10,000 steps only burns 90 calories???

navillus3
navillus3 Posts: 14 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Hello! So I synced my step counter with this app and after my usual walk I noticed it said I only burned 90 cals after 10,000 steps. This doesn’t seem right to me. I walk briskly. My height is 5’8 and I weigh 130 lbs if that affects it. Not trying to lose weight I use this app for monitoring nutrition, I just find this odd.

Replies

  • Mouse_Potato
    Mouse_Potato Posts: 1,512 Member
    Did you log it as a workout and it said you only burned 90 calories or is that the adjustment it made to your daily goal?
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    SuzySunshine99 wrote: »
    What did you set as your activity level in the app? I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but when you sync an activity tracker, I think the app takes this into account. If you set your activity level to "active", it's going to assume a certain amount of activity for the day and is not going to give you "credit" for all your step calories. If it did, you would be double-dipping your calories and have an inaccurate count.

    Yes, double check that your activity level was sent to Sedentary. If so, more troubleshooting required. If not, there's your explanation.
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    That many steps is ~3-4 miles I think. ~A little over the first mile is already expected even at sedentary setting. Net calories burned for the remaining ~2-3 miles depends on your weight.

    net calories per mile ~ 0.3 x [weight in lbs]
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    The average person walks a mile in 2,100 steps, since the average stride is 2.5 feet and there's 5,280 feet in a mile. At 5'8" you probably have the average stride. So that's ~ 5 miles. At your weight, you'll burn ~ 70 calories per mile. So the number should be in the 350 range.

    For the same distance covered, calories don't increase for walking briskly; they decrease, because the slower you walk, the longer it takes to get there, and activity time weighs more heavily than exertion level in low-moderate activity. But not enough to materially change that 350 estimate.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    lgfrie wrote: »
    The average person walks a mile in 2,100 steps, since the average stride is 2.5 feet and there's 5,280 feet in a mile. At 5'8" you probably have the average stride. So that's ~ 5 miles. At your weight, you'll burn ~ 70 calories per mile. So the number should be in the 350 range.

    For the same distance covered, calories don't increase for walking briskly; they decrease, because the slower you walk, the longer it takes to get there, and activity time weighs more heavily than exertion level in low-moderate activity. But not enough to materially change that 350 estimate.

    That's not how a synced Fitbit works though....
  • nighthawk584
    nighthawk584 Posts: 2,023 Member
    at 130 lbs, it should be around the 350 calorie range. Someone of my weight @ 220 burns on average 600 calories
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    lgfrie wrote: »
    The average person walks a mile in 2,100 steps, since the average stride is 2.5 feet and there's 5,280 feet in a mile. At 5'8" you probably have the average stride. So that's ~ 5 miles. At your weight, you'll burn ~ 70 calories per mile. So the number should be in the 350 range.

    For the same distance covered, calories don't increase for walking briskly; they decrease, because the slower you walk, the longer it takes to get there, and activity time weighs more heavily than exertion level in low-moderate activity. But not enough to materially change that 350 estimate.

    The ~70 calories per mile would be ~ the total calories (not net)(MFP already gives 'credit' for calories you would burn just sitting on the couch (which is close to half of the amount of walking during the same time period).
  • ritzvin
    ritzvin Posts: 2,860 Member
    (A positive adjustment usually kicks in a bit before 3000 steps/1.2 miles on my Garmin)
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    ritzvin wrote: »
    lgfrie wrote: »
    The average person walks a mile in 2,100 steps, since the average stride is 2.5 feet and there's 5,280 feet in a mile. At 5'8" you probably have the average stride. So that's ~ 5 miles. At your weight, you'll burn ~ 70 calories per mile. So the number should be in the 350 range.

    For the same distance covered, calories don't increase for walking briskly; they decrease, because the slower you walk, the longer it takes to get there, and activity time weighs more heavily than exertion level in low-moderate activity. But not enough to materially change that 350 estimate.

    The ~70 calories per mile would be ~ the total calories (not net)(MFP already gives 'credit' for calories you would burn just sitting on the couch (which is close to half of the amount of walking during the same time period).

    Agreed. Although not quite half.

    If your TDEE is, say, 2000 calories/day, then you burn 83 calories an hour just going about your business (2000/24). If you walk 3.5 miles in an hour of brisk walking, you'd burn gross calories of, say, 245 (70*3.5). The 83 calories you would've burned regardless is only 34 % of that; the remaining 162 calories would be legit net cals to log.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,260 Member
    So many comments... most true.

    Including that if the sync is directly from an apple watch the calculations will be wrong unless an intermediary app such as Pacer (or something else that both syncs and understands apple products and is able to sync a single TDEE value to MFP) is used.
  • reshmapatel12
    reshmapatel12 Posts: 6 Member
    Hi, I’ve had the same issue. My app is set to ‘in active’
    And recently changed from a fit bit - which used to register more calories (300ish) vs my Apple Watch which counted only 6!!!!
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,260 Member
    See the post right above your implied question.

    The issue is what apple sends to mfp when the two connect directly

Categories