How accurate (or not) are the calorie ratings for exercise?

Options
IgnatiousOReilly
IgnatiousOReilly Posts: 16
in Fitness and Exercise
The subject says it all, really. I know it incorporates weight and height when calculating calorie use but I've read comments about MFP being too optimistic. I am absolutely at my limit with my daily cardio and feel that I'm doing well, I'm losing more than 2lbs per week, I'd just like to have an accurate measurement of how I'm doing. Perhaps I should get a heart rate monitor.

Replies

  • fiveohmike
    fiveohmike Posts: 1,297 Member
    Options
    My chest strap Polar HRM shows me to burn about 60 - 70% of what MFP says for cycling.. YMMV.
  • LAT1963
    LAT1963 Posts: 1,375 Member
    Options
    I have a wahoo heart rate monitor. Even with a new battery, my monitor is having a hard time sending a strong enough signal to my phone unless the phone is practically on top of the monitor. I'm working on the signal issue with their customer service folk; it may be a bad unit not a product-wide problem.

    The Wahoo app has really good voice feedback options-you can set it to tell you your heart-rate on the trigger of entering or leaving your target heart rate zone. But I found the Wahoo app underestimates calories burned (or maybe I haven't set it up correctly).

    I have been using Runkeeper in concert with the Wahoo monitor. Runkeeper uses your age, weight, and your phone's *GPS* data from your workout to calculate your calories burned. When I first do my usual loop hike, the calories log around 600 calories--but after I upload it to their site, it gets *corrected* to between 700 and 800 calories (depending on how long I was hiking) on the basis of the elevation change as measured from the GPS. At first I thought this was over-estimation, but my weight loss is consistent with the Runkeeper data.

    Both these apps talk easily to MFP. Runkeeper automatically uploads to MFP; I think you have to tell Wahoo to do so for each workout. (I turned off Wahoo's communication with MFP because I don't want to double-log my workouts. I turn both Wahoo and Runkeeper on while walking so I get Wahoo's in-process alerts but Runkeeper's better calorie estimations).

    I used MFP to estimate calories for martial arts (which are not in the Wahoo or Runkeeper database). But my art is Aikido, and the intensity can vary; I think MFP's estimate would be more appropriate for Muy Thai or some other "hard" art. I'm considering logging Aikido as 'Yoga' but then how will I discern it from actual yoga when reviewing my log?

    My work-around is to log less time for Aikido sessions that are less rigorous.
  • acpgee
    acpgee Posts: 7,670 Member
    Options
    It varies a lot from activity to activity.

    My typical cardio workout is 65 minutes on the elliptical targeting a heart rate of 140. My HRM says I burn around 500, the machine says around 750 and MFP database says 882. I prefer to trust the HRM, being more conservative.

    On the other hand, the MFP entry for an hour of moderately paced walking at 298 sounds reasonable to me.
  • SHHitsKaty
    SHHitsKaty Posts: 301
    Options
    My HRM typically showed me as burning a little less than what MFP sets for exercises. That being said, on some of my longer runs, my HRM has me burning more than what MFP says as well. That's why I finally bucked up and decided to buy a Polar watch and HRM because I wanted to know as realistically as possible what I was burning plus it helps me for my half training.
  • hkristine1
    hkristine1 Posts: 950 Member
    Options
    It's not accurate - how could it be? For a spin class, it tells me that I burn about 500 calories. But, I tell you there are spin classes, and then there are SPIN classes. There are days when I have loads of energy and push myself hard. Other days when my energy is lower and I know I work less hard. MFP can't adjust for my effort levels or for the rigor of the particular ride.

    I think a good rule of thumb, if you don't get a HRM, is 4-6 calories per minute for light exercise; 6-8 calories per minute for moderate exercise; and 8-10 calories per minute for very vigorous exercise. I know it's hard to calculate the exact minutes of each kind of exercise, but if, for instance, you are doing HIIT training, with 30 seconds of pushing hard to 1 minute of recovery for an hour, that works out to 20 minutes of vigorous and 40 minutes of light, and I would estimate 180 for the vigorous exercise (9*20), plus 200 (5*40) for the light exercise, for a total of 380 calories in that hour.

    I got tired of calculating my burns, so I just do 100 calories for every 30 minutes of exercise, irrespective of type of exercise or my effort level. For most forms of exercising, this is a pretty huge under-estimate of burn, so I know that I'm not going to give myself too many calories.
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    Options
    I usually found them close to my HRM's estimate, but as others have said it depends a lot on what activities you're logging and how much effort you're putting into them. Almost all of the numbers involved with weight loss are just going to be estimates so sometimes you have to adjust a little to find your sweet spot.
  • JonathanLepoff
    JonathanLepoff Posts: 46 Member
    Options
    Buy a Polar hear rate monitor, one of the models that can evaluate your fitness and has the own cal feature for tthe most accurate results
    Equipment at the gym: elliptical trainers, treadmills etc indicated calories burned are way off what an accurate hrm calculates (hrm number is much lower)
    For me mfp also shows substantially more calories burned than the hrm does
    Even using map my fitness with a Polar blue tooth transmitter strap gives higher readings than the hrm when used at the same time
  • IgnatiousOReilly
    IgnatiousOReilly Posts: 16
    Options
    Yes I think it's best just have a healthy skepticism for the calorie ratings on the app. I never ever eat into my exercise calories each day and I'm losing at a rate im happy with. And I'm not hungry so I'm going to keep on as I am.
  • markiend
    markiend Posts: 461 Member
    Options
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1348299-snap-i-have-been-wrong-about-calorie-burns

    good info in there
  • GuineaPiglet
    GuineaPiglet Posts: 35 Member
    Options
    I'm having the opposite experience of most people. My Polar F24 shows me burning about 10 cal a minute for intense exercise, which for me is usually a sustained heart rate of 160-170 bpm. The calorie burn shown on my HRM is nearly twice what I usually come up with for MFP estimates and the gym equipment. My guess is that the default estimate is set to show results for someone lighter than I am. If the treadmill shows I've burned 250, my HRM says 450. MFP is usually pretty close to the gym equipment estimates.

    I try to eat back the calories from the lesser of the two estimates to be on the safe side.
  • fvtfan
    fvtfan Posts: 126 Member
    Options
    I have a heart rate monitor and I have honestly not found a huge difference between what MFP and Map My Fitness shows verses my HRM although I do calculate out my "net calories burned" and log that rather than the full amount.

Categories