Does MFP overstate Exercise? & Bike Questions

jmsspr93
jmsspr93 Posts: 117 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
On my exercise bike there is a pedometer and it shows calories and time, when I input the time on MFP it shows more calories so I alter that to what it says on the bike. My question is also that what is the pedometer based on? Normal weight? so I am actually losing more than it says? And also is it a good idea to ramp up the difficulty slightly each week?

Replies

  • Iknowsaur
    Iknowsaur Posts: 777 Member
    Yes. It very much overestimates calorie burns. MFP is notorious for this.
  • jmsspr93
    jmsspr93 Posts: 117 Member
    So is it better to only take what the bike says? (as i have been doing)
  • Iknowsaur
    Iknowsaur Posts: 777 Member
    So is it better to only take what the bike says? (as i have been doing)

    That would most likely be more accurate.
  • bwogilvie
    bwogilvie Posts: 2,130 Member
    Yes, the MFP database tends to overstate calories. I have a fairly accurate GPS/HRM for cycling (a Garmin Edge 800, which I've been using for over 3 years), and its calorie estimates are 25-50% lower than MFP's.
  • IrishGabriella
    IrishGabriella Posts: 48 Member
    I go by the MFP estimate as it knows my weight & height whereas the bike doesn't. But I try not to eat back all the calories earned as ppl say MFP overestimates. I do an hour at vigorous (+35 kph) about 3 or 4 times a week depending on the week. I haven't thought about upping the intensity though.
    I have ordered a heart rate monitor to try and calculate the calories burned more accurately.
  • scubasuenc
    scubasuenc Posts: 626 Member
    I have an exercise bike and also use my HRM. I find the exercise bike also overstates calories compared to the HRM, but the exercise is closer than MFP.

    The only thing I have found MFP to be pretty close on is walking on a treadmill at the stated mph. Even my walks outside don't match because my pace changes and there are hills.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    If the bike measures power (e.g. watts or kilojoules) then it may be fairly accurate. If it doesn't it's just an estimate - like MFP is an estimate - like a heart rate monitor is an estimate....

    Unless you are using your exercise bike standing up your weight doesn't have a huge amount to do with how many calories are burned unlike weight bearing exercises: walking or running for example.

    Just pick one or the other or take a mid-point.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    To give perspective on this...

    I do a fitnessblender workout 2x a week...it's 23mins long and it gives a range for that workout...

    anywhere between 164-258...that range is dependent on age, height, weight, effort etc...hence the range...MFP when I type in 23mins of circut training gives me 274....

    This is why when asked this question most responders say eat back 50-75% of the calories you have burned...just to be safe.
  • Velum_cado
    Velum_cado Posts: 1,608 Member
    Yeah, when I started using a HRM I discovered that MFP was generally giving me double the calories burned. I've found MFP is more accurate for walking, but still a bit high. Don't rely on what the site is telling you.

Categories