Calories burned

Options
dfouse
dfouse Posts: 2
in Introduce Yourself
My name is Dave. I have always been an active person, but I travel about 60K miles a year in my car and have gained 30+ lbs over the last several years. I just joined MFP last Friday and like the program very much.
My question is this - I did 60 mins on my gym treadmill at 3.7mph (random setting). The treadmill calculated 756 calories burned while MFP had me burning 440......that's a pretty big gap. Does anyone know if one is proven more accurate than the other?

Replies

  • Moriarek
    Moriarek Posts: 14 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    How about getting a heart rate monitor? Most of them look like a "sports watch", but they will give you far better results based on your ACTUAL heart rate considering your age/height/weight.
  • rjsnau
    rjsnau Posts: 11 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    Hard to know which one is more accurate. I would lean more towards the MFP. 756 is alot of calories. If you are serious about following the MFP program I would highly recommend a fitbit. I love mine. I have the Zip and it just goes in my pocket. It makes the whole calorie burn much more accurate (although not perfect) and is only like $60 on Amazon. I love being able to get up and go for a walk at the end of the day and seeing that I earned dessert for that night! Not that it is required by any means but I found it to provide much more motivation.
  • dfouse
    dfouse Posts: 2
    Options
    Just had the Fitbit discussion with a friend. I think I'll go that direction. Appreciate the feedback.

Categories