How am I supposed to eat back my calories?
Suly09
Posts: 88 Member
How am I supposed to eat back my calories If I do not know how many calories I lost in my workout? I do not have a fitbit (and I can not afford one) and everyone says not to trust the calories lost in the exercise machines...also I do a lot of no equipment exercises...so how can I eat back my calories?
0
Replies
-
Log it using MFP... start with 50-75% of the cals to avoid over counting.9
-
Best thing to try is go by the entry in the MFP database but only eat back a portion of the exercise calories. Could start at 50% and give it a month, and see how your loss fares.7
-
Find a reasonable way to estimate your calorie burn (I suggest starting with the MFP database), eat back a reasonable portion of those (begin with 50-75%), and make adjustments based on your real life results.7
-
Log your exercise manually on this app/website. Eat 50-75% of those calories back because sometimes the burns are over estimated.5
-
It depends on the machine and the brand.
If it's a treadmill, the calculation is simple. use the runners world formula, if it's a bike or an elliptical. Take 40-75% of the estimate and give it time and adjust accordingly..
https://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn2 -
TavistockToad wrote: »Log it using MFP... start with 50-75% of the cals to avoid over counting.
Agreed.
All the numbers we use, both for calories in (food) and cals out (exercise, bmr, etc) are just estimates. We make the best, most reasonable estimate we can, and then we monitor things over time and adjust as necessary. Accuracy is an illusion with all of this, and some trial and error is an expected part of the process.
On a side note - some machines can give very accurate numbers, so don't dismiss them so quickly.6 -
TavistockToad wrote: »Log it using MFP... start with 50-75% of the cals to avoid over counting.
Agreed.
All the numbers we use, both for calories in (food) and cals out (exercise, bmr, etc) are just estimates. We make the best, most reasonable estimate we can, and then we monitor things over time and adjust as necessary. Accuracy is an illusion with all of this, and some trial and error is an expected part of the process.
On a side note - some machines can give very accurate numbers, so don't dismiss them so quickly.
^^This. Just be aware of how you are feeling. If you are getting run down and not able to do the exercises, that is a sure sign you are not fueling enough. If you feel this before the 4-6 week mark (where your average weight loss is a good indicator) up your calories a bit.
I know the treadmill at the Y is very close to my tracker and the runners world formula for me so I eat all my running calories back. Less on the weight and swimming ones right now (based on my tracker)2 -
Yes, I agree with eating back about 50% of what mfp gives you. I have a heart rate monitor and it gives me about 400 calories for 60 minutes of Zumba. MFP gives me 850 (way off!!!). So do 50% to be on the safe side. Good luck.2
-
stanmann571 wrote: »It depends on the machine and the brand.
If it's a treadmill, the calculation is simple. use the runners world formula, if it's a bike or an elliptical. Take 40-75% of the estimate and give it time and adjust accordingly..
https://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn
@stanmann571
I wouldn't lump all bike and ellipticals into one group.
Many modern indoor bikes have power meters and can be extremely accurate for calorie burns, look for power displayed in watts.
Even ellipticals vary enormously from ones where manufacturers test a sample of people in a lab and produce a reasonable calorie table to ones where Hans Christian Andersen would appear to be the reference point.....
The feedback loop of results over time I certainly endorse.
OP - "not trusting" and assuming all machines are both inaccurate and exaggerated is two different things. They aren't all inaccurate and they aren't all high.
What your personal exercise routine is really determines the best way to estimate, there isn't one true source for everything.3 -
Before my fitbit, I'd find something comparable from the MFP database, and then I would take the number that MFP gave and cut that in half, and log that. I'd eat it if I was hungry as an extra snack or a glass of wine before bed.1
-
So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.11
-
sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
If you're working from your TDEE, that will include the calories you're burning in exercise. They're not a "bonus."
TDEE is just another way to eat back exercise calories so I'm not quite following your advice.7 -
sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...3 -
sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
That's not how TDEE works...3 -
Thank you all so much, I am learning so much. I stalk the forums like crazy and in the 30 days that I have been using MFP I have lost almost 5 pounds. Before that I used to do these crazy diets that never worked and left me hangry. I can't believe the answer has been this easy this whole time.
I am going to search the exercises do on MFP and eat back half the calories they list. I will test that out first.7 -
Thank you all so much, I am learning so much. I stalk the forums like crazy and in the 30 days that I have been using MFP I have lost almost 5 pounds. Before that I used to do these crazy diets that never worked and left me hangry. I can't believe the answer has been this easy this whole time.
I am going to search the exercises do on MFP and eat back half the calories they list. I will test that out first.
It sounds like you're off to a great start! Good luck!3 -
WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...
Thank you. Very helpful. Before I found out I was supposed to be eating back my calories I lost 2 pounds this last week (in 1 week)...I worked out 3-4 times that week. Should I be worried that I will gain that back since I guess I was not fueling myself right?1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...
Thank you. Very helpful. Before I found out I was supposed to be eating back my calories I lost 2 pounds this last week (in 1 week)...I worked out 3-4 times that week. Should I be worried that I will gain that back since I guess I was not fueling myself right?
No, I would just get yourself on track and be consistent going forward. It's common to lose a little faster in the beginning, as you shed water weight and glycogen stores are depleted. It's important to sustain an appropriate deficit for the amount of weight you have to lose - what are you trying to lose and what rate of loss have you selected? What calorie target did MFP provide?1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
No, I would just get yourself on track and be consistent going forward. It's common to lose a little faster in the beginning, as you shed water weight and glycogen stores are depleted. It's important to sustain an appropriate deficit for the amount of weight you have to lose - what are you trying to lose and what rate of loss have you selected? What calorie target did MFP provide?0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...
Thank you. Very helpful. Before I found out I was supposed to be eating back my calories I lost 2 pounds this last week (in 1 week)...I worked out 3-4 times that week. Should I be worried that I will gain that back since I guess I was not fueling myself right?
No, I would just get yourself on track and be consistent going forward. It's common to lose a little faster in the beginning, as you shed water weight and glycogen stores are depleted. It's important to sustain an appropriate deficit for the amount of weight you have to lose - what are you trying to lose and what rate of loss have you selected? What calorie target did MFP provide?
I started at 151 and I want to get to 125. (I am 146.4 now). Im 5'0 and sedentary (desk job). 1200 calories daily but I work out 3-4 times a week. I selected 2 pounds loss per week but MFP gave me .05 at a 1200 daily calorie goal.
1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...
Thank you. Very helpful. Before I found out I was supposed to be eating back my calories I lost 2 pounds this last week (in 1 week)...I worked out 3-4 times that week. Should I be worried that I will gain that back since I guess I was not fueling myself right?
No, I would just get yourself on track and be consistent going forward. It's common to lose a little faster in the beginning, as you shed water weight and glycogen stores are depleted. It's important to sustain an appropriate deficit for the amount of weight you have to lose - what are you trying to lose and what rate of loss have you selected? What calorie target did MFP provide?
I started at 151 and I want to get to 125. (I am 146.4 now). Im 5'0 and sedentary (desk job). 1200 calories daily but I work out 3-4 times a week. I selected 2 pounds loss per week but MFP gave me .05 at a 1200 daily calorie goal.
From your discussion it is obvious that 2lbs a week is un-realistic as you're neither obese nor does your activity level support such a large deficit.
MFP seems to think that your maintenance calories as a sedentary person who won't do any extra exercise is probably in the 1500 Cal range based on what you're saying.
Sounds like you are achieving a faster loss rate than MFP predicted based on averages.
Especially with 1200 it is important to eat back exercise calories as you can easily end up with very few net calories with sufficient exercise.
While it is "nice" to "see" the losses, a 0.5lb per week loss rate is not even visible most of the time from the ground level! <remember weight fluctuates for many reasons, most of them having nothing to do with your fat level>
I am sure that Ms Gelato will give you good advice: but my bit says: use a weight trend application to evaluate progress. Don't aim for more than 0.5lbs to 1lb given your presumed TDEE. Don't be surprised if you actually turn out to be more active than sedentary.
Sounds like you're off to a good start.3 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...
Thank you. Very helpful. Before I found out I was supposed to be eating back my calories I lost 2 pounds this last week (in 1 week)...I worked out 3-4 times that week. Should I be worried that I will gain that back since I guess I was not fueling myself right?
No, I would just get yourself on track and be consistent going forward. It's common to lose a little faster in the beginning, as you shed water weight and glycogen stores are depleted. It's important to sustain an appropriate deficit for the amount of weight you have to lose - what are you trying to lose and what rate of loss have you selected? What calorie target did MFP provide?
I started at 151 and I want to get to 125. (I am 146.4 now). Im 5'0 and sedentary (desk job). 1200 calories daily but I work out 3-4 times a week. I selected 2 pounds loss per week but MFP gave me .05 at a 1200 daily calorie goal.
From your discussion it is obvious that 2lbs a week is un-realistic as you're neither obese nor does your activity level support such a large deficit.
MFP seems to think that your maintenance calories as a sedentary person who won't do any extra exercise is probably in the 1500 Cal range based on what you're saying.
Sounds like you are achieving a faster loss rate than MFP predicted based on averages.
Especially with 1200 it is important to eat back exercise calories as you can easily end up with very few net calories with sufficient exercise.
While it is "nice" to "see" the losses, a 0.5lb per week loss rate is not even visible most of the time from the ground level! <remember weight fluctuates for many reasons, most of them having nothing to do with your fat level>
I am sure that Ms Gelato will give you good advice: but my bit says: use a weight trend application to evaluate progress. Don't aim for more than 0.5lbs to 1lb given your presumed TDEE. Don't be surprised if you actually turn out to be more active than sedentary.
Sounds like you're off to a good start.
What if I started sedentary and have now sort of shifted to lightly active...do I keep the information I originally imputed or change it? Yes 1200 calories and especially when I work out keeps me very hungry so I would go over my calories those days. Now I know why.0 -
Names are just labels that help you conceptualize.
What matters is that you capture the totality of your "calories out" so that you can balance them against your "calories in" (which you are also hopefully recording accurately by weighting your ingredients and using database entries that you personally verify)
"exercise" for the purpose of the MFP "calories out" calculation is anything that is not already included in your "base non exercise daily activity" (NEAT, or non exercise activity thermogenesis) calories.
your "base non exercise daily activity" calories can include anything under the sun as long as you don't over or under count it.
If this is a permanent change I would adjust my actvity level. Otherwise I would log the additional activity as a separate exercise.
Personally I log 2 hours of deliberate walking as part of my daily activity (hence I set myself as very active even though I am sedentary in terms of work and lifestyle)
It doesn't really matter as long as you're consistent and you don't over or under count things.2 -
WinoGelato wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »sayitundefined wrote: »So, my advice would be to not eat back your calories. Stick to your calorie number from your TDEE. be consistent with that first, and then everything you work off is a bonus.
TDEE is a measure of your Total Daily Energy Expenditure and includes an estimate of exercise calories in the calculation, so a deficit taken from TDEE would also include exercise, and so therefore, you are correct you shouldn't eat back those calories, they are already accounted for.
However, MFP uses a NEAT method, which includes BMR and non-exercise activity, and the system is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories. Telling someone who is using the MFP method to set calorie targets to ignore exercise would likely lead to them underfueling themselves and creating too large of a deficit.
OP, I agree with others who have said that all of this is based on estimates. Look at what the machine estimates for your workout, plug the same entry in MFP and let it calculate a calorie burn, and pick something you are comfortable with. The most important thing is consistency - if you go with the MFP estimate, and eating back 50% of the calories, do that for about a month or 6 weeks, and track your progress. If you lose at the rate you selected with MFP (ie 1 lb/week) then the approach is working. If you are losing more, then maybe increase the percent of calories you eat back. If you aren't losing at the rate you want, consider eating back less but also consider tightening up your logging as that is the primary culprit of not losing at the desired rate of loss...
Thank you. Very helpful. Before I found out I was supposed to be eating back my calories I lost 2 pounds this last week (in 1 week)...I worked out 3-4 times that week. Should I be worried that I will gain that back since I guess I was not fueling myself right?
No, I would just get yourself on track and be consistent going forward. It's common to lose a little faster in the beginning, as you shed water weight and glycogen stores are depleted. It's important to sustain an appropriate deficit for the amount of weight you have to lose - what are you trying to lose and what rate of loss have you selected? What calorie target did MFP provide?
I started at 151 and I want to get to 125. (I am 146.4 now). Im 5'0 and sedentary (desk job). 1200 calories daily but I work out 3-4 times a week. I selected 2 pounds loss per week but MFP gave me .05 at a 1200 daily calorie goal.
Your stats are very similar to mine when I started: 5’2, 153 lbs trying to get to 125 with a desk job. I also chose Sedentary and was given 1200 cals.
I wasn’t exercising much then but walking a couple times a week, I logged and ate back those calories, and was losing. I started reading on the forums that most people don’t need to go that low in order to lose, so I raised the cals to 1400, and continued to eat back exercise cals, and kept losing.
After about 6 months I got a FitBit and realized that I was more active than I thought, averaging about 10k steps a day at that point. I also got good advice on the boards that that activity isn’t Sedentary, and so I raised my setting to lightly active. At that point I had less than 20 lbs to lose, so I also changed my rate of loss to 0.5 lbs/week. I kept losing, kept increasing activity, and hit my goal of losing ~30 lbs in about a year after starting. I never felt deprived or restricted because I chose a moderate rate of loss and focused on adding things to my lifestyle (more exercise, more protein, more vegetables, more sleep) rather than cutting things out.
Here I am now 5 years after starting, successfully maintaining and now weigh about 117 lbs, with a TDEE of about 2100-2200 because my activity has continued to increase and (I believe) I took the slow approach to weight loss.
I think you also are probably more active than you think and I also think you should consider a slower rate of loss to preserve lean body mass. I also agree with the suggestion of using a trending weight app as weight loss is not linear, it fluctuates naturally and those tools help demonstrate the long term downward trend when many get caught up in the day to day noise.
Read the stickied most helpful forum posts if you haven’t already - lots of good info in there.
Good luck!3 -
TavistockToad wrote: »Log it using MFP... start with 50-75% of the cals to avoid over counting.
This ^^
It's how I lost 25 kg.
0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »It depends on the machine and the brand.
If it's a treadmill, the calculation is simple. use the runners world formula, if it's a bike or an elliptical. Take 40-75% of the estimate and give it time and adjust accordingly..
https://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn
@stanmann571
I wouldn't lump all bike and ellipticals into one group.
Many modern indoor bikes have power meters and can be extremely accurate for calorie burns, look for power displayed in watts.
Even ellipticals vary enormously from ones where manufacturers test a sample of people in a lab and produce a reasonable calorie table to ones where Hans Christian Andersen would appear to be the reference point.....
The feedback loop of results over time I certainly endorse.
OP - "not trusting" and assuming all machines are both inaccurate and exaggerated is two different things. They aren't all inaccurate and they aren't all high.
What your personal exercise routine is really determines the best way to estimate, there isn't one true source for everything.
I lumped bike and ellipticals, because unless they are calibrated and show watts, unlike a treadmill there's no objective standard with which to compare and cross check them.0 -
My Fitbit was inaccurate so i dont wear it. Therefore like others have said. if I do any exercise I find a decent one to log in MFP and log it. However I only record 1/2 the time I did it
(Equals me only eating half of the calories vs logging the full work out and having to remember to eat only half)2 -
stanmann571 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »It depends on the machine and the brand.
If it's a treadmill, the calculation is simple. use the runners world formula, if it's a bike or an elliptical. Take 40-75% of the estimate and give it time and adjust accordingly..
https://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn
@stanmann571
I wouldn't lump all bike and ellipticals into one group.
Many modern indoor bikes have power meters and can be extremely accurate for calorie burns, look for power displayed in watts.
Even ellipticals vary enormously from ones where manufacturers test a sample of people in a lab and produce a reasonable calorie table to ones where Hans Christian Andersen would appear to be the reference point.....
The feedback loop of results over time I certainly endorse.
OP - "not trusting" and assuming all machines are both inaccurate and exaggerated is two different things. They aren't all inaccurate and they aren't all high.
What your personal exercise routine is really determines the best way to estimate, there isn't one true source for everything.
I lumped bike and ellipticals, because unless they are calibrated and show watts, unlike a treadmill there's no objective standard with which to compare and cross check them.
@stanmann571
Except there is a very objective and standard conversion for watts to calories for cycling.
It's a mathematical formula (watts to joules to calories) with an estimated efficiency ratio and that ratio varies very little between cyclists.
For your regular gym goer a power measuring indoor bike using the standard formula is really the gold standard for calorie estimates. And as a bonus for people wanting to lose weight the small human and mechanical variables mean the number given is both net calories and the realistic minimum burn unless you are a pro with an exceptional souplesse.
My point is that neither all bikes, or even all treadmills, can be lumped together and have a totally random "correction" factor applied. If you start with an accurate estimate it's illogical to adjust that estimate because some other devices (a bargain price bike trainer from Walmart for example...) you don't use may be inaccurate.
It's better for people to understand their exercise, their own capabilities and how best to estimate than just make random guesses. Walking, running, Concept2 rowers and power meter bikes are all good ways to get a true idea of your real calorie burning capability and that shows up suspiciously high numbers very clearly.
If I can burn 767 net calories on a bike in an hour flat out I know damn well Zumba isn't going to be more than that!
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions