Which calorie count to trust?

Options
Entaro
Entaro Posts: 23 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
So the calorie count on MFP seems to say 371 calories burned for 30 minutes of elliptical, however, the machine I use gives me a count of around 650 burned.

Could it be that my machine takes resistance into account while MFP doesn't? As I've maxed out the resistance on my machine and do it pretty intensely. Or is my machine just silly?



As a side question that I've been wondering about for a while: Would I burn more calories by running for 30 minutes and then doing elliptical than I would if I just did elliptical for 30 minutes straight? Would that increased "intensity" from running carry over at all and influence the elliptical burn? Been curious for a bit, on that.

Replies

  • hdelamore
    hdelamore Posts: 206 Member
    Options
    Both machines & Mfp use averages, what the average person would burn doing that of your weight.

    Before I had a HRM I used to put a number between the two.
    The best way to know how many calories your burning is to get a HRM though :)
  • Entaro
    Entaro Posts: 23 Member
    Options
    How trustworthy are HRMs? :D
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    Options
    I would definitely go with MFP in this case. The machines are generally greatly overstated. My treadmill estimates are generally 20% to 30% higher than my HRM. A good rule of thumb is that really intense cardio burns up to 10 calories per minute. So, for 30 minutes, 300 calories is a typical max. Of course some intensity can go higher than that, but it shouldn't be significantly higher. I think 371 sounds about right and likely includes your BMR.

    A HR monitor, while not completely accurate, is the *most* accurate method we have available. If you get one that takes a VO2 max estimate into account (usually via a fitness test feature) then they are more accurate. I've never had an issue with the numbers from my HRM (and I subtract about 10% to account for my BMR so I'm not double counting). Without the fitness test feature, they can be up to 25% off reality.
  • perfectflightisbeingthere
    perfectflightisbeingthere Posts: 66 Member
    Options
    How trustworthy are HRMs? :D

    They are an estimate, like everything else. If set up properly they can be a reasonable approximation, and probably the best we have outside of a laboratory..... certainly my expereince is that the machines read at least 20% higher than HRM, and this gets larger at higher intensities. Sadly don't have access to the kit needed to find a true figure, although I did see some research that Polar published suggesting it was more accurate for men than for women. There have been several old threads on this, eg:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/459580-polar-hrm-calorie-burn-estimate-accuracy-study

Categories