Which one is right?

sarahbear1981
sarahbear1981 Posts: 610 Member
edited September 25 in Fitness and Exercise
So I have taken up swimming and I am swimming for an hour doing laps of breaststroke. The exercise log on here says I burned approximately 1100 calories, give or take (I can't remember exactly), in one hour. However, i looked up this same exercise on another site and it asked for my weight. It says I burned 3586.841142 calories. Which one do I pay attention too and enter into my exercise log? Which one is more accurate. Do the calorie counts on here factor in weight?

Replies

  • vanesilla
    vanesilla Posts: 6
    i would go with what it says here on fitness pal
  • mishmash73
    mishmash73 Posts: 166 Member
    at your highest heart rate, typically you'd burn about 450 calories in 60 minutes... you could do up to 600 in 60 minutes, but would have to be dying & completely out of breath. when i do my bootcamp after 60 min my heart rate monitor says about 470-500 calories. i doubt youd'do double that swimming
  • gameovergt
    gameovergt Posts: 502
    1100 seems high, the 3000 one is extremely high.
  • sarahbear1981
    sarahbear1981 Posts: 610 Member
    i just did another one that calculated my weight, height, age and gender and it said 728
  • sarahbear1981
    sarahbear1981 Posts: 610 Member
    i just did another one that calculated my weight, height, age and gender and it said 728

    I think this one may be more accurate. Here's the link if anyone wants to check it out: http://www.fitday.com/webfit/exerciseinfopage.html
  • sarah44254
    sarah44254 Posts: 3,078 Member
    Did you swim nonstop for the entire hour? That should be taken into account.

    I can trust most of MFPs totals. Today I went jogging for 32 minutes. I have a heart rate monitor, so I know how much I burned. I looked it up on the site just out of curiosity. This site said 353 calories. My HRM said exactly 353 calories!!

    I'd go with MFP, but be sure to enter in the amount of time you were really doing the laps, not while you were resting (if you did rest).
  • Coyla
    Coyla Posts: 444 Member
    Swimming burns more calories, because the body is trying to keep the body warm. So I think the 700-something is more accurate for swimming, possibly even the 1,000.

    It also depends how tired you are. Were you exhausted afterwards? I don't think MFP is calculating too high there, but just in case, go with the 700.
  • sarah44254
    sarah44254 Posts: 3,078 Member
    i just did another one that calculated my weight, height, age and gender and it said 728

    I think this one may be more accurate. Here's the link if anyone wants to check it out: http://www.fitday.com/webfit/exerciseinfopage.html

    I entered my run from today on that site, and it gave me 264 calories burned. That is almost 100 less than what I really burned. Or 30% less. The best and most accurate way to know what you've burned is by heart rate monitor, and even that can be wrong because really, who knows how our bodies work well enough to monitor each and every calorie per minute?
  • sarahbear1981
    sarahbear1981 Posts: 610 Member
    I swam practically non-stop. I took about two minutes of break overall to adjust my cap and goggles. Yes I was worn out and I was starving. Are heart rate monitors water proof?
  • sarah44254
    sarah44254 Posts: 3,078 Member
    Some of them are, look for that specifically when you shop for one :smile:

    I just looked for one low price, with chest strap (more accurate than watch only), and that it includes calorie burn along with heart rate monitoring.

    I use a Polar FT7 ($85 on amazon) and I am not certain if it is waterproof or not. I will have to double check! I'd love to use it swimming.
  • koosdel
    koosdel Posts: 3,317 Member
    Swimming can burn an enormous amount of calories, especially if the water is cold. I know this is an extreme example, but English Channel swimmers can burn well over 20,000 cals, depending on their weight.
  • sarahbear1981
    sarahbear1981 Posts: 610 Member
    Guess I should start swimming the English Channel then LOL!!
  • LadyScarlett77
    LadyScarlett77 Posts: 26
    You and me both! Let's get wet suits first though, it cold over there!
  • koosdel
    koosdel Posts: 3,317 Member
    I'll watch from the boat!
  • NeuroticVirgo
    NeuroticVirgo Posts: 3,671 Member
    I would go with the lowest one. Only because I think its better to under estimate than over estimated your exercise calories (especially if you eat them).
  • Flyntiggr
    Flyntiggr Posts: 898 Member
    given your current weight, you are probably in the 700-1000 calories burned range.

    I would under vs. over estimate.

    And although there are some HRMs that say they work in water, most will give incredibly inaccurate readings. Even the hard-core triathletes I know guesstimate their burns in the water...
  • sarahbear1981
    sarahbear1981 Posts: 610 Member
    Thank you all for the good advice. I am going to go with the lowest count for now and I hope I can find a water proof heart monitor that will give me an accurate count.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories