Be Aware

mommyhof3

When I log 15 min on my elliptical trainer using MFP it says I burned 210 calories. However, my heart rate monitor says in those 15 min I only burned 108 calories. If I ate the MFP calories I would have eaten almost double what I burned. I wanted to inform those who don't use a heart rate monitor and use MFP to calculate their calories

cdavis1126

I do not go by what MFP says you burned. I think they are way off base. I use what my treadmill tells me I burned. Or I take the total minutes worked out, add a zero and then divide by 2. That formula is pretty accurate.

kimberly428

agreed, it says 45 on the bike burns 350 when the bike says 250...I go with the bike

jerren

I do not go by what MFP says you burned. I think they are way off base. I use what my treadmill tells me I burned. Or I take the total minutes worked out, add a zero and then divide by 2. That formula is pretty accurate.

The problem with this formula is that it doesn't take into account the level of effort you put into the exercise. Running for 10 mins will burn more calories than walking for 10 mins. Your current fitness level also effects the ammount of calories you would burn.

I really don't see how that formula could be accurate at all.

KarenECunningham

I use the elliptical at the gym. I program in my weight and age and I use what it says. MFP says I burn way more calories so I go with the gym elliptical. I don't eat all of my exercise calories but I want it to be as accurate as possible.

offriver

Good point! Calorie expenditures will vary from person to person depending on many variables - how hard you're actually working, your weight, etc. It's best to use a heart rate monitor. MFP can only generalize the counts.

kimmydear

I've seen that too. My treadmill calories burned are a little over half of what MFP says, so I always go with the tready. Don't want to end up undoing all my hard work!

erickirb

When I log 15 min on my elliptical trainer using MFP it says I burned 210 calories. However, my heart rate monitor says in those 15 min I only burned 108 calories. If I ate the MFP calories I would have eaten almost double what I burned. I wanted to inform those who don't use a heart rate monitor and use MFP to calculate their calories

And on top of that you have to minus off the calories you would have burned at rest. Say your body burns 2 calories per minute over that 15 minutes you would have burned 30 calories sitting at your desk so the amount of calories extra you should eat would be 78 (108-30). The 108 that the HRM shows is total calories burned, not extra calories burned.

chgudnitz

I do not go by what MFP says you burned. I think they are way off base. I use what my treadmill tells me I burned. Or I take the total minutes worked out, add a zero and then divide by 2. That formula is pretty accurate.

The problem with this formula is that it doesn't take into account the level of effort you put into the exercise. Running for 10 mins will burn more calories than walking for 10 mins. Your current fitness level also effects the ammount of calories you would burn.

I really don't see how that formula could be accurate at all.

Ditto. This formula doesn't work really at all.

candicemcl

I have noticed that too, I either go with what the bike says or when I am out walking/jogging/running I use gmaps-pedometer site to get a better idea as I don't have a HRM

lab_goddess

Hi!
My elliptical (he is named Thor--LOL!) has an option for entering your weight, and it give you how many calories you've burned based on the workout you did--it does not have a heart rate monitor. I always use these calories--MFP usually estimates a bit lower, but not by much. Generally I've noticed that as I have lost weight, the calories I burn have also decreased. This seems to be working for me so far--I've dropped a little over 30 pounds since january, just by staying under my calorie intake based on the MFP suggestion plus the exercise calories.
Good luck!