Question about calories burned walking...

Options
gr8xpectationz
gr8xpectationz Posts: 161 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
MFP's walking calories are divided by miles per hour. But doesn't someone who's 5'2" expend more calories walking 3.0 mph than someone who's 6'3"? And doesn't someone who's 300lbs burn more calories walking 3.0 mph than someone who's 170lbs?

When I walk, I try to make sure I'm too out of breath to sing along steadily with the music I'm listening too. I walk fast on level ground, and try to keep up the pace when I'm walking uphill. But I have never ever once managed to hit a 3.5 mph average on a walk.

I can go faster and longer than when I started about eight weeks ago, but I wonder if I'm burning more calories because I'm going faster, or if I'm burning the same because I'm more fit.

Any thoughts?

Replies

  • Pinkahlicious
    Pinkahlicious Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    The only way to get a more accurate measure of calories burned is buying a HRM. I love mine, because as you stated I burn relatively more than what MFP says I do. I am 5'2" - I don't know if that makes any difference though...but a HRM is a good way to get a better more accurate number.
  • barb1241
    barb1241 Posts: 324 Member
    Options
    I know I walk almost exactly 3mph. And when I walk at that pace for an hour (or whatever), MFP gives me a certain amount of calories burned. As I have lost weight, it gave me fewer calories burned for the same time/speed. i went on vacation, ate like a piglet, and gained a bit of weight so now it is giving me more calories burned for the same time/speed. I'm not sure what amount you have to lose before it deducts calories burned-but it figures it out for sure.

    HTH
  • cyndilie
    cyndilie Posts: 52
    Options
    What about using a Pedometer? I'm not sure that's the answer since I'm new to all of this myself, but it might help, especially if you use it along with an HRM. Good luck!!
  • buzzcockgirl
    buzzcockgirl Posts: 260 Member
    Options
    You are correct, a larger person, older person, male vs. female...whatever, will burn more cals than a smaller, younger, more fit person. BUt that is all figured in when you enter your age, weight, sex, activity level , etc. So if I was 300 lbs (and we're both 40 yr old women at about 5'5'') but you're only 200lbs, I will burn more doing the same exact activity than you do in the same amount of time.
    But it's all accounted for in your profile - so you'll see the number change as you get more fit.

    I agree with others, get a pedometer or a Heart Rate Monitor. Pedometer will tell you how far you've gone on what amount of time (so you can figure out your speed)... but the HRM will give you a pretty accurate calorie burn. I swore by a pedometer for almost a year, because I gave myself a personal goal of 20,000 steps a day. But I love my HRM now- because I like to see just how HARD I work doing things other than walking.
  • gr8xpectationz
    gr8xpectationz Posts: 161 Member
    Options
    I swore by a pedometer for almost a year, because I gave myself a personal goal of 20,000 steps a day. But I love my HRM now- because I like to see just how HARD I work doing things other than walking.

    20,000 steps a day! That's seriously hard core....it's like TEN miles a day. You are definitely my hero for the day!
  • gr8xpectationz
    gr8xpectationz Posts: 161 Member
    Options
    And thanks for the suggestions everybody!

    A heart-rate monitor is on my list as a reward for hitting 25 lbs, so I'll definitely be getting one if I stay on track. But I might try it earlier instead.
  • Megs081211
    Megs081211 Posts: 150
    Options
    I'm 5'1 and 175 pounds. MFP always seems to cut my calories burned by like 200. I have a polar that has a HRM and it counts my calories burned, generally a 1 hour walk will burn 500 calories, MFP always says around 300
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'1 and 175 pounds. MFP always seems to cut my calories burned by like 200. I have a polar that has a HRM and it counts my calories burned, generally a 1 hour walk will burn 500 calories, MFP always says around 300


    I know who I would listen too;)
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'1 and 175 pounds. MFP always seems to cut my calories burned by like 200. I have a polar that has a HRM and it counts my calories burned, generally a 1 hour walk will burn 500 calories, MFP always says around 300


    I know who I would listen too;)

    And you are right .I use run keeper and mfp always show about 150- 200 less
  • Robin_Anne
    Robin_Anne Posts: 54
    Options
    Do you have a smart phone (or iPhone)? You can download a free pedometer app that will track your speed, time, and calories based on age, weight and height. I've got RunKeeper and love it. When I enter the info on MFP, I just type in what RunKeeper tells me vs. using the pre-set walking that's listed in the search engine on here.
  • cupcakegirl81
    cupcakegirl81 Posts: 2,033 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'1 and 175 pounds. MFP always seems to cut my calories burned by like 200. I have a polar that has a HRM and it counts my calories burned, generally a 1 hour walk will burn 500 calories, MFP always says around 300

    Thanks for this. I'm 5'0 and I'm was surprised by the number on my HRM. I just got on Friday. The cals burned are so much higher than estimated on MFP and I was doubting my HRM.
  • Capt_Apollo
    Capt_Apollo Posts: 9,026 Member
    Options
    it's walking. do we really need to overthink it like this????
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Actually, the majority of the responses are wrong.

    The energy required to move a set weight against gravity and propel forward doesn't change on all those factors.

    Does the energy to pick up 5 lbs change depending on gender, age, ect? No.
    Now, you pick up straight in front of you with out-stretched arm to make it harder at the end of a beam, compared to someone lifting it straight up - ya, there's a difference.

    But walking?
    Personal efficiency may, like if you have a club foot or walking with a skip, but the variance among people walking level up to 4mph is very minor. Running up to 6.3 mph level.
    Treadmill walking is the most studied form of exercise.

    And in fact the calculations from a formula or far more accurate than a HRM.

    Studies are in this thread. 4.2% off is incredibly better than anything else.

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/774337-how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is

    Only thing that matters is weight and time and pace and incline.
    Going above about 5% incline and personal efficiency again starts entering the picture.

    http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html

    Oh, why would someone shorter going same pace as someone taller burn same calories at same weight?
    Seems like it should be more, right, shorter stride, more steps required to hit same pace?
    You have to push your mass less distance against gravity then they do. Watch a side view of people walking an exercise pace, watch the difference in head bob between height. Taller people may take less steps, but if striding out about the same as shorter person, they are pushing up against gravity more height. Short person may take more steps, but less push up.
    That's what I meant by unless you walk funny, like short person trying to stride it out further, having to lift their mass more, but then again, they are taking fewer steps now.
    See, it balances out.
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    Options
    Do you have a smart phone (or iPhone)? You can download a free pedometer app that will track your speed, time, and calories based on age, weight and height. I've got RunKeeper and love it. When I enter the info on MFP, I just type in what RunKeeper tells me vs. using the pre-set walking that's listed in the search engine on here.

    I do too. Run keeper gives you a generous amount of burn compared to mfp!

Categories