Most accurate way to calculate calories burned?

pplf2001
pplf2001 Posts: 133 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I know a lot of folks think that MFP *overestimates* calories burned with exercise - I'm wondering if perhaps it is the one that is more accurate? Either that - or it is massively underestimating calories burned.

I just ran for 23 minutes at an 11:15 pace, 165 bpm average heart rate, here is what i got from a few different methods of calorie calculators:

1. My Garmin (uses speed and distance to calculate calories) - 237 calories burned
2. MFP - 203 calories burned (using the 11.5 pace option from the database)
3. Online calculator using average heart rate - 346 calories burned (http://www.triathlontrainingblog.com/calculators/calories-burned-calculator-based-on-average-heart-rate/)
4. 2nd online calculator using average heart rate - 265 calories burned (http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx)

As you can see, MFP is definitely the lowest... what is the most accurate way to calculate?

What would you use? Seems like either my garmin or the 2nd calculator are probably most accurate... but that MFP is a good conservative estimate. No, I am not going to go buy another HRM - I have my garmin for running and it has a HRM built in... I don't need any more gadgets. My model is also not compatible with the New Leaf program.

Replies

  • pplf2001
    pplf2001 Posts: 133 Member
    bump
  • majope
    majope Posts: 1,325 Member
    I'd go with the Garmin. DC Rainmaker investigated their accuracy, and the newer models are within 10%, which is said to be as good as you can get without a lab. The older models were "just slightly less accurate" than that.

    http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html
  • pplf2001
    pplf2001 Posts: 133 Member
    My garmin is too old to have the technology that is 10% accurate... I think mine is the speed/distance that is further down the list...
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    I'd use the lowest estimate. There is no way to be 100% sure of calorie burn. An HRM that has a fitness test that allows you to determine your VO2 max is the closest as long as you set it up right and retest and adjust periodiclly.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    One of those portable oxygen analyzers in the hands of a trained technician will probably get you very close... they're only $40,000.

    Or you can just estimate. It's worked for millions of people.
  • Energizer06
    Energizer06 Posts: 311 Member
    Well, my wife and I both wear HRM while working out and a fitbit. Everybody seems to get down on MFP, however, we have been within 10 - 15 calories from our HRM and what MFP states. We do various activities, jogging, zumba xbox, P90X, Kenpo, to name a few. Our MFP and fitbit and HRM are all within a great range. The only time MFP and fitbit have been way off, is when I do circuit training (Strength and cardio). I tend to workout at a high intensity with a HR of 166 while strength training. MFP and Fitbit are usually much lower ton those days.

    I think it would be fair to say, that a 35 calorie difference isn't all that much. When you start burning 100 or so more than what MFP states, then I would reconsider.
  • mdcoug
    mdcoug Posts: 397 Member
    "Accurate" isn't the right term here. Nothing is going to give you an absolutely accurate answer.

    IMO, the most reliable estimate for my workouts comes from my heart rate monitor.
  • hanababe
    hanababe Posts: 16 Member
    Get a heart rate monitor/watch. Don't use the heart rate monitors on the cardio machines at the gym. They are reasonably priced for the information that it gives you, and has been the most accurate method that I know of. I have not had too many problems with MFP overestimating however.

Categories