Calorie burn comparisons.

So.... i often see people on my friends list burn 500 or more calories in a half hour of the same exact exercise I am doing, but I only burn about 160 calories in 25 minutes... Why is this? what is the discrepancy? I also see some people listing "Climbing stairs - 10 minutes - 350 calories... really?!?! i cant burn that much in climbing stairs for only 10 minutes...

I have an FT7 HRM that i start at the beginning of my workout and end right after my walk home from the gym.

I think it is calibrated correctly without doing the medical tests for body fat %

I jog until I cant jog anymore at the highest incline I can, as hard as I can, but i couldnt imagine ever hitting 500 calories burned in 30 minutes.


And then the worst part is that i know once I get stronger, the same exercises won't burn as many calories, so it would take me even longer to hit my daily exercise goals than it already does!

Im not trying to rant so much as wonder on the explanation for this occurrence...

Replies

  • It depends on how much they weigh. The more you weigh the more you burn.
  • felcandy
    felcandy Posts: 228 Member
    even if they only weigh about 20-30 lbs more than me? that doesnt seem like it would cause that much of a difference...
  • For_the_Last_Time
    For_the_Last_Time Posts: 136 Member
    If you are entering from your HRM and they are entering from the database that could very well explain it. When I enter from the database I cut the number at least in half of what I think I actually burned.
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    If there is only a 20-30 pound difference then they are WAAAY overestimating their calorie burns. If they have an HRM that is showing that many calories burned, it's probably out of whack.

    At 5' 2.5" and about 130 pounds I burn around 280 calories running 3 miles in about 30 minutes. There is literally no exercise I could do for a half hour straight that would burn 500 calories in that time.

    If this person is posting such huge burns the only person they are hurting is him or herself, especially if exercise calories are being consumed.

    ETA: MFP's database can be really far off because it doesn't take the level of effort into account. Going all out burns a lot more calories than doing something with minimal effort.
  • felcandy
    felcandy Posts: 228 Member
    Yeah i did notice that the database tends to be 50-100 calories more than my HRM... maybe that is it.
  • If you are entering from your HRM and they are entering from the database that could very well explain it. When I enter from the database I cut the number at least in half of what I think I actually burned.

    This is a HUGE cause for difference. If I go to the gym I use the machines to tell me my burn. If I'm doing it at home I use the database... I also don't eat many of those calories back bc I know it can be incorrect, but it still helps me track what I burn with what I eat...
  • felcandy
    felcandy Posts: 228 Member
    I am so glad i have my HRM, otherwise i would be going over by about 100 a day! so bad hahaha
  • I've been using my treadmill for about 5 weeks now..My first workout was a 200 calorie burn in 22 minutes. Five weeks later I'm up to 499 calories burned in 22 minutes. My treadmill goes up to a 40% incline and I'm up at 30% or higher at least 10 minutes of the workout. My polar ft4 heart monitor shows only a 230-267 calorie burn for the same workout..The workout intensity makes me feel the treadmill read out as being more accurate. The other day I took my dog for a walk wearing the Polar Heart monitor. It displayed a 139 calorie burn for 39 minutes with an average heart rate of 85 with a high of 112. My 22 minute workouts on the treadmill are a 135 average heart rate with a high of 157. How can a slow walk be more then half of a 22 minute high intensity workout on the treadmill at an incline of 30% or higher for at least half of the 22 minutes..The polar heart monitor is great for your heart beat fig..But calorie burn it seems to be off..