Fitbit steps to calories
katfarber
Posts: 4 Member
My fitbit charge sends calories burned from steps directly to myfitnesspal as exercise. Today I walked on the treadmill, do I add those calories burned to MFP as well? Or are they already calculated in to the steps count calories?
0
Replies
-
They'll already be accounted for, all your FitBit is doing is counting steps, it's agnostic about where you are when you take them.
Running steps are a bit different as the calorie expenditure is somewhat higher, so you'd want to log that.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »They'll already be accounted for, all your FitBit is doing is counting steps, it's agnostic about where you are when you take them.
Running steps are a bit different as the calorie expenditure is somewhat higher, so you'd want to log that.
I believe some Fitbit models factor heart rate into the calorie calculations. Therefor running calories would be higher than walking calories for instance. YMMV on accuracy.1 -
.... factor heart rate into the calorie calculations. ...
Not relevant at walking pace, HR is too low to be a meaningful indicator.
fwiw, for those that can apply HR it's when it's set onto workout mode. If it's set to workout mode then the FitBit platform will reconcile the activity and the steps anyway, so still not an issue.0 -
The calories from steps were lower than that of my activity that I'd already done though?0
-
Also, when I say "walking on the treadmill" I don't necessarily mean slow. I was at peak for a while, so these extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count I don't imagine. How am I supposed to figure out the difference?0
-
Also, when I say "walking on the treadmill" I don't necessarily mean slow. I was at peak for a while, so these extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count I don't imagine. How am I supposed to figure out the difference?
Don't for now. FitBits are really pretty good at estimating step based activity. Because that's what your activity is, use the numbers for awhile. Then see where you may need a tweak here & there. If you were training for a marathon or spending many hours exercising this could add up.
It's awfully difficult to get really accurate calorie burns....even heart rate monitors are estimates, and these estimates are best used for steady state cardio only.
Be sure to enable negative calorie adjustments. If there is a day when you are less active than your MFP setting, you will get calories taken away......My Home......Settings (down at the bottom).
Check out the group....lots of info by model
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/1290-fitbit-users
3 -
Also, when I say "walking on the treadmill" I don't necessarily mean slow. I was at peak for a while, so these extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count I don't imagine. How am I supposed to figure out the difference?
Doesn't matter. Calorie per mile walking are 0.3* bodyweight in lbs. Pace isn't significant and the relationship between HR and calories is weak.0 -
How am I supposed to figure out the difference?
Well, you have two choices:
(1) You can track things very closely and do complicated math to try to reach a better estimate, by calculating what those "extra calories" would have been. You know, time in peak zone, whatever else you consider relevant. And then enter the adjustments manually every time you exercise. It might be more accurate, it might be less, but it'll definitely be more cumbersome.
(2) Accept the numbers your Fitbit gives you for now. Log your exercise and eating, both in detail. Give it some time. Then see whether you're losing weight at the pace your Fitbit numbers would predict. Once you've done that, adjust future estimates according to your results.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Also, when I say "walking on the treadmill" I don't necessarily mean slow. I was at peak for a while, so these extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count I don't imagine. How am I supposed to figure out the difference?
Doesn't matter. Calorie per mile walking are 0.3* bodyweight in lbs. Pace isn't significant and the relationship between HR and calories is weak.
This ^^^ means it takes exactly the same amount of energy at any incline setting on your treadmill, or up and down hill outdoors. Obviously wrong.1 -
Also, when I say "walking on the treadmill" I don't necessarily mean slow. I was at peak for a while, so these extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count I don't imagine. How am I supposed to figure out the difference?
I have both an Alta and a Charge 2. The Alta doesn't have an HR monitor while the Charge 2 does. I have found that the Charge 2 reports a higher calorie burn than the Alta does because your heart rate for the same distances/steps is taken into account. The Alta never reported more than 11 cals/min while the Charge 2 reports 13 or 14 cals/min for the same effort. I walked 2.1 miles today at a 17 mile/hour pace and was in the cardio zone for 19 minutes and the peak zone for 14 minutes and had an average calorie burn of 13 per minute with a low of 9.7 (starting out) and a high of 16.2 cals/min at around 1.75 miles. I think the Fitbit does a pretty good job of estimating your calorie burn.
I'm not sure what you mean by "extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count." as those two things are actually mutually exclusive. You walked a certain amount of steps and the Fitbit counted them. The Fitbit like any other "tool" that estimates your calorie burn uses your weight and heart rate (if you have something that measures that) is just an estimation. As someone else said, you can do all the complicated calculations yourself or take the tool's word for it and go from there.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »Also, when I say "walking on the treadmill" I don't necessarily mean slow. I was at peak for a while, so these extra burned calories wouldn't be included in my step count I don't imagine. How am I supposed to figure out the difference?
Doesn't matter. Calorie per mile walking are 0.3* bodyweight in lbs. Pace isn't significant and the relationship between HR and calories is weak.
This ^^^ means it takes exactly the same amount of energy at any incline setting on your treadmill, or up and down hill outdoors. Obviously wrong.
There is a variant that allows for elevation, but that assumes knowing the model and whether it's calibrated properly. Clearly in these circumstances the already tenuous relationship between HR and calorie consumption breaks down even more.
No mention of elevation in the originators posts, just that she was working hard and hitting peak... now it would surprise me if she was hitting c200bpm while walking. So is elevation material here? Unlikely. Is HR material? absolutely not.
Well done...
0 -
By "extra" I really just mean am I getting a basic calorie burn count based on steps alone, or is harder work taken into account...
Anyway, I've decided to take the steps off MFP altogether and just add my exercise manually. This is way too complicated for what it is, and that method served me just fine before.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: ».... factor heart rate into the calorie calculations. ...
Not relevant at walking pace, HR is too low to be a meaningful indicator.
fwiw, for those that can apply HR it's when it's set onto workout mode. If it's set to workout mode then the FitBit platform will reconcile the activity and the steps anyway, so still not an issue.
I very much disagree. According to the Fitbit graphs my calorie burn may vary from as little a 3.5cals/min at the onset to as much as 14cals/min during a hilly or hurried portion of a walk.0 -
By "extra" I really just mean am I getting a basic calorie burn count based on steps alone, or is harder work taken into account...
Anyway, I've decided to take the steps off MFP altogether and just add my exercise manually. This is way too complicated for what it is, and that method served me just fine before.
Harder work is taken into account if you're using a HRM since your heart works harder (beats faster) when you're working harder. As I said in my post above, I know this because I have both an Alta (no HRM) and a Charge 2 (has an HRM) and the Charge 2 shows a higher calorie burn than the Alta when doing the same amount of work for the same distance.2 -
By "extra" I really just mean am I getting a basic calorie burn count based on steps alone, or is harder work taken into account...
When you're walking the key point is the distance you cover, which can be determined by the number of steps you take and your average step length. More steps as a result of working harder means more distance, so more calories.
Your HR increase because you're burning more, it's a secondary effect not a cause. Essentially as you expend more calories your cardiovascular system needs to get more oxygen to the relevant locations, o your heart beats faster. Your HR is rising as a result, it's not causing.
If your increased HR were causing increased calorie expenditure you'd lose weight from watching a horror film
1 -
I very much disagree. According to the Fitbit graphs my calorie burn may vary from as little a 3.5cals/min at the onset to as much as 14cals/min during a hilly or hurried portion of a walk.
Which assumes that HR is a reliable indicator of calorie expenditure.
Based on the research that originated as Stanford and has been built on since the mid 80s, the relationship between HR and calorie expenditure is reasonably consistent in the aerobic range and when steady state. Below and above the aerobic range, and walking is below, the relationship is poor.
As noted above, hilly terrain does make a difference as one is moving in space vertically as well as horizontally, so covering more distance.
0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »I very much disagree. According to the Fitbit graphs my calorie burn may vary from as little a 3.5cals/min at the onset to as much as 14cals/min during a hilly or hurried portion of a walk.
Which assumes that HR is a reliable indicator of calorie expenditure.
Based on the research that originated as Stanford and has been built on since the mid 80s, the relationship between HR and calorie expenditure is reasonably consistent in the aerobic range and when steady state. Below and above the aerobic range, and walking is below, the relationship is poor.
As noted above, hilly terrain does make a difference as one is moving in space vertically as well as horizontally, so covering more distance.
You originally stated "...all your FitBit is doing is counting steps". I pointed out most Fitbit models do more than count steps. They also apply an algorithm to allow for differing levels of effort.
You then stated "Not relevant at walking pace, HR is too low to be a meaningful indicator." I pointed out that at least in my case heart rate will vary greatly over the course of an extended walk and this correlates with effort applied. In my opinion this proves heart rate is most certainly relevant, at least in the case of people like me whom are not yet "fit".
I don't particularly enjoy internet arguments. I've made my points and shall cease to comment on the subject.
ENJOY
2 -
I don't particularly enjoy internet arguments.
It's unfortunate that you're seeing this as an argument. I appreciate that the marketing around these devices has somewhat clouded the issue around how they work, and that the associated science is unclear to many.
Marketeers, third up against the wall come the time of the glorious revolution.
0 -
-
By "extra" I really just mean am I getting a basic calorie burn count based on steps alone, or is harder work taken into account...
Anyway, I've decided to take the steps off MFP altogether and just add my exercise manually. This is way too complicated for what it is, and that method served me just fine before.
I think this is a mistake based on a common misunderstanding when people first start using a FitBit or any activity tracker in conjunction with MFP. FitBit isn't only tracking the steps you take for exercise and adding calories based on that to MFP. It is tracking the total amount of steps and calories burned through your entire day of activity, so an adjustment you see immediately after you complete a workout may not be the final adjustment you see for the day.
A little more explanation of how it works:
MFP has an estimate of your non exercise calorie burn with a deficit built in based on your stats, chosen activity level,and goal (i.e. Lose 1 lb/week). Using myself as an example, I'm 5'2 and currently maintaining my weight loss at 120 lbs. When I was set at sedentary, MFP estimated my calorie burn to be about 1600 cals. When I would log exercise such as walking on a treadmill, I was basing that on MFP estimates which were often around 200-300 cals. When I got my FitBit, and stopped logging that exercise, I was getting big adjustments like 500-600 cals, because FitBit was tracking all my activity including the day to day stuff and estimated that I was burning in total, 2100-2200 cals. So FitBit calculates the difference between what MFP thinks you will burn without exercise, what you actually did burn all day long, and that is your exercise adjustment. But it is a full day measurement that goes up and down throughout the day based on your natural ups and downs of activity. Yesterday I was quite inactive which is a rare situation, and the negative calorie adjustment made sure that my goal was actually less than normal since FitBit recognized I wasn't hitting my usual step counts.
What most people find is that FitBit is very accurate and a handy tool when settings are consistent, goals are aligned, and a basic understanding of how the tools work together. It does tend to get more accurate over time as it tends to learn your patterns of activity and better predict your calorie burns. I used it while losing and now maintaining and have never had any issues with accuracy or achieving my goals.
I hope you'll give it another chance and some time to really understand how to optimize it as it's a handy little tool.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 398.4K Introduce Yourself
- 44.7K Getting Started
- 261K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.4K Food and Nutrition
- 47.7K Recipes
- 233K Fitness and Exercise
- 462 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.7K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.5K Motivation and Support
- 8.4K Challenges
- 1.4K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 17 News and Announcements
- 21 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.5K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions