MyFitnessPal realllllly over estimates on calories..

Jenjenthejetplane1
Jenjenthejetplane1 Posts: 130 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Just saw from a friend they burned almost 900 calories for walking for a little over an hour... hmmm doesn't seem right.
«13

Replies

  • sunflowerhippi
    sunflowerhippi Posts: 1,099 Member
    It really depends on the person and the pace.

    When I run a full hour at 5-6 mph pace I burn around 700-800 calories via my HRM. When I was heavier it was even higher because there was more body weight to cart around.

    Now I will say MFP general calorie burns are a bit off at times, but not always as bad as you think.
  • madhatter2013
    madhatter2013 Posts: 1,547 Member
    It really depends on the person and the pace.

    When I run a full hour at 5-6 mph pace I burn around 700-800 calories via my HRM. When I was heavier it was even higher because there was more body weight to cart around.

    Now I will say MFP general calorie burns are a bit off at times, but not always as bad as you think.

    ^^^This^^^

    My husband burns around 900 calories doing an hour of walking because he's a bigger guy. I only burn about half that doing the same amount of time and pace because I'm smaller than him.
  • welly2012
    welly2012 Posts: 3 Member
    It definitely depends on the pace! My friends jogging pace is the same as my walking pace so i would burn more if we both were to walk :)
  • GBrady43068
    GBrady43068 Posts: 1,256 Member
    To be on the safe side, I always just use 2/3 of the amount MFP suggests. That shouldn't be enough to send me into "starvation" mode but it's enough that I don't get derailed from overestimating my burn.
  • ShannonMpls
    ShannonMpls Posts: 1,936 Member
    I find MFP estimates for walking and running to be pretty consistent with my heart rate monitor, actually. Usually the spread is only a few calories if I enter the pace correctly.

    (though the estimates for other exercise - like elliptical, cycling, etc - seems to be quite overestimated compared to my HRM, which of course makes some sense - MFP doesn't know resistance, effort, hills, etc).
  • knra_grl
    knra_grl Posts: 1,566 Member
    I noticed that when I entered walks twice in one day the calorie burn was cumulative but the time entry was only for the last entry. Looked like I had a mega burn for a 48 min walk but really it was the burn for two walks in one day.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    What I can see based on my own personal experience MFP doesn't over estimate that much.

    It takes the high side yes.

    When I do a HIIT from fitnessblender it gives me a range of about 161-261...which of course is dependant on height, weight, current cardio health, exertion etc.

    MFP estimates about 213 for me...when I enter the time for circut training.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Just saw from a friend they burned almost 900 calories for walking for a little over an hour... hmmm doesn't seem right.

    I agree, it doesn't seem right. Weight does play a factor but 900 calories for walking is really really high.

    Are you sure it was an MFP entry? You can easily modify the number yourself, even if you use the MFP entry.


    I just did a quick check and holy cow the numbers are all over the board. If I choose walking at 4mph I get over 700 calories ( I don't even get that for running for an hour). If I chose 5mph, I got over 500.
    I'm not sure if it is exactly an overestimate, maybe a glitch.

    I have found that most of the entries like walking and running were fairly reasonable for me. I don't know what's up with that.
  • Miamiuu
    Miamiuu Posts: 262 Member
    For a 220 pound male one hour of walking 2 miles per hour is around 250. How in the world are you walking for only an hour and burning 900 calories??????????????O.o Number seems wrong to me no matter how big the person is.
  • momof5
    momof5 Posts: 11
    I agree... Not sure how much you would have to weigh to burn 900 calories for an hour's worth of walking!! I was just doing some calculations as well and according to MFP, 15 minutes of jogging in place burns about twice as many calories as general aerobics. Yet jogging in place takes virtually nothing out of me but when I do general aerobics (i.e. jumping jacks, skipping, etc.) I am way more tired and out of breath. I sense something is not quite right. Unless being tired and out of breath is not a valid indicator of how hard you've been exercising??
  • hannaawh
    hannaawh Posts: 51
    Some of MFP's calculations are just really off. 900 calories for an hour of walking - no way (except you're really obese). I burn a third of that when I run for the same time.
    I usually don't use the MFP calulators, I use the app runtastic to figure out my calorie burn. I would recommend you to download some sort of exercise app or just compare different calorie burn calculators on the internet.. and choose the one in the middle. If one calculates 300 calories, one 150 and another 225, go for the 225 calculator and stick with it. :)
  • hannaawh
    hannaawh Posts: 51
    I agree... Not sure how much you would have to weigh to burn 900 calories for an hour's worth of walking!! I was just doing some calculations as well and according to MFP, 15 minutes of jogging in place burns about twice as many calories as general aerobics. Yet jogging in place takes virtually nothing out of me but when I do general aerobics (i.e. jumping jacks, skipping, etc.) I am way more tired and out of breath. I sense something is not quite right. Unless being tired and out of breath is not a valid indicator of how hard you've been exercising??

    It depends how fast you run on your spot. If you really bring up those knees and do it in a fast paste, you should feel it burn. However, maybe your leg muscles are bigger than other muscles on your body, so running is easier for you than for example doing jumping jacks :) Everybody is different.
  • spfldpam
    spfldpam Posts: 738 Member
    It depends on the walking pace and weight of the person really. I burned more cals when I weighed 270 pounds than I do now when doing any type of exercise. I have a Polar FT7 I use for workouts and really MFP isn't off much from some of the cals it says I should burn vs what my Polar FT7 says, in fact MFP is actually lower by 30 cals on some exercises. It depends on the persons size and their heart rate really.
    Best and most accurate is to buy a HRM with a chest strap. I recommend Polar. I wear mine in the pool to so it is great!
    Good luck!
  • lilRicki
    lilRicki Posts: 4,555 Member
    I use MFP for my exercise log, and I'm still losing inches and weight. I don't eat all my exercise calories back though.
  • erikayblue
    erikayblue Posts: 10 Member
    For a 220 lb guy, but we don't know the weight of the person walking. If the guy is 400 lbs it's going to be really high. We really don't know enough information about this guy to say one way or the other.
  • miss_smilla
    miss_smilla Posts: 5 Member
    For me, in spin, running and biking mfp always estimates at least a third more calories burnt than I actually do, according to my HRM.
  • quirkysterks
    quirkysterks Posts: 21
    It really does depend upon your weight and build. For example: I can run for an hour and burn almost 1000 calories. My friend, who is roughly 2/3 my size will burn 600 calories running in step with me.

    This may seem unfair... but she can also lose 10 lbs and drop a dress size. I can lose ten pounds and no one will notice.

    So it's all about perspective :)


    60957489.png
    Obstacles are those frightful things you see when you take your eyes off the goal - Henry Ford
  • dswolverine
    dswolverine Posts: 246 Member
    I use a HRM, subtract from that (they can be off) then enter in whatever minutes will give me that amount of calories is in MFP. The minutes exercising are never correct- i just fill it in for the numbers. Maybe they did the same thing?
  • _Zardoz_
    _Zardoz_ Posts: 3,987 Member
    The clues in the word 'Estimate'
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    The clues in the word 'Estimate'

    I'd agree for being within 100- 200 calories. But 900 is way off any reasonable estimate, even for someone carrying more weight.

    From what I've seen, there seem to be a few duplicate walking entries in the database. One gives a reasonable estimate, that other gives very high figures.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    Nobody is burning 900 calories walking for an hour...sorry people.
  • 1princesswarrior
    1princesswarrior Posts: 1,242 Member
    I had to laugh when I entered a jog last week, I used my hrm to actually track the calories but found the entry in mfp. MFP automatically had my burn at over 1400 when my hrm had it at 380 something, my speed averaged 4 miles/hour and I jogged for 33 minutes.

    ETA: I had to walk through the icy mud and up the icy hills.
  • jwdieter
    jwdieter Posts: 2,582 Member
    I checked 3 walking exercise entries, and all were reasonable. Nothing close to 900 (or even 500) for an hour.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    I checked 3 walking exercise entries, and all were reasonable. Nothing close to 900 (or even 500) for an hour.

    Maybe its just mine although I have never entered these in. I don't use MPH.

    If I go to exercise, then to database and type in walking, I get a whole list.

    If I choose "Walking, 4.0 mph", I get 739 calories for 60 minutes at 150lbs.
    If I choose" Walking, 4.0 mph, very brisk pace", I get 340 calories for 60 minutes at 150lbs.

    There are a few entries like this.
  • squiggysmama
    squiggysmama Posts: 76
    I use MFP for my exercise log, and I'm still losing inches and weight. I don't eat all my exercise calories back though.

    I do the same. I assume exercise calories are over estimated, and calories consumed are under estimated, (when I can't measure exactly). It may not be completely accurate, but as long as the overall effect is a loss in pounds and inches, I'm happy.
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    To be on the safe side, I always just use 2/3 of the amount MFP suggests. That shouldn't be enough to send me into "starvation" mode but it's enough that I don't get derailed from overestimating my burn.
    never a bad idea

    I always do about this- and then over estimate calories- instead of the opposite of what most people do- which is over estimate burn and under estimate food.

    factor of safety people. Use it.
  • _lyndseybrooke_
    _lyndseybrooke_ Posts: 2,561 Member
    Woah. I'm 5'5" 140 lbs and MFP says I'd burn about 315 calories from walking at a pace of 4.0 mph for 60 minutes. Your friend says he or she burned 3 times that? It's true that the bigger you are, the more calories your body will burn, but 3 times that amount seems like a gross miscalculation and I doubt that's an MFP issue. He or she probably manually put in the amount burned.
  • momof5
    momof5 Posts: 11
    I always do the same as well... I overestimate calories consumed and underestimate calories burned. But sometimes it seems the figures are a lot more off than what I would have normally compensated for this way. I think personally I will start to compare on other sites for exercise calories burned.
  • TeamCassieCass
    TeamCassieCass Posts: 68 Member
    I agree that I believe the app overestimates calories. It told me I burned nearly 200 calories just walking my dog at a very leisurely pace. However, if you spend any time at all working out on machines that track your calories or have a fitness you should have a general idea about how many calories you're burning for a particular activity. I have been shaving time off an activity to help compensate for this. For example, if my Zumba class is 55 minutes, I'll enter 40 minutes. Just a thought. I just started with the app this week so I'm feeling it out.
  • parkscs
    parkscs Posts: 1,639 Member
    I find it slightly overestimates for me but not by a ton. I don't bother logging things like walking or cleaning, but it sounds like there are some erroneous entries out there for some activities.

Categories