Accurate Calories Burned

Options
Broderick50
Broderick50 Posts: 851 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
First off I don't have a heart rate monitor I know they are more accurate. I'm wondering how do you calculate your calories burned do you use what the machine tells you you burned or what MFP tells you you burned. I've noticed that sometimes there can be a big difference. I use what MFP says and I'm wondering how other people do it.

Replies

  • joannadalina
    joannadalina Posts: 112 Member
    Options
    I generally go off of what MFP says. Now that I joined a gym and use the elliptical, calories burned on the elliptical tend to be way less than what MFP says when I enter it in.

    For example, 15 mins on elliptical says 138 calories, when entered into MFP it says 221. I always go with the lowest number.

    I've been thinking about getting an HRM, but haven't fully committed to the idea just yet.

    Best of luck :)
    Joanna
  • tristaj90
    tristaj90 Posts: 330 Member
    Options
    I typically use what the machine said as long as it's actually connected to the machine. I have a bike that only counts time so I have to use MFP calories for that. Sometimes I manually enter the calories to be more of an average between MFP and the machine. Obviously for my workout DVDs i can only track the actual exercise (i.e., kick boxing) or a "aerobics, general" on here.

    Really I think both are more generalized so taking an average is really what I try to do.

    Sorry I'm not much help!
  • howardheilweil
    howardheilweil Posts: 604 Member
    Options
    If those are your options, you have to use the machine number. That is at least based on the intensity of your workout. The MFP number is based on multiple assumptions and may be totally inapplicable to your actual workout. In my personal experience, now that I use a HRM, the MFP numbers tend to be at least 30 - 40% higher then the actual calorie burn. The machine numbers tend to be closer. Good luck!
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Options
    I wouldn't eat back more than 50% of either. Both are generally too high and machines pretty much always lie on the high side.
  • Lizzy622
    Lizzy622 Posts: 3,705 Member
    Options
    I usually go with the lower number and only eat back 1/2.
  • LiminalAscendance
    LiminalAscendance Posts: 489 Member
    Options
    Since individuals notoriously overestimate their calories burned, you should always go with the lowest estimate. Also, I recommend only eating, at most, 1/2 of your calories back (unless you want to come back here and post a "why am I not losing weight?" thread).

    I didn't eat any of my calories back, although that approach isn't for everyone.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    No 1 method is guaranteed to be more or less accurate than any other method. Period. They are all based on formulas that calculate an estimated calorie burn, and those formulas can vary greatly.

    The best thing to do is to pick 1 method of estimating... use MFP, use an HRM, use something basic like 7cals burned per minute of exercise... but pick one and use it exclusively and consistently for a month. Then compare your expected results to yoru actual results. If they are fairly close, then your estimating is probably pretty reasonable - keep doing what you're doing. If they aren't close, then tweak something and repeat the process.
  • joannadalina
    joannadalina Posts: 112 Member
    Options
    No 1 method is guaranteed to be more or less accurate than any other method. Period. They are all based on formulas that calculate an estimated calorie burn, and those formulas can vary greatly.

    The best thing to do is to pick 1 method of estimating... use MFP, use an HRM, use something basic like 7cals burned per minute of exercise... but pick one and use it exclusively and consistently for a month. Then compare your expected results to yoru actual results. If they are fairly close, then your estimating is probably pretty reasonable - keep doing what you're doing. If they aren't close, then tweak something and repeat the process.

    7cals burned per minute? I have never heard of that one before! Def gonna have to give that a try!
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    No 1 method is guaranteed to be more or less accurate than any other method. Period. They are all based on formulas that calculate an estimated calorie burn, and those formulas can vary greatly.

    The best thing to do is to pick 1 method of estimating... use MFP, use an HRM, use something basic like 7cals burned per minute of exercise... but pick one and use it exclusively and consistently for a month. Then compare your expected results to yoru actual results. If they are fairly close, then your estimating is probably pretty reasonable - keep doing what you're doing. If they aren't close, then tweak something and repeat the process.

    7cals burned per minute? I have never heard of that one before! Def gonna have to give that a try!

    It's just an estimate... but anywhere between 5 and 10 cals per minute depending on the person and the intensity can be a good rough estimate.
  • mathjulz
    mathjulz Posts: 5,514 Member
    Options
    I generally go off of what MFP says. Now that I joined a gym and use the elliptical, calories burned on the elliptical tend to be way less than what MFP says when I enter it in.

    For example, 15 mins on elliptical says 138 calories, when entered into MFP it says 221. I always go with the lowest number.


    Interesting … I have the opposite results. 7 min on the elliptical and it shows 75 calories, where MFP only shows 53. (I only use it for warmups anyway, so I don't really worry about it…)


    OP … another alternative would be to use the TDEE method. Google TDEE calculators and try several. Take a calorie amount int he mid-range. Eat TDEE - 500 calories to lose about 1 lb per week (or TDEE - 15% might be better for some people …). You have to be really honest about your activity and workout level, because it includes exercise calories in your daily estimate. Then you don't eat back exercise calories so you don't have to worry about how accurate those estimates are :wink:
  • vorgas
    vorgas Posts: 741 Member
    Options
    I generally go off of what MFP says. Now that I joined a gym and use the elliptical, calories burned on the elliptical tend to be way less than what MFP says when I enter it in.

    For example, 15 mins on elliptical says 138 calories, when entered into MFP it says 221. I always go with the lowest number.
    Here's an experiment you can try on your own.

    Get on an elliptical. Set the resistance at the lowest possible setting. Stride at an easy pace, say 80 strides per minute, for 10 minutes. See what the machine says. See what MFP says.

    Now set the resistance at the highest setting where you can comfortably maintain that same rate of 80 strides a minute for 10 minutes. Maybe it's resistance 4 or 5. Maintain 80 strides per minute for 10 minutes. See what the machine says. See what MFP says.

    Finally, set the resistance at an exhausting level, say resistance 10. Maintain 80 strides a minute for 10 minutes. You should be pouring sweat by this point, and gasping for breath. See what the machine says you burned in calories. See what MFP says.

    You will notice that no matter what resistance you choose, MFP always calculates it as the same amount. The machine, however, will calculate each one at a greater amount. The same thing will happen if you keep the resistance the same, but increase your strides from 80 to 160. MFP will call it as the same amount burned no matter what.

    Do you know why that is? Because MFP has no idea how hard you worked. It's just going to take an average of what most people do. The machine, however, does know how hard you've worked.

    Now, I'm not saying the machine's numbers are gospel. But it's going to be a lot more accurate than MFP.
  • monicastryin
    monicastryin Posts: 40 Member
    Options
    I have a heart rate monitor.

Categories