How accurate is it?

Options
Slimithy
Slimithy Posts: 348 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I'm looking for opinions on how accurate you find the MFP exercise calorie calculators to be. For example, MFP says I burn loads and loads of calories while mowing my lawn, its a push mower and i know it's a workout, but I'm not nearly as tired after mowing as I am after running/Lifting. It has me only burning slightly more calories when I jog than when I walk. I'm fine trusting it, lots of people have found succes here. I just wanted other people's thoughts.

Replies

  • Shadowcasting
    Shadowcasting Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    I find that MFP highly OVERestimates calories burned from some exercises. In a 45-minute elliptical workout, MFP puts my calories around 300 more than the machine does. I'd be more likely to trust the machine since it monitors how hard/fast I'm actually working and the resistance level.
  • wannabskinny85
    wannabskinny85 Posts: 21
    Options
    I invested in a heart rate monitor and noticed most often mfp gives me more calories than what my hrm says. Every once in a while they are on track but If I am going by the mfp estimates I usually deduct half and eat only half back. That is just me but each person is different
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    I would say anywhere from underestimating by 10% to over estimating by 75%, depending on your stats, and current fitness level.
  • Slimithy
    Slimithy Posts: 348 Member
    Options
    I find that MFP highly OVERestimates calories burned from some exercises. In a 45-minute elliptical workout, MFP puts my calories around 300 more than the machine does. I'd be more likely to trust the machine since it monitors how hard/fast I'm actually working and the resistance level.

    Do you reset the weight/height/sex setting on the elliptical when you get on? I know that would throw them off.
  • Miss_Chievous_wechange
    Miss_Chievous_wechange Posts: 1,230 Member
    Options
    Wearing a HRM is the only way to get an accurate number.
  • aimee0515
    aimee0515 Posts: 67
    Options
    I'm not sure how accurate it is...I've never used their calculations. I use a heart rate monitor and log my own calories...this is the closest reading you are going to get. Does the database just have one number (amount of calories burned) for each exercise?? If it is not estimating specifically for each person (ie. weight, age, sex), there is no way it is accurate. Sometimes I do the exact same workout and my calorie burn can be up to 100 calories different depending on how high my heart rate is (if I push myself harder on one day compared to another) so I don't think the database can be very accurate.
  • ChitownFoodie
    ChitownFoodie Posts: 1,562 Member
    Options
    It really depends on the workout. Strength training on MFP and using my HRM are about the same, but circuit training is usually way off. HRM says I burn more calories than what MFP says. And, push up and pulls up are the complete opposite. MFP says I burn more than my HRM says.....by A LOT
  • deniseg31
    deniseg31 Posts: 667 Member
    Options
    It does seem like it calculates our calorie burn way overboard. MFP always says I burn about 800+ cals when I do 60 mins. on the elliptical. But then I found this site...

    http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc

    I entered my weight and time and I got way more...I got like 1,060 for 60 mins. Soooo...I stick with the MFP calculator (even though I think it's still about off somewhat) because I just don't want to get my hopes up thinking that I'm actually burning over 1k calories.
  • waster196
    waster196 Posts: 138 Member
    Options
    The only way to be anything close to accurate is with a HRM. I found MFP really over-estimates what you're burning, but a lot of machines were UNDER estimating my burn. I'd pick up a HRM dude, I use a Sigma PC15 which you can pick up from Amazon for less than $60
  • mwhartley
    mwhartley Posts: 35
    Options
    I have been thinking the same thing and thank you for posting this topic. I don't think it is accurate, but I still add it for tracking purposes. I have learned a lot from this thread and will now be looking into a HRM. Thanks =)
  • NAMsMommy
    NAMsMommy Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    I invested in a heart rate monitor and noticed most often mfp gives me more calories than what my hrm says. Every once in a while they are on track but If I am going by the mfp estimates I usually deduct half and eat only half back. That is just me but each person is different

    I use mine ALL THE TIME! I would be in BIG trouble if I ate all the calories I burned according to MFP, but by using my HR monitor burn it seems to be working =)
  • chevy88grl
    chevy88grl Posts: 3,937 Member
    Options
    For me, MFP greatly overestimates most of the exercises. If I'm using a machine at the gym - I go by what that says. But, if it is something without any way of tracking it, I usually lower what MFP says by 50-100 calories and call it good. I can't afford a HRM right now, so guessing is all I can do.
  • momma3sweetgirls
    momma3sweetgirls Posts: 743 Member
    Options
    I think MFP overestimates too. I've just recently gotten an HRM and it shows fewer caloris burned than what MFP says by 10-40%, depending on the activity.
  • SarahofTwins
    SarahofTwins Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    I also agree that mfp gives your more calories burned because I just got an hrm and its a lot more reliable than what this site says.
  • sdthunder
    sdthunder Posts: 2
    Options
    I have to agree with everyone. Mowing my lawn for 68 minutes it says that I burn like 367 calories. If I up that minute total to 70 it increases the calories to 700+. There is no way that by adding 2 minutes that I would increase the amount by that much.
  • helloburger
    helloburger Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    may i ask, has anyone actually brought this up with the people who run mfp....
  • Bviera
    Bviera Posts: 106 Member
    Options
    I don't have an HRM, but I usually workout at the gym and I set my specific weight on the machine before starting, plus I also let it measure my heart reat throughout the workout, so I'd think it's at least close to accurate. When I was at my higher weight, MFP's calories would usually be way higher than what the machine at the gym said. At my current weight, MFP's calories are actually really close to what the treadmill says. (I don't trust MFP's elliptical readings because it doesn't know what speed or resistance I was doing, as opposed to the treadmill, where I can tell it the speed I was going at.) Even so, I usually log about 10-15% less of what it gives me and a bit less than whatever the treadmill says, just to be on the safe side. It's been working so far.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    may i ask, has anyone actually brought this up with the people who run mfp....

    MFP plugs in established calculations based on age, weight, gender and duration. The reason it is not accurate and MFP and the calculation does not know how hard you are working, your HR, your current fitness level etc.
  • dragonflydi
    dragonflydi Posts: 665 Member
    Options
    Wearing a HRM is the only way to get an accurate number.

    I have an HRM as well and most of the time, MFP is off for me, but only by a little. Friday I did a 6 mile run. When I logged it, it came up with a calorie burn of 803 and my HRM had 816 ... it is also pretty close for me on the elliptical (off by less than 25-30 from my HRM) ... but I do make sure to weigh myself daily and plug all the stat info into the machine too.

Categories