Do you believe your fitbit calorie burn?

Sometimes they're updating stuff and the app throws a hissy fit. If you try again in about 30 minutes it should have its crap together, lol.

~Lyssa

christinev297 wrote: »

Thanks Might delete my last message,.... for obvious email reasons

I would go with yes...unless you like spam email!

~Lyssa

For me when I had my Force the numbers were relative, meaning while the were a tad high on calories burned in a day, or on an exercise, I knew they were off by a certain percentage so I could adjust them. I just returned the Surge because that things was ALL over the place for me, giving my 4500+ calorie burn days.

Your Fitbit will store data - I think for 7-10 days. So sync occasionally or often: up to you.

zyxst wrote: »

When I had my Ultra, I felt it to be very accurate with steps and calories burned. I bought a Zip because of the lower cost (a mistake!) as a replacement. My Zip has me burning 3000 calories a day at 30,000 steps. I believe the steps are accurate, but the calorie burn seems way off. I weigh a lot less than I did with the Ultra and the only times I burned 3000 calories were when I'd spent several hours outside walking/hiking around ponds and the woods. I did find out that the Zip is more generous with its calories burned estimates compared to the Ultra and One. Ex: Zip would give Very Active when Ultra would give Active. It's possible that I really am burning 3000 calories a day, but that doesn't seem very likely since I'm not losing as much weight as I might with a -8120 weekly deficit.

I'm not using the MFP method though. I go with TDEE - 10% because I prefer having the same amount of calories available each day and not a rollercoaster cycle. I guess the best advice I have is try eating half of the exercise calories back for a few weeks, see if you gain/maintain, and if you do, either stop eating them or eat less of them.

I "upgraded" from the Ultra to the Zip when I killed my charger. Recently I thought the Zip was lost so I bought a new charger for the Ultra. I found the Zip, but I am sticking with the Ultra anyway. I like it a lot better.

I think my Fitbit underestimates my calories, so I usually manually log my exercise with higher calorie burns that what Fitbit estimates. I've been doing that for over a year and I've stayed right at my goal weight.

I think part of the reason it undercounts is that I have a Flex. It doesn't count stairs/hills and I do tons of climbing in the course of my day. When I had a different tracker, I regularly racked up 100+ floors a day. That's enough to add up to a significant calorie difference from walking on the flat.

Docbanana2002 wrote: »

Yes, I believe it because I tested it.... log faithfully for a couple of months with a fitbit adjustment, then figure out how much weight you should have lost (calories below maintenance for that time frame /3500). Compare to what you actually lost. Mine is very accurate, with a slight error in the direction of my losing slightly more than my data would predict.

Me too, with Fitbit one. I analyzed over 14 weeks and my calculated deficit was very close to weight lost x 3500. So close (within 2%) that I asked myself if I had unconsciously biased my logging every day for 14 weeks to achieve the "right" accumulated deficit. My unconscious is really good at arithmetic.

I'd suggest change to lightly active if your goal is 10k. Will be more appropriate for your actual activity level.

Walking uphill is certainly more intense than flat. But I also do some running in place during my lunch hour when its not weather-wise to go outside. That overcounts, I believe, because its more steps per minute. But its not as intense as actually running. So days when I run in place, I try to 'balance' it by walking on the treadmill at an incline in the evening.

Fitbit calculations are based on an average metabolism. After doing calculations between calorie intake and calorie burns, I calculated that Fitbit/MFP was telling me I burned 269 more calories per day than I actually did. That's quite a bit. I'm sure Fitbit is accurate for other people. I will run the numbers for April at the end of the month to see if the discrepancy is the same.

It's easy to calculate your actual TDEE and compare it against Fitbit.

To calculate your actual total daily energy expenditure for a 30 day period do the following:

Total number of calories consumed + (number of pounds lost x 3500) / 30

Then find the total calories burned in Fitbit for the same time period, divide by 30 and compare the two.

Of course you can do this for any number of days, but I think it is more accurate over a period of 30-60 days as weight loss doesn't always appear on the scale right away.

Any difference between the two numbers could be a result of:

1. Your own metabolism
2. Inaccurate logging of foods (you forget to log or the data is not accurate).

By doing this calculation I discovered that I just need to burn a few hundred more calories than what MFP/Fitbit tells me in order to reach my goals. It's nice to know.

I've had the Fitbit One for about two years. It seems accurate. I do not eat calories earned by exercising unless I'm on vacation.

For example Fitbit is accurate for walking, but underestimates for hiking. I use MapMywalk for hiking.

I eat back my calories if I'm hungry, but rarely do I eat all of them.

Compare your Fitbit calories to this chart
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/weight-loss/in-depth/exercise/art-20050999?pg=2

shezza4mobee wrote: »

sarahas wrote: »

shezza4mobee wrote: »

I have another type of tracking device through weight watchers and don't trust it 100%. I can wave my arms 5 mins and get an extra 50 calories. Though I hear fitbits are more accurate. I'm actually wanting to buy one, but swimming is one of my favorite activities, and so far they're water resistant, but not waterproof.

As for eating back the calories, I hardly ever do.
If I work out at the gym hard during a session for an hour and earn 800 calories, I might eat 100-200 but never more. (unless I'm having a naughty pizza kind of day!)
Otherwise, I keep it fairly close to my original total, just because I think a lot of exercise is overestimated, and food underestimated.

Misfit Shine is waterproof and has a mode specifically for swimming.

Oh thanks for the info! I'll look into it!

Misfit Flash is another option (to the Shine). It's made out of plastic instead of aluminum, so it's half (or less) of the price of the Misfit Shine. Otherwise, they are pretty much identical in form, fit, and function. My wife and I both got a Misfit Flash on Black Friday last year and neither of us have complaints....other than those days when we haven't met our goal yet in the evening and have to jump on the treadmill for a little while.

christinev297 wrote: »

ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »

christinev297 wrote: »

7lenny7 wrote: »

For example Fitbit is accurate for walking, but underestimates for hiking. I use MapMywalk for hiking.

I eat back my calories if I'm hungry, but rarely do I eat all of them.

No worries about hiking lol I need to get a bit fitter yet.

I don't have negative calorie adjustments activated. I have read the explanation, but don't quite understand what it means. So I just left it unticked

It means Fitbit giveth and Fitbit taketh away. :laugh:

If you're not active enough to reach your calorie goal it authorizes fitbit to take away calories.

Oh how cruel! I'll just leave it unticked then

While it may be cruel, it definitely motivates me to stay active.

When I received my first Fitbit (a Zip), I had MFP set to Sedentary and it would still take away calories. It opened my eyes to how much of a couch potato I really was. I'm at least lightly active now, but I probably wouldn't have changed if it hadn't kept taking away calories and sticking it's tongue out at me.