Treadmill calories burned??

audiophile

Okay, so I walked 28 minutes and 46 seconds at 3.5 mph on the treadmill just now. My treadmill (reebok i-run) says I burned 200 calories, yet I entered the time walked into MFP, and it says I only burned 108 calories? :ohwell:

I was just wondering which is actually correct, so I know which to trust. Would it be worth buying a heart rate monitor??

Thanks, guys! :happy:

geekyjen

Did your treadmill ask you to enter your weight first? In general, the treadmill is more accurate but entering your weight also dramatically improves the accuracy.

HeatherMN

Absolutely buy a heart rate monitor! I have a Polar F6 that I love.

bjandlm

Hi there! I too work out on the treadmill, but when I use MFP, it usually gives me more calories than what the
treadmill says, I believe that MFP takes into account your body weight when figuring out your calories burned, so
if you do not have that feature on your treadmill, I believe the closer number would be the MFP calculation.
But if you take a number inbetween them both, you can't go wrong..... Happy treadmilling.... BJ

princessbee728

I'd say trust the heart rate monitor or the treadmill (if it asks your weight and/or keeps track of your heart rate). I get two different amounts of calories burned for walking a few miles - a lower number here on MFP and a higher number from my heart rate monitor, and I tend to go with what the heart rate monitor says since it pays attention to the work I've actually done.

freffenwolfe

What about on a cross trainer? I usually go on one at the gym for 40 mins at a time and I get conflicting results from myfitnesspal.
I usually just enter the results from myfitnesspal even though it is considerably lower than the machine at the gym.

audiophile

Interesting... Thanks, you guys! I guess it would make sense if MFP took my weight into account. My treadmill didn't ask me to enter my weight, so I'm guessing that's why. :happy:

As for the heart rate monitor, I'm on a low budget (curse being a student! :mad: ) Do the cheaper ones work just as well as the more expensive ones?? I was looking at one in the £30 range... I'm not sure yet, though.

pamelapamela

@ bjrocks,

Hi there! I'm a personal trainer and I've seen this question a lot.. and what everyone says here seems to be pretty accurate, if the treadmill is asking you your weight and age, the calories burned tend to be more accurate, but of course will differ from treadmill-to-treadmill.

Basically, there was dozens of different methods and equations used to calculate energy expenditure, and it seems so that MFP and your treadmill use different ones .. as for buying a heart rate monitor, great idea! they aren't that expensive these days and it's the most accurate way to know how hard your body is working!

Also, I know this site focuses on calorie counting, so it's hard to tell someone not to worry too much about how many cals they're burning, but it really shouldn't be the focus! Eat healthy and work hard during your work outs and you'll be happy with the results!

Cheers,
Pamela

jowily

Yes on the HRM. By the way - I put in 29 minutes at 3.5MPH and it said 174 (275 if it was uphill) - so it must take into account our stats.

MacMadame

I wouldn't trust either. At one point I was walking on a treadmill with a Nike+ and entering into MFP. All three told me I had a different calorie burn. I bought a HRM and found out that all three were wrong!

princessbee728

I'd say at least try the cheaper HRM - I spent $100 USD on mine, and it's got all sorts of extra bells and whistles on it - not only does it check my heart rate and keep track of calories burned, but it also has a function where I can keep track of the calories I eat each day! (I'd rather keep track of my eaten calories here, where I can keep track of all the other nutrients as well.)