Be careful with MFP calorie estimates - don't work for everyone

2»

Replies

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    so you are saying that MFP burn estimates are not correct? That is why everyone is only told to eat back half of exercise calories….
  • jenniferinfl
    jenniferinfl Posts: 456 Member
    MFP was underestimating for me. Sure love my heart rate monitor, worth every penny. I like losing weight AND eating. I didn't feel like exercising yesterday, so I got 1200 calories. But, I get to eat even as much as 2000 calories and still lose weight if I'm willing to commit that amount of time to exercise.
  • cgvoabc
    cgvoabc Posts: 18 Member
    edited May 2015
    Another vote for heart rate monitor. After buying one and using it along with Runkeeper to track my workouts my calorie burn estimates are much more consistent and realistic!
  • spdoman7
    spdoman7 Posts: 121 Member
    999tigger mentioned intensity which is the key.
    The only true way to measure work/calories burned is with a HR monitor.
    I can burn 1,000 calories in an hour, but at a HR of 145 bpm or 80% maximum HR As I get fitter and my body becomes more efficient, I either have to increase my effort or ride longer to burn calories at the same rate.
    My current Polar HR monitor only cost $69.00.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    edited May 2015
    spdoman7 wrote: »
    999tigger mentioned intensity which is the key.
    The only true way to measure work/calories burned is with a HR monitor.
    I can burn 1,000 calories in an hour, but at a HR of 145 bpm or 80% maximum HR As I get fitter and my body becomes more efficient, I either have to increase my effort or ride longer to burn calories at the same rate.
    My current Polar HR monitor only cost $69.00.

    All kinds of wrong here!
    Basic HRMs aren't that great unless used for the right activity by someone who happens to be average. A more expensive one that someone has put in the effort to calibrate properly can be quite good.

    1000 cals an hour is highly unlikely unless you are superfit.

    Your body doesn't burn less as you get fitter. As you get fitter you have the capacity to burn more not less.

    You are confusing an inaccurate measuring device with reality. Your HR has reduced because you are fitter - that doesn't mean you are burning less - it's just your HRM that can't work that out.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    spdoman7 wrote: »
    The only true way to measure work/calories burned is with a HR monitor.

    If you'd said power meter I might have some time for the assertion. An HRM is a pretty poor way to estimate calories expended in many situations.



  • sngnyrslp
    sngnyrslp Posts: 315 Member
    I've never used My Tracks but does it take into account elevation/terrain? I know that the MapMyFitness apps account for climb, and going uphill a lot obviously burns extra calories. if My Tracks doesn't take that into account, that might explain some of the difference?
  • Michael190lbs
    Michael190lbs Posts: 1,510 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    I'm assuming you burn less on the stationary bike vs a real bike, but going at 15mph for 45 minutes, I only burn 220 calories (on the stationary bike). I see people logging 600 calories for 60 minutes and I just shake my head... it really doesn't burn as much as people think (maybe if they have a lot of resistance added, but I tried once and frankly the difference wasn't that great).

    I ride 50 minutes everyday at an intense level (15 of 20)for me and I log it as 500 calories eat 2500 calories and still lose weight (275 lbs then 195 now). Hell I could burn a 100 calories just walking in place with no sweat and a hearts rate of 90 (RHR62). I average 135-150 HR through out my training maybe the people logging 500-700 calories are working harder.

    My 2 cents

    nfvnspefmmib.png

    fifsj3ztsjcg.png









  • aubiefan122013
    aubiefan122013 Posts: 21 Member
    MFP vastly overestimates my calorie burn for stationary cardio equipment (elliptical, stationary bike, etc), but seems to do a lot better with "free exercise" like running and walking. This is based on both my heart rate monitor readings and also on what I know about what the food/exercise balance it takes for me to maintain. I prefer to have RunKeeper report my exercise to the MFP app rather than logging it using MFP alone.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • nxd10
    nxd10 Posts: 4,570 Member
    You have to make sure you tweak the coordination of the two programs so you don't get a calorie over-estimate. I used to use Map My Ride. It worked fine - but you need to follow the directions.

    MFP estimates for steps and bike riding have worked fine for me. But we're all different.
  • disasterman
    disasterman Posts: 746 Member
    My weight loss on MFP was predictable and as I expected when I cut the MFP calorie burn numbers in half.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories