We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

How should I track my exercises/calories burned?

MarybethMcBain1991
MarybethMcBain1991 Posts: 6 Member
edited November 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
At the gym, I'll enter my weight when prompted to get the most accurate count of calories burned, however, when I go to log my exercises into MFP, there is always a huge difference. For example, I did 80 minutes on the elliptical yesterday. The machine calculated that I burned 1,000 calories. When I enter it into MFP, it calculates that I burned around 1,250. I'm not usually coasting along, either. I give it good effort the entire work out, where my chest, neck, and forehead are dripping sweat, to the point that my hair gets quite damp. I typically log the lesser amount so that I'm not tricking myself into thinking that I've burned more calories than I have...but which is more accurate? The machine or the app?

Replies

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,865 Member
    Neither is particularly accurate, but you're probably reasonable taking that fairly conservative approach.

    Best bet is to stick with a method and monitor your progress, adjusting your intake as required. If you're losing faster than planned then eat back more, of slower then eat back less.

    I'd question the real value of 80 minutes on the elliptical. Rather than burning that much time for c800 calories why not take a shorter session. You're well into diminishing returns territory beyond about 45 minutes.
  • MarybethMcBain1991
    MarybethMcBain1991 Posts: 6 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Neither is particularly accurate, but you're probably reasonable taking that fairly conservative approach.

    Best bet is to stick with a method and monitor your progress, adjusting your intake as required. If you're losing faster than planned then eat back more, of slower then eat back less.

    I'd question the real value of 80 minutes on the elliptical. Rather than burning that much time for c800 calories why not take a shorter session. You're well into diminishing returns territory beyond about 45 minutes.

    Can you explain the last paragraph? I often do 45 minutes, but I'll go longer if I'm feeling really good or wanting to burn off a certain amount of calories. Are you saying more than 45 minutes is negative? Thanks for your help!
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,865 Member
    MarybethMcBain1991 wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Neither is particularly accurate, but you're probably reasonable taking that fairly conservative approach.

    Best bet is to stick with a method and monitor your progress, adjusting your intake as required. If you're losing faster than planned then eat back more, of slower then eat back less.

    I'd question the real value of 80 minutes on the elliptical. Rather than burning that much time for c800 calories why not take a shorter session. You're well into diminishing returns territory beyond about 45 minutes.

    Can you explain the last paragraph? I often do 45 minutes, but I'll go longer if I'm feeling really good or wanting to burn off a certain amount of calories. Are you saying more than 45 minutes is negative? Thanks for your help!

    If you're just doing cardio, rather than training, you'll get a reasonable level of benefit from 20-40 minutes. Beyond that you're not really getting any benefit. It's not that it has a negative effect, is just not particularly time efficient.
  • jennybearlv
    jennybearlv Posts: 1,519 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    MarybethMcBain1991 wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Neither is particularly accurate, but you're probably reasonable taking that fairly conservative approach.

    Best bet is to stick with a method and monitor your progress, adjusting your intake as required. If you're losing faster than planned then eat back more, of slower then eat back less.

    I'd question the real value of 80 minutes on the elliptical. Rather than burning that much time for c800 calories why not take a shorter session. You're well into diminishing returns territory beyond about 45 minutes.

    Can you explain the last paragraph? I often do 45 minutes, but I'll go longer if I'm feeling really good or wanting to burn off a certain amount of calories. Are you saying more than 45 minutes is negative? Thanks for your help!

    If you're just doing cardio, rather than training, you'll get a reasonable level of benefit from 20-40 minutes. Beyond that you're not really getting any benefit. It's not that it has a negative effect, is just not particularly time efficient.

    It sounds like the OP is going 80 minutes because she is attempting to burn more calories, not improve her cardiovascular fitness. You will still burn calories if you go longer than 20-40 minutes.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,865 Member
    edited July 2017
    jennybearlv wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    MarybethMcBain1991 wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Neither is particularly accurate, but you're probably reasonable taking that fairly conservative approach.

    Best bet is to stick with a method and monitor your progress, adjusting your intake as required. If you're losing faster than planned then eat back more, of slower then eat back less.

    I'd question the real value of 80 minutes on the elliptical. Rather than burning that much time for c800 calories why not take a shorter session. You're well into diminishing returns territory beyond about 45 minutes.

    Can you explain the last paragraph? I often do 45 minutes, but I'll go longer if I'm feeling really good or wanting to burn off a certain amount of calories. Are you saying more than 45 minutes is negative? Thanks for your help!

    If you're just doing cardio, rather than training, you'll get a reasonable level of benefit from 20-40 minutes. Beyond that you're not really getting any benefit. It's not that it has a negative effect, is just not particularly time efficient.

    It sounds like the OP is going 80 minutes because she is attempting to burn more calories, not improve her cardiovascular fitness. You will still burn calories if you go longer than 20-40 minutes.

    It would seem more time efficient to just consume 400 fewer calories. Spending 80 minutes and expending 800-1000 calories could give you two Quarter Pounders with cheese.

    We see it in discussions all the time, weight loss is about calories in < calories out. Exercise is about improving fitness. For someone just using something like an elliptical 80 minutes is no better than 40 minutes. On the other hand an 80 minute run is quite a good element of a 10K improvement plan.

  • siyana1985
    siyana1985 Posts: 25 Member
    personally i use the slowest/ least calorie adding when i calculate just to be safe
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    MarybethMcBain1991 wrote: »
    ...but which is more accurate? The machine or the app?

    Most likely both are significantly over-estimating. How far can you run in 80 minutes?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories