My Fitness Pal OVER-estimating calories burned?

Options
Sassy_xo
Sassy_xo Posts: 44
in Fitness and Exercise
Does anyone else feel like MFP really overestimates the number of calories you burn exercising and being active? I see people post things like "180 for half an hour of cleaning" and that sort of thing, and I wonder if this is accurate? Compared to what cardio machines at the gym tell me when I enter my weight, MFP tells me alot more calories were burned than the machine. I ordered a FitBit, so I will be interested what it shows when I get it. I just wondered what you all think about this and what you think is the most accurate way to log calories burned?
«13

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    Cut them in half is the standard advice
  • isulo_kura
    isulo_kura Posts: 818 Member
    Options
    They're all estimates based on averages. For some things they seem to be more consistent than others. Personally I think they're running estimate seems pretty accurate. Even a HRM or a fitbit are not perfect. Take these estimates and adjust if necessary
  • mccindy72
    mccindy72 Posts: 7,001 Member
    Options
    always. If you want accuracy in your calorie burn, get a good HRM with a chest strap. Otherwise, you are not going to have much accuracy, if you are depending on machinery or MFP.
  • JessieLMay
    JessieLMay Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    I think some things are over like the cleaning, however, I have noticed that what mfp has is consistant with what I get from heart rate.
  • rayw89
    rayw89 Posts: 564 Member
    Options
    Personally I've never used what MFP tallies for me. I also don't trust what the machine in the gym tells me. Typically I take what the equipment tells me(such as treadmill, eliptical) and subtract atleast 100 calories from what it says, and then manually enter it in to MFP. I also don't track things like cleaning, or casual walks, but that's just me. :)
  • aaliceinw
    aaliceinw Posts: 747 Member
    Options
    I've found the HRM is really the most accurate and if I enter the exercise manually on MFP it tends to calculate about 20% more calories.
  • Terryb99
    Terryb99 Posts: 23 Member
    Options
    I look at it as a benchmark, something to show day to day consistency, or not.
    Kind of like your bathroom scale. Is it truly accurate? It does not really matter, as long as you use the same scale each time. It will show you whether you are gong up or down.
    I use a HRM to plug in my exercise routine calories burned. My Fitbit adds some activity, or calories burned. An average guy burns 2000 calories just getting out of bed and moving thru a day. So if I use those numbers, plus my HRM reading, MFP seems close enough for me to keep track of my activity and net calories.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    Most calculators, machines, and HRMs report gross, not net, calories burned. HRMs are only close to accurate for a limited number of activities.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    Terryb99 wrote: »
    I look at it as a benchmark, something to show day to day consistency, or not.
    Kind of like your bathroom scale. Is it truly accurate? It does not really matter, as long as you use the same scale each time.

    HRMs don't work that way - heck, they'll give you different numbers for the same level of exertion depending on the temperature outside! :smile:

    Use with caution....
  • blankiefinder
    blankiefinder Posts: 3,599 Member
    Options
    I don't log calories for cleaning, and usually log 1 calorie for strength training. For other cardio, I log the lower of my HRM / MFP / machine reading, and then eat back no more than 50%.
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    I thought HRMs were to measure heart rate in steady state cardio and that calorie burns are extrapolation off a formula which cna be way out if used incorrectly or for the wrong form of exercise?

    People often overestimate their own effort on MFP as well.
  • Oldbitcollector
    Oldbitcollector Posts: 229 Member
    Options
    I've always suspected that MFP is over estimating my cardio calorie counts, but being that it doesn't tally my strength training exercises, I've declared it a wash since the pounds are coming off.
  • milaxx
    milaxx Posts: 1,122 Member
    Options
    I honestly only log it for record keeping purposes. I do think it estimate high, but I usually don't factor the calories burned into my diet anyway. I just like being able to log that I worked out for _____amount of time. I know their are other apps that likely could be more accurate, but I like having everything in one spot.
  • GBO323
    GBO323 Posts: 336 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    I stopped logging exercise in MFP. The reason is when you add it in, MFP gives you immediate credit for it..and accuracy of what it gives you is questionable. With a tracking device like FitBit, you don't get exercise credit until you've burned a certain amount of calories for the day to warrant getting extra. While I use my Moto360 to track steps for my daily 10,000, I don't sync devices to MFP anymore. It was a yo-yo effect for me.
  • tigerblue
    tigerblue Posts: 1,525 Member
    Options
    MFP is pretty close to what my HRM gave me, when I was using it. At least for running and other cardio. But neither of them subtracts the calories that you would be burning in that time if you were not exercising. And those are already counted in your goal. For me, I figure I would be burning about 1 calorie per minute just sitting(I'm pretty small so that is conservative) so MFP exercise estimation minus the number of minutes exercised gets it in the ball park. After that you just have to adjust based on weight loss/gain results.
  • numinousnymph
    numinousnymph Posts: 249 Member
    edited March 2015
    Options
    yes MFP always shows way over what i burn/would burn. i use a Polar FT4 HRM with a chest strap, and even then i always subtract 75 cals from the total after a workout, just to adjust for any error the HRM has inherent in it. for cardio machines -- i only use ones that i can enter my weight in, and when i do enter my weight i put it in 15 lbs lighter than i really am, and then i HALVE the final calorie count the machine says -- and by that point it's closer to what my HRM says. call me overly-cautious or paranoid, but i do not want to end up gaining weight 'cause of errors like that!!
  • tigerblue
    tigerblue Posts: 1,525 Member
    Options
    999tigger wrote: »

    People often overestimate their own effort on MFP as well.

    No kidding! I thought I was running 10 minute miles and really they were closer to 12 minute miles!

  • jke78
    jke78 Posts: 59 Member
    Options
    I've seen this topic several times and I'm still confused :s
  • numinousnymph
    numinousnymph Posts: 249 Member
    Options
    jke78 wrote: »
    I've seen this topic several times and I'm still confused :s

    what are you confused about?
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,515 Member
    Options
    I think it overwstimates. As I'm interested incals and duration I calculate net calories using METs and/or experience and then chose a random cardio activity that gives me the same number for the correct duration. That works for me. That I today logged a type of walking for 37 mins of circuit doesn't matter. I add a note of what I did and am happy my stats look ok.

Categories