METS

pichu318
pichu318 Posts: 172 Member
edited November 16 in Fitness and Exercise
If you want to calculate the amount of calories you burn in an exercise you could do it yourself! Most of us know that using MFP's standard of how many calories we have burned is way too much. The other option is to use METS and use the formula. In order to calculate the amount of calories you burned do the following:

1. Find your exercise here: https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/
2. Use the formula "(METS for activity)x(Weight in kgs)x(number of hours spent doing the activity)
3. Enter this number into MFP!

If you do not know your weight in kgs the formula for that number is (weight in lbs)x2.2

Quick, how many hours should I enter for ___ minutes?
Number of hours - Number of minutes
1 - 60
0.75 - 45
0.5 - 30
0.333 - 20
0.25 - 15
0.167 - 10
0.00833 - 5

I hope this helps :)

Replies

  • CyberTone
    CyberTone Posts: 7,337 Member
    The estimates provided by MFP for Cardiovascular exercises are already based on published metabolic equivalents for tasks (METs). How would calculating your own estimated values for the same pre-loaded activities differ from those provided by MFP? I could see how you could use that information for activities that are not already pre-loaded by MFP. But then, if you feel that "using MFP's standard of how many calories we have burned is way too much," wouldn't the estimated calories you calculated using the same METs data MFP uses, but for different activities, also be way too much?
  • pichu318
    pichu318 Posts: 172 Member
    edited April 2015
    I didn't realize MFP was based on METs. Whoops. I just saw that the calorie difference was at least 1/5th less when I do my own calculations. Some are more, some are less, but all were at least 1/5th less. With that in mind I assumed that MFP used something else or maybe they over guess the METs used for each exercise. Apparently I am just slightly harder on myself than MFP is, my bad ^^;
  • mudmonkeyonwheels
    mudmonkeyonwheels Posts: 426 Member
    Well according to these formulas MFP seriously underestimates calories burned from Mountain Biking...... For a 2 hour race there is almost 500 calories difference between MFP and these estimates. I guess MFP needs to have more options for exercise. Good news for me- more post-race carb replenishing!
  • CyberTone
    CyberTone Posts: 7,337 Member
    The Compendium of Physical Activities includes a limitations caveat on its home page. I am copying it here to remind users that any calculations for Calories burned for any physical activity are only estimates for a general population. Your individual results may vary.
    Limitations
    When using the Compendium to estimate the energy cost of activities, investigators should remind participants to recall only the time spent in movement. The Compendium was not developed to determine the precise energy cost of physical activity within individuals, but rather to provide a classification system that standardizes the MET intensities of physical activities used in survey research. The values in the Compendium do not estimate the energy cost of physical activity in individuals in ways that account for differences in body mass, adiposity, age, sex, efficiency of movement, geographic and environmental conditions in which the activities are performed. Thus, individual differences in energy expenditure for the same activity can be large and the true energy cost for an individual may or may not be close to the stated mean MET level as presented in the Compendium. i]emphasis added[/i
    Reference:
    https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    CyberTone wrote: »
    The Compendium of Physical Activities includes a limitations caveat on its home page. I am copying it here to remind users that any calculations for Calories burned for any physical activity are only estimates for a general population. Your individual results may vary.
    Limitations
    When using the Compendium to estimate the energy cost of activities, investigators should remind participants to recall only the time spent in movement. The Compendium was not developed to determine the precise energy cost of physical activity within individuals, but rather to provide a classification system that standardizes the MET intensities of physical activities used in survey research. The values in the Compendium do not estimate the energy cost of physical activity in individuals in ways that account for differences in body mass, adiposity, age, sex, efficiency of movement, geographic and environmental conditions in which the activities are performed. Thus, individual differences in energy expenditure for the same activity can be large and the true energy cost for an individual may or may not be close to the stated mean MET level as presented in the Compendium. i]emphasis added[/i
    Reference:
    https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/

    In addition, the compendium uses sources with varying levels of accuracy and the authors have admitted they cannot take time to independently verify the quality and accuracy of the research provided.

    I don't think that many people realize when they complain about the "inaccuracies" of the MFP database, that much of it is likely sourced from the Compendium.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories