The calories burned estimates seem a bit high, no?

abyssfully
abyssfully Posts: 410 Member
edited September 25 in Health and Weight Loss
I'm finding that when I add an exercise the amount of calories stuns me. Does it go by your height/weight at least, or is it literally a VERY rough estimate?

Replies

  • leomentlines
    leomentlines Posts: 440 Member
    I'm not 100% sure, but they also seem a bit high to me as well.. I usually try not to eat all of my exercise calories because of this. The only true way to know is using a heart rate monitor
  • Simone1970
    Simone1970 Posts: 67
    From what I can tell it looks to be a rough estimate. Have you thought of purchasing a POLAR Heart Rate Monitor or something like it for exercising? I had a personal trainer a couple years ago and despite him being terrible at what he did, he did give me great advice which was to buy a heart rate monitor. I bought it and wear it every time I work out . It shows me exactly how much calories I burn as well as monitors your heart rate which I think is very important too. Its really motivating to see how many calories you are buring during the excercise, and great to see how it affects your daily caloric intake for the day. I would recommend buying one and using the info from the monitor to accurately track how many calories you are burning.

    Good luck!
  • HungryMom
    HungryMom Posts: 280
    I second the HRM suggestion. I have found the numbers to off significantly. For example, for the cardio portion of my workout tonight my HRM said I burnt 375 calories and MFP's number was 529. As you said the MFP database is a rough estimate that has to generalize across a large population.
  • seachelle
    seachelle Posts: 69 Member
    Agree Heart rate monitor! Everyone burns different amounts! I have a polar as well.
  • katnz17
    katnz17 Posts: 45
    I have a treadmill and it always says I've burned more calories then MFP (factoring the same speed)
  • holli_walker
    holli_walker Posts: 109 Member
    I use my heart rate monitor and usually burn way more than what MFP says. this website was still off a little. But it takes your weight into consideration. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbcoff. Hope it helps :)
  • Tiger4him
    Tiger4him Posts: 1
    They seem a bit high to me too.. however i love the comment about someone's treadmill giving even higher estimates. I am almost certian it takes into consideration you weight and stats.. I know it for sure does it with the amount of daily calories allowed for certain goals.. I played with it a little and found that out.
  • PirateJenny
    PirateJenny Posts: 233
    I find them to be very high (sometimes by hundreds of calories) and never use them as they are.

    When the walk I take my dog for in the morning is estimated to burn the same or even more calories that the readout I get off the elliptical after 30 minutes of high intensity interval training, you know something is up.

    I use an aggregate of information from other online sources and the approximation from the machines (elliptical, treadmill, rower etc) at the gym I go to. I have not started using a heart-rate monitor, but I am shopping around for a reliable model.

    Getting a dead on account (or close to it) of calories burned is difficult (if not impossible) without specialized equipment, so an approximation is the best I am going to go for. Even with that I do not "eat back" all my exercise calories.
  • DianaPowerUp
    DianaPowerUp Posts: 518 Member
    For me, the cal. burn on MFP is always way higher than my HRM (Polar FT40) gives me. Sometimes by 50-100%! You can see why that's a problem if you're eating back your calories.
  • elliecolorado
    elliecolorado Posts: 1,040
    My elliptical always gives me a lower number than MFP does. I always go with the lower number because I'd rather be estimating on the low side then think I am burning more than what I really am.
  • beckajw
    beckajw Posts: 1,728 Member
    I use an hrm. Sometimes the estimate is higher than my hrm, sometimes it is lower (depends on the exercise). If you're doing a variety of exercises, it will probably even out. If you do the same thing every day, you are probably either consistently low or consistently high. The problem I find with these estimators is that one person's "strenuous" may be another's "medium".
  • bhildebrandusmc
    bhildebrandusmc Posts: 3
    Calorie burn always does seem a little high. Use a heart rate monitor and if possible get your VO2 Max tested so that you can measure your actual calorie burn.

    Best advice would be to just not count all of your excercise calories and continue to work your butts off.

    Cheers.
  • fteale
    fteale Posts: 5,310 Member
    What surprises me is that leisurely walking is listed as 200 cals an hour, when I could and often do do that all day without feeling the slightest bit tired, whereas a full on 50 min aerobics class that has me out of breath and sweating like a loon only comes out at about 350! I don't understand!

    When I am using a pedometer or nike+ I go by their estimate instead.
  • rmhand
    rmhand Posts: 1,067 Member
    The estimates from MFP are low in my case from comparisions with cardio equipment and my HRM. The approximations they have for cleaning and gardening seen a bit high but I have not tested those with my HRM.
  • CelticWarrior
    CelticWarrior Posts: 117
    I use my heart rate monitor and usually burn way more than what MFP says. this website was still off a little. But it takes your weight into consideration. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbcoff. Hope it helps :)

    that is the key ,mfp accounts for your weight, that I know for sure, I dont use a heart monitor so I dont know if they do it also, but my treadmill doesnt, it always is the same no matter what with the treadmill, but mfp has changed over time due the to the weight change
This discussion has been closed.

Categories