Estimated calories on mfp are sooo off!

Wait, so are we assuming the HRM is gospel? How do we know if either one of these tools is providing an accurate count?

That is a good question.

In my case I trust the HRM for the following reasons. I did a bmr test and aerobic test at Lifetime Fitness where they hook you up to a mask and computer to measure your breathing at rest. For the rest of the metabolic screening they hooked me up to a mask and computer again and measure oxygen and carbon dioxide while I was on a treadmill. This measured the anaerobic and aerobic threshold. They then took those numbers and input the data into my Polar 300x HRM including specific calculations for each zone 1-5.

A basic HRM might not be as accurate but the more sophisticated ones that allow for more personal data to be input will be more accurate than a out of left field guess done by MFP.

Good luck meeting your goals!

I have no way of knowing for sure, but I keep "shrinking" each week, so I must be doing something right.

I have a polstar f7 and it has pretty similar numbers to MFP when I do cardio. When I lift weights, my HRM shows me burning more calories than MFP's guess. We are all different peeps.

I don't have this problem. My HRM and MFP give me the EXACT same numbers - I ran for 51 minutes one time and my HRM said 524 and MFP said 526 calories. I also tested it for walking and during a yoga class and the numbers were the same (makes me wish I didn't buy a HRM now! haha)

I am also the type of person who runs at the same exact pace from start to finish and can pretty easily judge my pace (usually 9 min/mile). If you are the type of person who starts off fast/strong and slows down, then MFP's estimates may not work well for you.

I've heard this a lot and it makes me question my HRM because MFP's estimates usually match what my HRM says. I have a polar FT4 and love it. Anyone get this too?

I have the same experience. I have a polar FT7.

What makes you think your HRM is right?

All your HRM knows is your heart beat. It doesn't know how many cals you burn.

That's why I bought an HRM…I haven't got it in the mail yet, but heard everyone say MFP is so far off….Now you would think a site designed to help people lose weight could be a little more accurate on their cals burned…who knows….!?!

I also have a Polar and find it's close to MFP or reads more than MFP.

My HRM says I burn a ton more than MFP tells me. My heart rate goes up quick and stays there. MFP can't gauge our heart rates so it has to use an average system. I'd stick with what your HRM is telling you.

Just playing devil's advocate here- your heart rate doesn't directly dictate calorie burn at all . It has to do with oxygen exchange based on your VO2max. HR monitors use an algorithm that associates HR and calorie burn based on your VO2Max and maximum HR. If either of those settings are incorrectly input in to your HR monitor, the calorie burns from your HR monitor can be wayyyy off. Plus, the calorie burns for women (as reported by Polar) can be in the range of 30% off for women if it's not calibrated correctly.

Yeah yeah yeah, you and your big sciency words and stuff. Makes my head hurt.

So can I just blindly accept whatever MFP (or a treadmill or a HRM) tells me my calorie burn is or what?

If you blindly accept any calorie burns from any method without reality checking it- HRM, Apps, MFP, anything, and you eat all your exercise calories back, I would highly suggest continuing the blindness when you get on the scale.

I typically used a Polar HRM, which showed my cals burned. It might be a little off, but I'd rather have one thing to look at consistently verses jumping all over. I used it to get an general idea of what I was burning for various levels of exercise and activities.

Actually, I stopped using anything a little while back as I got used to what my body is doing and needs, so perhaps I'm a bad example. Carry on . . .