Ummm... Calorie Burn??

Lisone
Lisone Posts: 78 Member
edited September 27 in Fitness and Exercise
Hey y'all.... I was just wondering... When you guys log in your activity/exercise for the day, do you go by what the MFP calculates or do you go by what the actual machine at the gym says? I find that when I go by the elliptical, stairmaster, treadmill, etc. it usually says that I burn a fraction of the calories that MFP comes up with. What gives??? Is anyone else experiencing this?? Any thoughts, comments, sarcastic remarks are welcome. ;-)

Replies

  • ChrisDixon2610
    ChrisDixon2610 Posts: 2
    When you use the machines at the gym do you enter your weight, age, etc? If not this could explain the reason why the read out you get is less than MFP calculates.
  • Ree_Chatelain
    Ree_Chatelain Posts: 229 Member
    I've noticed the same thing. I normally go with what the treadmill says. I got a HRM this weekend and i'm very excited to compare the three. And i also try to go with the lower calorie burn when pointing exercise and higher when pointing food, just to be safe.
  • petraann
    petraann Posts: 20 Member
    And my elliptical says I burn on average 100+ more each 65 minute session. I would go by the machine considering you can change level/intensity that MFP can not factor in not knowing the level people do. GO BY THE MACHINE FOR ACCURATE CALORIE BURN!
  • cylababe0075
    cylababe0075 Posts: 1
    I go with what the machine says. In my opinion they do a better job of calculating but this only if you put in your age and weight so ALWAYS make sure to do that. For instance, I burn roughly 270-280 calories on the elliptical in 25 minutes according to the machine but only like 200ish according to MFP. I haven't had any problems with gaining weight or anything because I choose to trust the machine so I feel fairly confident using that number is fine. The only time I use the MFP number is when I go for outside runs (I don't have a heart rate monitor) and I figure any calories that I actually, physically burned but didn't take into account because MFP maybe undershot the number are just icing on the cake. No need to overeat on accident. Hope this helps! Good luck with everything.
  • Lisone
    Lisone Posts: 78 Member
    Thanks everyone for the advice!! Definitely going to stick with the machine reading. And, going to start putting in my age too! I always forget that part!! =)
  • suecq09
    suecq09 Posts: 36 Member
    I found that my heart rate monitor and the machine are very close together. The calories on MFP are high for some things and low for others. I tend to adjust my minutes to match what my heart rate monitor tells me I burned. I don't trust the calories on MFP - so I tend NOT to eat back my exercise calories to account for that.
  • Windi38
    Windi38 Posts: 164 Member
    I got a heart rate monitor just because of this issue. And I found out that I burn a significant amount less than either the machines or MFP says.

    I'd go with whatever is lower, to be safe! And if it's at all possible, invest in a heart rate monitor! One with a chest strap! :)
  • dawn131982
    dawn131982 Posts: 2
    A HRM is best. I love using mine from anything that that burns calories...running, lifting weights, washing the car, mowing the lawn... The HRM records the increase and decrease in your heart rate so unless your machine is working properly and inspected/repaired as needed then they are usually inaccurate. MFP does not take into account every factor that you can program your watch/HRM strap can. For a little less than $100 you can record and monitor all the calories burned!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories