MFP Estimate calorie count for exercising

oXGetFitBabeXo
oXGetFitBabeXo Posts: 341 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I have a question... Do you follow MFP calorie counting for your activies or do you follow what the treadmill says at the end of a workout. MFP has an estimated burnt calorie count.. is it accurate at the end of a workout? I'm kinda confused on which to use now.

For instance: i'll put in a workout for a half an hour... the calories burnt will show up & then i look at another calorie counting website and the numbers are different. Does MFP work the calories for a walk according to weight or just time..

Replies

  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    I always use the MFP numbers.
  • BigG59
    BigG59 Posts: 396 Member
    Neither, I think both over estimate. I use a Heart Rate Monitor and enter the calories it says I've burned.
  • rachelerwin
    rachelerwin Posts: 140 Member
    I don't use either. I wear a HRM and enter that. It has been my experience that MFP overestimates calories burned.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Everything is an estimate. Even HRMs. I use MFP but tend to under estimate and don't eat all the calories back (but a good portion).
  • cmcollins001
    cmcollins001 Posts: 3,472 Member
    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.
  • VeganZombie13
    VeganZombie13 Posts: 297
    I use my bodybugg MFP always go over IMO. I say get a HRM or something along those lines for correct readings.
  • Bevkus
    Bevkus Posts: 274 Member
    MFP always over estimates
  • ChristyRunStarr
    ChristyRunStarr Posts: 1,600 Member
    Neither....I use my HRM. MFP over estimates it and so do the machines at the gym
  • victorious27
    victorious27 Posts: 250 Member
    I don't log my exercise.

    It's been working wonders for me.
  • neetneetneets
    neetneetneets Posts: 95 Member
    I came across this the other day and it's quite interesting:
    http://www.shape.com/fitness/cardio/how-inaccurate-are-calorie-counters-gym
  • lizziebeth1028
    lizziebeth1028 Posts: 3,602 Member
    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.
  • rebasporty
    rebasporty Posts: 287 Member
    HRM works best. Do not use the numbers on the treadmill or eliptical they are inflated big time. The manufacturer does that so you use thier machine vs the one next to it because you are "burning more calories".
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    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
  • EnchantedEvening
    EnchantedEvening Posts: 671 Member
    MFP and the machines at the gym are always much lower than my HRM. Once I'm under 200 pounds, that might flip-flop.

    I take my HRM number and subtract 20% just to be safe. I also overestimate food just in case.
  • buzzcockgirl
    buzzcockgirl Posts: 260 Member
    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.
  • KamalBhai
    KamalBhai Posts: 79 Member
    I use the MFP numbers. Though whatever number treadmill / Hrm / MFP shows, we can always estimate 100 - 150 calories more or less in total. Nothing can be 100% accurate so estimating 100-150 numbers up or down in total calories consumed or burnt, is what I try to use.
  • acpgee
    acpgee Posts: 7,963 Member
    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.
  • alanpryke
    alanpryke Posts: 20
    I use the MFP numbers, but don't eat into them, just stick to my original target calories
  • abfab_sweetie
    abfab_sweetie Posts: 64
    I log my exercise (to keep a record) but try not to eat back my exercise calories when possible.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    I use my HRM.
    Yes I know that's it's an estimate but at least it's been set up for me rather than a population average and the readings are consistent.
    To me consistency is more important than the absolute number.
    Gym machines vary wildly - even found a huge difference in measured heart rate between two set of grips on the SAME machine!
  • oXGetFitBabeXo
    oXGetFitBabeXo Posts: 341 Member
    If i were to get a heart rate monitor which one would anyone recommend? i feel like since im smaller im at the point to where its harder and slower to lose the weight. I was at my goal weight then i gained 13lb back with 7 left to go. I used to eat 1200 and burn 600 and not eat what i had burned. It seemed to have worked but now i feel like i need 1200 to be satisfied.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    If i were to get a heart rate monitor which one would anyone recommend? i feel like since im smaller im at the point to where its harder and slower to lose the weight. I was at my goal weight then i gained 13lb back with 7 left to go. I used to eat 1200 and burn 600 and not eat what i had burned. It seemed to have worked but now i feel like i need 1200 to be satisfied.

    Ya, when you have less to lose you have less room for error, like not eating enough for your level of activity.

    So you going to do the same method that didn't work already, namely eat 1200 and burn off 600 in exercise, leaving 600 for your body to repair and build and run basic metabolism with?

    Does that even sound scary to you? It should.

    If you are going to be sticking with the treadmill, trust those figures. Read the study a few posts up if you missed it. Most people don't even know how HRM's work, nor what their stats are doing or changing things on it.
  • fsutony
    fsutony Posts: 12
    the treadmill and bike heart rate monitors and MFP have been almost the same for me. All the other stuff like running and tae bo i usually just subtract 20 minutes off my workouts when i log them.

Categories