Calories burned accurate on here??

mlcharb
mlcharb Posts: 69 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
For those that use HRM, do you find the 'calories burned' on this site are pretty comparable? Although this seems to be based on stats anyways, I'd hate to be overestimating. Would it be fairly accurate to use the calories burned on here or should I take off some, just incase???

Replies

  • threeohtwo
    threeohtwo Posts: 153 Member
    I always have to take a decent amount off. What the gym machines tell me versus what MFP tells me is even different. I think on here they severely OVER estimate.
  • Keefypoos
    Keefypoos Posts: 231 Member
    some times they are the same as my HRM somtimes they are less depends on how hard I worked in my exercise period.
    you can only use it as a guide IMHO
  • PaulFields56
    PaulFields56 Posts: 108 Member
    bump
  • jojo37696
    jojo37696 Posts: 93 Member
    Too High!!!!!
  • elaineirene84
    elaineirene84 Posts: 65 Member
    I have found compared to my calories burned on my HRM that MFP is usually several hundred more calories higher. So always take a chunk off to be somewhat closer to actual calories burnt.
  • gatilbury
    gatilbury Posts: 5 Member
    I use Endomondo which links up directly to MFP for running, walking and biking. I never believe the calories are accurate, but are good estimates/ approximates which should be sufficient enough.
  • Mcgrawhaha
    Mcgrawhaha Posts: 1,596 Member
    mfp tells me 600ish calories burned for 30 minutes on the elliptical, however, i really only burn 300ish... i believe mfp overestimates...
  • LaurenAOK
    LaurenAOK Posts: 2,475 Member
    Everyone complains that MFP overestimates, but I've found that it UNDERestimates based on my HRM. Everyone is different. Try logging your calories normal and if you lose weight on track than it must be accurate. If not then try eating only half of your exercise calories back, just play around until you find what works for you. Or invest in a HRM someday!
  • footiechick82
    footiechick82 Posts: 1,203 Member
    I asked a trainer at the gym and he said "you're fit, you burn way more calories than someone your height and weight that has more fat mass than muscle mass, so you can't always depend on your HRM or that site."

    which really messed me up... so if my HRM is working properly (sometimes it can't get an accurate calorie count or I forget it) I go inbetween what the site says and what my HRM says - I usually undercompensate my calories burned because I don't want to overcompensate.
  • Iron_Duchess
    Iron_Duchess Posts: 429 Member
    My experience is that MFP is usually about a 100+ cals over my HRM reading.
  • PaulFields56
    PaulFields56 Posts: 108 Member
    bump
  • 4_Lisa
    4_Lisa Posts: 362 Member
    For me, my HRM is always HIGHER than what MFP estimates. For true tracking, I would invest in a monitor, that way you know what you are burning.
  • tjs616
    tjs616 Posts: 51 Member
    MFP knows nothing about your level of effort during an activity, so it can only provide a guideline. Compared to my HRM, I find some activities over estimate, some were spot on, and others were under. Off the top of my head, activities that are always too high for me are elliptical, hiking (climbing hills), and swimming. Walking is usually right or sometimes on the low side depending on hills etc.
  • tracybosch
    tracybosch Posts: 6
    For me, it really depends on what the exercise is. MFP for running is pretty close. biking, recently, is a little high. swimming has always been WAY off for me (mfp is like 2X too high) and rollerblading is too high too.
  • MizSaz
    MizSaz Posts: 445 Member
    It's definitely not an exact science. I always go by the lowest number I come up with, which is typically on my fitbit.
  • Evachiquita
    Evachiquita Posts: 223 Member
    I have found that MFP slightly underestimates based on what my Garmin HRM gives me. I am also pretty fit (I sometimes bike hundreds of miles a week and work out 10-15 hours a week). So maybe like others have said if you are slightly less fit than "average" maybe it over estimates. If you are slightly more fit than "average" then maybe it slightly under estimates. I can't compare with any gym equipment because it never picks up my heart rate. When the equipment uses my weight and exercise level it is pretty close, but still lower, than my HRM. I know you can't compare women to men or yourself to others but on a couple long bike rides my calories expenditure was almost exactly the same as dude who I though had similar body type/weight and fitness level.

    So, I usually go with what my HRM gives me as that is supposed to be the best estimate. Not sure if this helped or made it more confusing! lol
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    It's usually pretty close for me but I don't eat them back anyway so it doesn't really matter. If I were going to eat exercise back I'd only eat a third to a half just to be safe.
  • mlcharb
    mlcharb Posts: 69 Member
    Thanks! I figured it seemed a bit high but wasn't too sure. I definitely want to invest in a good HRM, it's just finding the right one. I've tried a couple so far and haven't liked them at all. For now I'll stick to taking about 25% off of what MFP tells me and go with that.

Categories