Which is right?

skatesynchro
skatesynchro Posts: 14 Member
edited November 21 in Fitness and Exercise
These are pics from my workout yesterday. I can only assume that my Apple watch is more accurate, right?

Replies

  • BrianKMcFalls
    BrianKMcFalls Posts: 190 Member
    Probably neither, calorie burn estimates are science based estimates at best. That's the reason most people who are eating back exercise calories start at 50% of estimated burned calories as a general rule.
  • EmmaCaz4
    EmmaCaz4 Posts: 113 Member
    Neither will be accurate. I'd go by the lowest one to avoid over estimating & then potentially over eating exercise cals back.
  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    Everything is a estimate. Does your watch have your weight and age in it?

    Either way 600 calories for an hour of walking seems pretty high (600 calories / hour is very high intensity exercise for me but it depends on your weight, etc). I might put in 400 calories.

    *I usually eat about 90% of my exercise calories.
  • lorrpb
    lorrpb Posts: 11,463 Member
    As a rule of thumb, only the most intense exercises burn 10 cals per minute. I scale everything back based on that. There is a formula for walking calories. I think it works out to about 1/3 of your body weight per mile in calories. So for 150 lb person, about 50 cals per mile. Someone will probably post the actual formula. Regardless of the number of calories burned, KEEP WALKING!
  • skatesynchro
    skatesynchro Posts: 14 Member
    Thanks! This was an intense hill workout with the incline set on 7-9 and me walking at 3.8-4.0 mph. I weigh 177.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Walking is bodyweight in lbs x 0.34 x distance in miles
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Theoretically, the machine would be more accurate, as it would have an algorithm to determine how much work you did to accomplish that distance/incline in that time.

    That said, the distances are different. So, the machine may need some maintenance, if your watch is correct in the distance. Or, your watch didn't accurately calculate the distance, and therefore didn't accurately calculate Calories.

    IOW: nobody can actually tell with certainty which is correct.
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    skatesynchro wrote: »
    Thanks! This was an intense hill workout with the incline set on 7-9 and me walking at 3.8-4.0 mph. I weigh 177.

    Were you hiding on to the rails?
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    singingflutelady wrote: »
    skatesynchro wrote: »
    Thanks! This was an intense hill workout with the incline set on 7-9 and me walking at 3.8-4.0 mph. I weigh 177.

    Were you hiding on to the rails?

    Good point. Most people I see walking on the treadmill at a high incline are leaning back and holding onto the rails/grips for dear life.
  • singingflutelady
    singingflutelady Posts: 8,736 Member
    edited September 2017
    *holding ugh
  • skatesynchro
    skatesynchro Posts: 14 Member
    Nope, not holding onto the rails. Just walking uphill.
  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    They look to be about twice what one would expect.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories