Accuracy of Exercise Calories

Junisahn
Junisahn Posts: 166 Member
edited September 21 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi,

Curious what others think of this... mainly because once I added jogging and walking to my routine a few weeks back, I stopped losing weight. I DO eat all my exercise calories, most days, and now I'm wondering if that's the connection - that I'm NOT actually burning the following amounts..

I walk 60 minutes at 4.5 mph and MFP says I burned about 324 calories.
I jog 40 minutes at 5.2 mph and MFP says I burned about 319 calories.

I'm 5'1, 115 lb female. When I'm jogging, my heartrate is around 132-140 bpm. When I'm walking, it's around 120 bpm.

Short of buying a heart rate monitor (for $$ reasons), can anyone verify that these are sort of on target? I understand that no one can say for sure what I'm burning, but are they in the ballpark, do you think?

Replies

  • sabrinafaith
    sabrinafaith Posts: 607 Member
    You probably stopped loosing because you are so close to your goal. The closer you get, the less that will come off. Sometimes your body might also be saying that it is comfortable at your current weight. Since you are 115 lb, this could be the case. Your body may want to stay at 115 lb, even if you don't.
  • waguchan
    waguchan Posts: 450 Member
    Since you jog and you know your heart rate, you can use an online calculator to figure out calories burned:

    Both of these work well, and are close to what my HRM reports:
    http://www.triathlontrainingblog.com/calculators/calories-burned-calculator-based-on-average-heart-rate/
    http://heartcalories.com/

    Also, you should be able to figure out your VO2Max by knowing how long it takes you to run a certain distance. There is info online to calculate that too. Otherwise, you can use this guide:
    http://www.brianmac.co.uk/vo2max.htm#vo2
  • altazin0907
    altazin0907 Posts: 188 Member
    I don't think anyone can give you an exact. Even HRM's are off sometimes. I would say if you want to jump start the loss, take 100-50 off what you are calculating you burned. So if walk is 324 and jog is 319, I would calculate burning say 224 and 219 or 274 and 269. It will give you a little more cushion.
  • xtina11179
    xtina11179 Posts: 352
    I was just about to post the same question. I just did 70 min on the treadmill: 10 min warm-up at 3.0, 50 min at 3.5 and a 10 min cool-down at 3.0 and MFP says I burned 434 calories while my treadmill says it was only 328. That's almost a 100 calorie difference!!

    So what do I do?? To be on the safe side should I go with what the treadmill says so that I don't over estimate and eat too many calories? Or do I go even less than that?

    And I do have a little pulse counter (not a HRM) but I forgot to use it. I suppose if I had I would have been able to use that website. Boo!! :-(
  • AlexandraNK
    AlexandraNK Posts: 54
    I was told once (i'm not a dr and the person isn't either, so take it with a grain of salt) that unless your working out like a mainiac you really don't need to eat all your excersie calories. In fact i was told that you really shouldn't eat most of them. I think if you work out for 500 calories, of that you should eat 200-300. This is just my thought. I don't know whats the right thing. BUt also at 5'1, i think 115lbs is a great weight. I'm 5 feet and trying to get down to 130lbs. Good Luck!
  • sarahsmom1
    sarahsmom1 Posts: 1,501 Member
    Hi,

    Curious what others think of this... mainly because once I added jogging and walking to my routine a few weeks back, I stopped losing weight. I DO eat all my exercise calories, most days, and now I'm wondering if that's the connection - that I'm NOT actually burning the following amounts..

    I walk 60 minutes at 4.5 mph and MFP says I burned about 324 calories.
    I jog 40 minutes at 5.2 mph and MFP says I burned about 319 calories.

    I'm 5'1, 115 lb female. When I'm jogging, my heartrate is around 132-140 bpm. When I'm walking, it's around 120 bpm.

    Short of buying a heart rate monitor (for $$ reasons), can anyone verify that these are sort of on target? I understand that no one can say for sure what I'm burning, but are they in the ballpark, do you think?

    are you putting your weight into the treadmill? if your not it will be the calories for a 150 pound person that is what most treadmill are pre-set for
  • Junisahn
    Junisahn Posts: 166 Member
    I run on trails, so my numbers don't come from the treadmill - they just come from the exercise database here.

    I just tried to calculate all those numbers on the sites waguchan posted, and basically it seems that altazin0907 is right... hacking off 100 calories puts me around the right calorie burn. Bummer... I thought I had a buffer already, since I track myself as "sedentary" even though I'm definitely lightly active.

    Interestingly, I did actually drop a little weight in the past few days, and it has corresponded to me eating about 300 calories below my accumulated total on Tuesday and Wednesday. Guess that's the key.

    I eat all my calories because I also breastfeed my baby, so I consider going too low on the dangerous side.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    The most likely reason that there is a discrepancy is the 60 min you are walking at 4.5 mph. The conventional formulas that are used to predict energy expenditure for walking/running define "walking" as 4.2 mph and below and "Running" as 5.0 mph and above.

    4.5 mph is kind of in "no man's land". The number of 324 was achieved most likely by the formula assuming that 4.5 mph was "running" and using the running factor, whereas another formula might assume the 4.5 mph was "walking". The difference between the two at your weight for 60 min is about 80-100 calories. The running number is more accurate.
  • sweetscorpio17
    sweetscorpio17 Posts: 47 Member
    I was told by registered nutritionist with Kaiser that to lose weight do not eat any of your "exercise calories." So where MFP says that if I spin for an hour I can eat an extra 500 calories the nutritionist said that I couldn't.

    It is very hard to come home after a workout and not eat those extra calories and I normally dont, however, the past 2 weeks I have slipped and eaten them, and can definitely tell. My weight stopped dropping.

    I would advise trying your best to not eat your exercise calories, or at least most of them. If I go over by a 100-200 or so, I don't see a gain, but the past 2 weeks when I was eating my extra 500 my body is not on my side. For me, an extra 500 calories is another meal, which I definitely don't need.
  • xtina11179
    xtina11179 Posts: 352
    As far as eating exercise calories, I say - whatever works for you. Last year I started to seriously use MFP and went with the idea that I needed to eat my exercise calories, mostly because my calorie limit is set at the minimum of 1200. I ate 95% percent of my exercise calories and in 4 months, lost 32 lbs! :happy: As us "mathletes" can figure out, that is an average of 8 lbs a month, 2 lbs a week which most say is at the high end of a "healthy" loss. What worked for me may not work for others. And although it worked for me before, it may not work this time around. :grumble: I believe it is all trial and error.

    Now, I just need to be able to figure out an accurate calorie burn so that I will know how many calories I have!! :wink:
  • mbrody1947
    mbrody1947 Posts: 14 Member
    I have been eating all my cardiovascular calories and continue to lose weight every week, having lost 31 pounds in 4 months. However, I do note that when I signed up for my BMR i did not include my workouts. If you included your regular workouts in calculating your BMR you would be doubling up on those calories.

    521053.png
    Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter
  • mbrody1947
    mbrody1947 Posts: 14 Member
    :smile: test
  • vickthedick
    vickthedick Posts: 136 Member
    I went from 225 down to 114 in a year. I never eat my exercise calories. there are always stories of how the caloric numbers are never accurate on th machines. Im not sure about the calculations that the site does, but I've never eaten exercise calories and I am not about to start now.
  • mbrody1947
    mbrody1947 Posts: 14 Member
    I know that some people do well by not eating their excercise calories. The reason I like to eat mine (without apparently any adverse weight loss impact) is that it highly motivates me to get to the Gym, go for long brisk walks, ride bicycles, etc keeping me fit and adding muscle along the way. In addition I get the added luxury of being able to eat more and/or drink more. When I particularly know I am going to a party, a special dinner, etc I try to work out vigorously that day to give me a cushion.

    To each his/her own but this has worked great for me and keeps me from feeling deprived.
  • mollymoo89
    mollymoo89 Posts: 202
    I just went to Walmart last night and bought me a HRM watch for $27. It also counts the calories burned based on your heart rate taken(with your finger) before working out, during warm up, working out, cooling down, and after working out. I take my heart rate on my watch many times during my work out to get the most accurate count of calories burned. I used it during a spin class and it said I burned 741 calories! On here, it says I burned 540 calories. I'm not sure which one is more accurate but I'm going by what my HRM watch says since it's actually measuring my heart rate. Hope it helps!
  • GnaBean
    GnaBean Posts: 112 Member
    Yesterday I walked briskly (3.5 mph estimated) for 40 minutes. I logged my exercise here. It said I burned 234 calories. This morning, I walked briskly for 20 minutes. Again, it said I burned 234 calories. What's up with that?
  • Junisahn
    Junisahn Posts: 166 Member
    Gnabean - Wow... now I'm really suspicious of the calorie burn! I may invest in an HRM...
This discussion has been closed.

Categories