Question regarding calories burned via MFP versus my ellipticall

they are using different algorithms. MFP states that theirs is more accurate than the more commonly used one. I have to agree from experience using the calorie counter on the machine a fitness tracker and MFP.

John854 wrote: »

they are using different algorithms. MFP states that theirs is more accurate than the more commonly used one. I have to agree from experience using the calorie counter on the machine a fitness tracker and MFP.

I would argue it depends on the entry.
For something that accounts for intensity, like the walking at specific speed entries, yes. But the elliptical entry is very general and does not account for speed or resistance level. I have always found it to be extremely high. But I hate the ellipitcal and never used a high resistance. I was getting calorie burns higher than a run and was putting out nowhere near the same effort.

A really great blog or two on the topic

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/exercise-calories-sometimes-the-cardio-machines-are-more-accurate-404739
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/estimating-calories-activity-databases-198041

ETA - regardless of source, I always go with the lower estimate

I would log half of the lower number, track for a while and see if your weight loss is as expected. If you start losing too fast, you'll know your burn number is too low.

@lipss2die4 - before buying one, have a read
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472