MFP v machine calories

ace175
ace175 Posts: 518 Member
edited September 23 in Fitness and Exercise
So I was curious... when I use the stationary bike or treadmill the calories it says I burn is "X" amount of calories. When I go to MFP to enter my exercise, it gives me a completely different number (usually higher) then what the machine gave me. Which is the accurate amount?

Replies

  • jlewis121186
    jlewis121186 Posts: 33
    i think mfp is more likely to be right...the machine doesnt know your weight, mfp uses your weight to calucalte calories burned. the machine is never right for me, but mfp seems to be right
  • CCortor
    CCortor Posts: 2
    I use what the machine gave me because tension and speed can reflect the calories burned. The machines at the gym I use do have me plug in weight and level as well. Remember the only person you cheat is yourself. I always go with the lower of the two. That way if I am wrong its in my weight loss favor not my extra calories to consume favor. MFP allows you to change the number as well.
    Hope this helps.
    Carma
  • MeliciousMelis
    MeliciousMelis Posts: 458 Member
    I think MFP over estimates. When I work out on the elliptical, I enter in my weight and age. For 35 minutes, I average about 350-ish calories burned (varies with intensity).

    MFP would give me 500+ calories burned....leading to extra calories to eat back, that I don't really need.
  • ace175
    ace175 Posts: 518 Member
    Yeah I enter my weight and age and on the treadmill it gives me a lower number and when I enter the time on MFP it gives me this huge number and I'm like wow, really? It just doesn't seem right to me.
  • MeliciousMelis
    MeliciousMelis Posts: 458 Member
    Go with the number you get from the machine- I have been and I am seeing results!

    Keep up the hard work!! :)
  • lisawest
    lisawest Posts: 798 Member
    If the machine requires you to enter your height, weight, age and gender, then it will be more correct. However, if it only requires you to enter one or two (and some don't require ANY!), then it will be less correct. Even more correct than either of those, would be a heart rate monitor which requires all of that information and monitors your heart rate continually throughout the work out. However, there is still a margin of error for a heart rate monitor! There is a thing they use while trying professional athletes that monitors CO2 and heart rate and other things. That would give you that absolutely most correct number. However, it is expensive to do, and who really wants to exercise while hooked up to tubes and wires?

    If you are unable to buy a HRM (the good ones can get pricey!), I would say use the lower of the two numbers, and eat those calories back. If after a month or two you are not seeing the loss that would be expected, try using the higher of the two numbers, and still eat those calories back!

    Good luck in finding what will work best for you!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories