Machines vs. MFP Calculations

Lizzy9
Lizzy9 Posts: 67 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I have been working out "cardio" daily at the gym. The machines at the gym indicates that I burned 200. When plugged in MFP it indicates the calories burned are 433. My hands are purposely on the bars monitoring my heart rate, etc. All equipment is up to date at the gym. Has anyone encountered this???????

Replies

  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.
  • rgohm
    rgohm Posts: 294 Member
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.

    Yikes! If that is accurate then I am glad I stopped holding on all the time!

    The machines at my gym seem to be very close to what MFP says for calories burned.
  • Karrie262
    Karrie262 Posts: 152 Member
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.

    I agree ^^^
  • 48Tara
    48Tara Posts: 10
    I invested in a heart rate monitor a year ago, I love it! polar FT4 on amazon for $70.00, to me that is the most accurate it will give you what YOU burn.
  • gimpygramma
    gimpygramma Posts: 383 Member
    I notice that the stationary bikes show a much lower count than MFP would give me.
  • jtmh2012
    jtmh2012 Posts: 32 Member
    The machines at my gym seem to be fairly on. The one thing to remember is your intensity could also affect any differences.
  • tammyrains
    tammyrains Posts: 6
    I always use a heart rate monitor for every exercise I do, machines or classes. Even though I do wear a heart rate monitor, I still put in my age, weight, etc and the machines are always way off. They always show more than what my monitor says I burn. I believe the heart rate monitor is more accurate.
  • CarlieeBear
    CarlieeBear Posts: 325 Member
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.

    Does MFP know how hard you worked, what level you worked at (incline, resistance, etc.), how far you went? My machine knows my weight, but not my sex or age, but it also knows what level I worked at and how many steps, etc. I trust the machine over MFP.

    Yesterday, they almost agreed and I worked the hardest I've worked without my trainer there pushing me.
  • slowbubblecar
    slowbubblecar Posts: 91 Member
    It all depends on your intensity level. I bought a HRM to see what I was really burning and found out I was actually burning more than what MFP or the machine said most of the time since I use a lot of resistence.
  • Lizzy9
    Lizzy9 Posts: 67 Member
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.
  • Lizzy9
    Lizzy9 Posts: 67 Member
    Yes it does, but I don't put that in. I will keep an eye on it nexttime.

    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.
  • Lizzy9
    Lizzy9 Posts: 67 Member
    It's only Day 4
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight? If not it will be off and if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    I'm getting a different calorie calculation from the machine versus mfp versus my hrm. Which number is accurate?

    A) the machine
    B) mfp
    C) my hrm

    The answer is D) IT DOES NOT MATTER. The accuracy of any of these numbers does not matter one whit in your quest for weight loss. All that matters is that you track your food calories and you monitor your scale once per week. The manner in which you track your exercise calories makes no difference.

    Why, you ask? If, after two weeks of recording the machine burn, you have not lost weight, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you used mfp? Ok, after two weeks of recording the mfp burn rate you have not lost a pound, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you spent good money on a polar BS1000? Ok, after two weeks of recording the polar BS1000 burns, if you have not lost weight, decrease your cals by 200.

    What? You lost a pound a week? Then whether you chose method A, B, or C, continue as you have been doing. Honestly, you don't need to track your exercise calories at all, but that is the default MFP way so fine, it won't hurt. But don't waste time worrying about calorie burning accuracy, *because it makes no difference*. Track your food, record your weight weekly.

    Oh, and take progress pics at least once per month.

    note: this advice assumes you are eating a normal, healthy amount of food. If you're eating 800 cals per day, ignore my advice, pick up the phone and order a pizza. your body needs food.
  • Lizzy9
    Lizzy9 Posts: 67 Member
    Thank you and all of you so much. The problem I have is I "don't" eat. I do now. And when burning calories due to cardio, I'm told I must eat the calories I burn. Ugh! Don't ask why I don't eat.....it's weird. I've been doing well, but again, it's not been a week yet. So far today it's almost 12:00 and I have not put anything in my stomach. NOT GOOD. So, I'm going to put something in me. Hopefully fit all my calories in (correct protein, etc.,) by days end. That is the only reason I was tracking my cardio. :)
    I'm getting a different calorie calculation from the machine versus mfp versus my hrm. Which number is accurate?

    A) the machine
    B) mfp
    C) my hrm

    The answer is D) IT DOES NOT MATTER. The accuracy of any of these numbers does not matter one whit in your quest for weight loss. All that matters is that you track your food calories and you monitor your scale once per week. The manner in which you track your exercise calories makes no difference.

    Why, you ask? If, after two weeks of recording the machine burn, you have not lost weight, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you used mfp? Ok, after two weeks of recording the mfp burn rate you have not lost a pound, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you spent good money on a polar BS1000? Ok, after two weeks of recording the polar BS1000 burns, if you have not lost weight, decrease your cals by 200.

    What? You lost a pound a week? Then whether you chose method A, B, or C, continue as you have been doing. Honestly, you don't need to track your exercise calories at all, but that is the default MFP way so fine, it won't hurt. But don't waste time worrying about calorie burning accuracy, *because it makes no difference*. Track your food, record your weight weekly.

    Oh, and take progress pics at least once per month.

    note: this advice assumes you are eating a normal, healthy amount of food. If you're eating 800 cals per day, ignore my advice, pick up the phone and order a pizza. your body needs food.
  • Lizzy9
    Lizzy9 Posts: 67 Member
    So are you saying that if I am set at 1200, (to lose weight/inches), I only eat 800 calories, work out, burn 400, that's a 400 deficit and I should not eat 800 more calories (assuming all caloric intake is healthy eating?) I'm confused.
    I'm getting a different calorie calculation from the machine versus mfp versus my hrm. Which number is accurate?

    A) the machine
    B) mfp
    C) my hrm

    The answer is D) IT DOES NOT MATTER. The accuracy of any of these numbers does not matter one whit in your quest for weight loss. All that matters is that you track your food calories and you monitor your scale once per week. The manner in which you track your exercise calories makes no difference.

    Why, you ask? If, after two weeks of recording the machine burn, you have not lost weight, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you used mfp? Ok, after two weeks of recording the mfp burn rate you have not lost a pound, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you spent good money on a polar BS1000? Ok, after two weeks of recording the polar BS1000 burns, if you have not lost weight, decrease your cals by 200.

    What? You lost a pound a week? Then whether you chose method A, B, or C, continue as you have been doing. Honestly, you don't need to track your exercise calories at all, but that is the default MFP way so fine, it won't hurt. But don't waste time worrying about calorie burning accuracy, *because it makes no difference*. Track your food, record your weight weekly.

    Oh, and take progress pics at least once per month.

    note: this advice assumes you are eating a normal, healthy amount of food. If you're eating 800 cals per day, ignore my advice, pick up the phone and order a pizza. your body needs food.
  • CarlieeBear
    CarlieeBear Posts: 325 Member
    I think what this poster is saying is that if the machine/MFP/HRM says you've burned 400 calories and you don't lose weight, then subtract 200 from the calories burned.
    So are you saying that if I am set at 1200, (to lose weight/inches), I only eat 800 calories, work out, burn 400, that's a 400 deficit and I should not eat 800 more calories (assuming all caloric intake is healthy eating?) I'm confused.
    I'm getting a different calorie calculation from the machine versus mfp versus my hrm. Which number is accurate?

    A) the machine
    B) mfp
    C) my hrm

    The answer is D) IT DOES NOT MATTER. The accuracy of any of these numbers does not matter one whit in your quest for weight loss. All that matters is that you track your food calories and you monitor your scale once per week. The manner in which you track your exercise calories makes no difference.

    Why, you ask? If, after two weeks of recording the machine burn, you have not lost weight, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you used mfp? Ok, after two weeks of recording the mfp burn rate you have not lost a pound, decrease your calories by 200. Oh, you spent good money on a polar BS1000? Ok, after two weeks of recording the polar BS1000 burns, if you have not lost weight, decrease your cals by 200.

    What? You lost a pound a week? Then whether you chose method A, B, or C, continue as you have been doing. Honestly, you don't need to track your exercise calories at all, but that is the default MFP way so fine, it won't hurt. But don't waste time worrying about calorie burning accuracy, *because it makes no difference*. Track your food, record your weight weekly.

    Oh, and take progress pics at least once per month.

    note: this advice assumes you are eating a normal, healthy amount of food. If you're eating 800 cals per day, ignore my advice, pick up the phone and order a pizza. your body needs food.
  • Changing_Charity
    Changing_Charity Posts: 197 Member
    MFP over-exaggerates on the calories burned. i always go by the machine at the gym and never by what MFP says. I am hoping for a heart rate monitor for my birthday in Feb. That is the most accurate way to calculate the calories burned.
  • icimani
    icimani Posts: 1,454 Member
    Does the machine ask for your age, sex and weight?

    The machines at my gym do ask for age, sex and weight, but the cals burned is always 30-50 higher than my HRM. And then, when I go to MFP the numbers go really out of whack (much higher than my HRM) if I change the workout time at all.

    ...if it's a treadmill and you hang on all the time it significantly lowers your burn

    Definitely this!! I've found that if my heart rate is going too high all I have to do is hang on to the monitor-handles on the treadmill for about 30 seconds and my heart rate gets back down again.
  • DaphneAtx
    DaphneAtx Posts: 153
    Get an HRM. MFP over-estimates, so don't use their burns if you're eating back your calories or your progress will surely slow.

Categories