My Fitness Pal vs. Google Fit estimates

blinx7
blinx7 Posts: 11 Member
edited November 19 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi,

I have Google Fit on my phone and it gives me different calorie numbers for my exercises than what's in the My Fitness Pal database. The Google Fit numbers are always higher. For example, MFP said I burned 183 calories on my 10 mph bike ride, Google Fit had it closer to to 250. I found this odd because others on the forum have suggested that the MFP exercise estimates for calories burned are usually on the high side. For what it's worth, I am 6'2, 200 pounds so I probably burn calories quicker than most, but I assumed MFP takes that into account in the exercise calorie estimates -- is that not true?

Which one should I use for logging purposes? Google Fit seems to have more bugs (my calories from this morning just disappeared from the app, who knows why, and yesterday it told me I biked 30 minutes when I walked 15 minutes) but if it compensates for my height and weight and MFP doesn't, maybe that's the better choice.

Thanks!

Replies

  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    I would err on the side of lower, especially with cycling. I find those to be vastly overstated based on how I cycle (as shown by my HRM). Things like walking and running have been studied much more so there is a good body of evidence for applications to use to estimate those calorie burns.

    I've found MFP to be pretty close to my HRM for running, a decent estimate for walking (only slightly high), overstated by a fair amount for biking. I haven't really used it for much else.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Lots of variables in cycling, so to me the Google result looks closer; 30 minutes of cycling for me.

    That said if riding slowly then it may be more realistic. If you're riding 13mph upwards an HRM might give you a better figure, but again on a bike there are lots of variables, wind resistance, rolling resistance, general maintenance state etc.

    Pick a method and stick with it, then you can adjust how you account for it based on your results.
  • ccm1313
    ccm1313 Posts: 13 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Pick a method and stick with it, then you can adjust how you account for it based on your results.

    I agree 100% with that. It doesn't matter what scale you use as long as you use it consistently. If your results are what you want, then why worry?

    JMHO
  • Roseyrhianna
    Roseyrhianna Posts: 1 Member
    When looking at calories burned I have found the difference between generic apps and my garmin with a heart rate monitor to be huge.

    For example a 2hr bike ride using a generic app states c1500 calories burned but using my heart rate monitor with my garmin it states c600calories burned.
    Gym equipment such as the cross trainer also vastly overestimate calories burned for me- usually double the figure from my garmin - even if I enter my height, weight, age etc
    (Also worth noting Strava and garmin connect also always differ on calories burned for the same data set)

    If you have a heart rate monitor and garmin type device this will be the most personalised estimate of calories burned. But if not I'd go with the lower value from any app if you are trying to lose weight and somewhere in the middle if you are trying to maintain /gain weight.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories