Discrepancy in calories burned...

texasladysv
texasladysv Posts: 103 Member
edited September 28 in Fitness and Exercise
OK! I used a BIG word! But there is a HUGE Discrepancy within this site on calories burned.....

just in the last hour or so,,, ive had several friends post exercise...

These are the numbers

555 - 60 min @ 3.0
132- 30 min @ 3.0
84- 12 min @ 3.5
90- 34 min @ 3.0
138- 30 min. @ 2.0

OK... 555 calories burned in 30 min @ 3.0mph is MORE THAN DOUBLE THE 132 of 30 min @ 3.0mph.

ETC.... How do you find an accurate calorie burned counter???

Replies

  • LittleSammyFly
    LittleSammyFly Posts: 1 Member
    It varies by weight but the most accurate way to know how many calories you've burned is to get a heart rate monitor.
  • kimberlyAjohnson
    kimberlyAjohnson Posts: 136 Member
    If your friends are using websites vs. MFP vs. a heart rate monitor, they are going to be HUGE differences. A HRM is generally the most accurate thing for most people.
  • campb2ti
    campb2ti Posts: 104 Member
    MFP calories burned counter is based on your weight, so the lighter you are the less your going to burn and the heavier you are the more calories you burn in less amount of time
  • bonnymom
    bonnymom Posts: 107 Member
    The number of calories burned is dependent on the weight of the person doing it. Another thing to consider is if the person manually entered the information, example someone who uses a HRM to get an accurate determination.
  • timeforme23
    timeforme23 Posts: 461
    Heart Rate Monitor
  • texastae1010
    texastae1010 Posts: 165
    Well are they using the sites calorie calculations or are they using a HRM....I use a HRM and deduct my resting calories burned to get an accurate amount of calories burned....also depending on how much someone weighs also depends on how many calories they burn walking for 30 min at 3.0 or what exercise they are doing I have an MFP friend and we do the same exercise and because I out weigh her by about 80lbs my calories burned are greater than hers...some factors to think about
  • mbehr1983
    mbehr1983 Posts: 29 Member
    I would say 555 is extremely off. Depending on size at that pace for about a half hour you will burn about 100 or so.I did an 45 mins on the eliptical at working level 12 and burned 524.I would say evryone else is close.
  • texasladysv
    texasladysv Posts: 103 Member
    Thanks ya'll! good to know why its so different...
  • nuttyfamily
    nuttyfamily Posts: 3,394 Member
    I've compared the calculator here to my runkeeper, caloriesperhour and webmd and they all come out pretty close.

    Their weight is a big factor in the differences. Also, are you sure it is all they did. For example, my exercise today 'includes' walking at 4.0mph but I had also biked two miles today in the cals burned for ten minutes to work and back but that was not listed for my friends to see.
  • wombletomsk
    wombletomsk Posts: 2
    I noticed this too so I wore my heart rate monitor on a walk and compared the calories burned with MFP dog walking pace and the caloires burned were identitcal so the MFP formula must be fairly accurate , so long as your weight recording is accurate in your profile.
  • nuttyfamily
    nuttyfamily Posts: 3,394 Member
    Here is how mine reads for today and I walked for 30 minutes and road bike for 14.

    burned 249 calories doing 44 minutes of cardio exercises, including "Walking, 4.0 mph, very brisk pace"
  • silverbullkitty
    silverbullkitty Posts: 41
    I've only been using mfp since the beginning of June, but I've noticed that say, if, someone did more than one cardio exercise in a day, then the day's burned calories will be lumped together in the news feed. Which makes it look like they burned a lot doing one certain exercise... however, in actuality it was a combination of different types of exercises that burned different amounts, just combined into one tagged to a particular description.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories