So how do you know what you are actually burning?

SeaDragonIsland
SeaDragonIsland Posts: 25
in Fitness and Exercise
I was reading an article entitled, How Accurate Are the Calorie Counters on Treadmills, Ellipticals & Other Cardio Machines? The report says that elliptical machines were found to be the most optimistic, overestimating one exerciser's calorie expenditures by 42 percent. Meanwhile, treadmills overestimated by 13 percent, stair climbers by 12 percent, and stationary bikes by seven percent. Another issue to consider is the age of the machine; newer tends to be more accurate. Add to the fact that your fitness level plays a big role in how many calories you burn during a workout. And that "As you get in better shape, your body becomes more efficient at performing exercise and therefore you end up burning fewer calories for the same activity,"
So how do I know exactly how many calories I burn during any given exercise, whether it be my treadmill or anything else I may use? I'm left confused. Is this part of the reason I'm not losing lately? That my treadmill is saying I'm burning more than I really am? This is frustrating enough without added in inaccuracies.

Replies

  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    Without paying lots of money and getting strapped up to a bunch of machines you really won't ever know exactly. It is all an estimation and you have to play with your numbers to see what works.
  • AllOutof_Bubblegum
    AllOutof_Bubblegum Posts: 3,646 Member
    Invest in an HRM. it's the only way to get anything close to ensured accuracy.
  • BigT555
    BigT555 Posts: 2,067 Member
    i dont bother trying to guess, because honestly thats what it is; guesswork.


    instead i average out my intake whether i exercise or not, i know if im eating too much or too little based on my results
  • martinel2099
    martinel2099 Posts: 899 Member
    You don't. You just have to take your best guess for your starting number and be consistent with how you record your food measuring and exercise exertion.
  • Springfield1970
    Springfield1970 Posts: 1,945 Member
    By trial and error and my heart rate monitor I have a very good idea. It took a while of taking records.

    I pre fuel my exercise so I really like to know.

    It's working so far, I think I slightly underestimate most of the time, but have the odd day with extra off piste calories and wine.

    I'm pretty spot on with the running cycling and swimming.

    The weight training and it's extra calories for repair throw a spanner in the works.

    Im sure I'm underestimating that, but it doesn't matter so much unless I'm bulking.
  • Ready2Rock206
    Ready2Rock206 Posts: 9,487 Member
    I use the TDEE method so I don't have to worry about that. It is all just a guess anyway.
  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    Heart Rate Monitor is the best estimate.
  • FatFreeFrolicking
    FatFreeFrolicking Posts: 4,252 Member
    Buy a heart rate monitor. It's the most accurate you'll get. I have a Polar FT4 and love it.
  • SeaDragonIsland
    SeaDragonIsland Posts: 25
    Thanks everyone for your answers. I'm not one to "eat back" the calories I burn. But I'll check into some of the devices you mention.
  • Tla0126
    Tla0126 Posts: 207 Member
    Polar ft4
  • thavoice
    thavoice Posts: 1,326 Member
    I dont so I dont eat back any exercise calories.
  • dopeysmelly
    dopeysmelly Posts: 1,390 Member
    i dont bother trying to guess, because honestly thats what it is; guesswork.


    instead i average out my intake whether i exercise or not, i know if im eating too much or too little based on my results

    Absolutely this.

    If you're changing your lifestyle rather than trying to lose weight quickly, at the end of the day, one week or one month of adjustments is nothing.
  • Behxo
    Behxo Posts: 1,190 Member
    Polar ft4

    +1, Can't go wrong with it
  • SueInAz
    SueInAz Posts: 6,592 Member
    It's all just guesswork. Really. Even the calorie content of foods can be a guess. There've been articles lately about the calories in packaged foods being off by as much as 20% in some cases. The FDA gives some wiggle room with what's on the package and the reality. For example, calories are rounded to the nearest 5 or 10 and anything under 5 calories can be listed as zero. 50 calories or less--Round to nearest 5-calorie increment: Example: Round 47 calories to “45 calories.” Above 50 calories--Round to nearest 10-calorie increment: Example: Round 96 calories to “100 calories.” Also cooking foods can remove calories from them. So you shouldn't use "raw" food choices when you cook something or your calorie count will again be off. This is probably more information than you wanted but the point I'm trying to make is that it's really all just estimates.

    All of that said, a HRM will be the closest you can come to being accurate for your calorie burns. And remember, when trying to lose weight, it's always better to underestimate your burn than overestimate, just in case.
  • tcamp02
    tcamp02 Posts: 61 Member
    I never trust the calorie burns on the equipment. It always seems to be overstated. I always wear a Polar heart rate monitor when I'm working out and use that reading to get my calorie burn. It has a chest strap and you load your age, weight, gender, etc. and it takes all of those into account using your heart rate while you exercise to calculate your calories burned. Those are the calories that I load into MyFitnessPal for my exercise. I also always create a new exercise since I never do exercise that fits into one of their categories.
  • tcamp02
    tcamp02 Posts: 61 Member
    I also see a lot of people saying that they aren't "eating back" the calories that they burn. Keep in mind that Myfitnesspal is calculating your calorie needs on a net basis. For example, it says I need a net of 1200 calories a day. If I didn't "eat back" my calories burned I would be eating way too few calories a day to lose weight since I always burn 250-550 calories a day from exercise. You can stop weight loss by eating too many or too few calories.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    To the OP - just remember that HRMs are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (running, elliptical, cycling). Any type of strength training, intervals, anything with a lot of start/stops will not be accurate using an HRM.
  • criticaltodd
    criticaltodd Posts: 86
    To the OP - just remember that HRMs are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (running, elliptical, cycling). Any type of strength training, intervals, anything with a lot of start/stops will not be accurate using an HRM.
    Some HRMs (at least mine) has ways to account for intervals, etc. I have no idea how accurate it is but you can use it to estimate for other activities if your HRM or software has different modes.
  • SeaDragonIsland
    SeaDragonIsland Posts: 25
    It's all just guesswork. Really. Even the calorie content of foods can be a guess. There've been articles lately about the calories in packaged foods being off by as much as 20% in some cases. The FDA gives some wiggle room with what's on the package and the reality. For example, calories are rounded to the nearest 5 or 10 and anything under 5 calories can be listed as zero. 50 calories or less--Round to nearest 5-calorie increment: Example: Round 47 calories to “45 calories.” Above 50 calories--Round to nearest 10-calorie increment: Example: Round 96 calories to “100 calories.” Also cooking foods can remove calories from them. So you shouldn't use "raw" food choices when you cook something or your calorie count will again be off. This is probably more information than you wanted but the point I'm trying to make is that it's really all just estimates.

    All of that said, a HRM will be the closest you can come to being accurate for your calorie burns. And remember, when trying to lose weight, it's always better to underestimate your burn than overestimate, just in case.

    That is great information to have as well. Thank you. I will work on making adjustments.
  • SeaDragonIsland
    SeaDragonIsland Posts: 25
    I also see a lot of people saying that they aren't "eating back" the calories that they burn. Keep in mind that Myfitnesspal is calculating your calorie needs on a net basis. For example, it says I need a net of 1200 calories a day. If I didn't "eat back" my calories burned I would be eating way too few calories a day to lose weight since I always burn 250-550 calories a day from exercise. You can stop weight loss by eating too many or too few calories.

    I log my food intake before I do the exercise log. I've heard about the too few calorie idea before, people are on both sides of the fence as to whether that's true or not, the "starvation mode". I know people who eat way fewer calories than 1200 for over a year and never stopped losing.
  • deksgrl
    deksgrl Posts: 7,237 Member
    I also see a lot of people saying that they aren't "eating back" the calories that they burn. Keep in mind that Myfitnesspal is calculating your calorie needs on a net basis. For example, it says I need a net of 1200 calories a day. If I didn't "eat back" my calories burned I would be eating way too few calories a day to lose weight since I always burn 250-550 calories a day from exercise. You can stop weight loss by eating too many or too few calories.

    I log my food intake before I do the exercise log. I've heard about the too few calorie idea before, people are on both sides of the fence as to whether that's true or not, the "starvation mode". I know people who eat way fewer calories than 1200 for over a year and never stopped losing.

    Yes, but how much muscle have they lost, and will they have osteoporosis because of it?

Categories