MFP Estimate calorie count for exercising

I always use the MFP numbers.

I don't use either. I wear a HRM and enter that. It has been my experience that MFP overestimates calories burned.

I know before I got my HRM, I used the treadmill numbers, which were a little different than MFP. I read several places that the treadmill numbers would be way over, but I realized that my HRM (Polar F4) shows that I burn more than the treadmill says I do. I usually put in what the HRM says which is usually higher than the treadmill and MFP. I don't always eat back all of my exercise calories, but I eat at least half or a little more on a regular basis.

However, before my HRM, I basically took the middle ground between whatever calculator I was using (I used MFP for most things, and another online calucator for some things) and what MFP said I did.

MFP always over estimates

I don't log my exercise.

It's been working wonders for me.

I'm one of those rare exceptions where MFP and the treadmill numbers are usually very close, almost the same. I still go with MFP though. Eventually I will invest in a HRM which is a more accurate way to calculate calories burned.

If you made the treadmill match the MFP description (walk 3.5 mph which would be level no incline) and you used the same weight on the treadmill as MFP knows about and got the time right, you'd probably find the calorie burn to match within 10 calories. They use the same calculations.

And for walking and running up to 6.3 mph level - those calculations are more accurate than HRM's.

If you did speed not in MFP, or used incline which MFP doesn't know about, use the treadmill.

Then again on the treadmill, you should NOT be using the weight on MFP - unless you happen to be walking naked first thing in the morning.

As to the claims HRM's are more accurate for this type of activity, read a study as to how accurate the calculations are, and then why the HRM's are going to be potentially so far off.

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

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/773451-is-my-hrm-giving-me-incorrect-calorie-burn

I use the MFP numbers, and compare them to another site: http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc
They are usually pretty much the same, and they base it off your age and weight (as well as the minutes of course). I agree though that these sites may be high in their estimates, so I always UNDERESTIMATE the intensity of my workout. When I swim, I always say "light/moderate" and not fast/vigorous. Or if I walk and am somewhere between 3 and 3.5 mph, I always say 3mph.
And lastly, I never, ever log activities that aren't "exercise for the sake of exercising". Like doing housework, or washing the car. I mean-- those are activities we always do, just in our regular life. You did them before MFP and logging, it's part of who you are and part of what got you to where you are. I consider those to be just part of my normal activity level that I entered when I set up my account. To me, exercise is putting on your workout clothes or shoes, and exercising!
Just my two cents....
oh-- and I dont eat back exercise cals, again, just to err on the side of caution. I dont want to go eat and extra 500 cals, if I really only burned 300.

For my equipment (elllptic trainer) at my weight, MFP numbers are way inflated (double) compared to the numbers given by the machine at my gym. I figure MFP doesn't know how fast I go or what resistance setting I use so I trust the machine, seeing as I don't have a HRM. As a sanity check, my nutritionist says an hour of brisk walking should be about 300 calories per hour. I get my heart rate to 140 on the elliptical, so the machine's reading of around 500 calories per hour sounds about right.

I log my exercise (to keep a record) but try not to eat back my exercise calories when possible.