My calories vs mfp calories on cardio

Allieoop33
Allieoop33 Posts: 2 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I’m 265lbs and I do interval training for an hour on different inclines at 3.0mph but then I push a little higher on the speed at the last 10 minutes on the treadmill. The treadmill says I burned 586 but when I used mfp it says I burned way more like 1100 so which one is accurate? Need help please.

Replies

  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,760 Member
    Were you walking or running? That matters quite a lot.

    There are theoretical reasons to consider either estimate flawed . . . as are most exercise calorie estimates in some way, TBH, though they can be close enough to be workable despite that.

    In this case, 1100 seems very doubtful to me, especially if walking. That's an extraordinarily high calorie burn for an hour-ish of exercise, and I am considering your body weight Even 586 may be high, but it's somewhat more plausible. I understand that the challenge increases with the incline, which does matter. But in theory, the machine knew about the incline, and MFP didn't.

    My normal practice, when faced with two different estimates where I don't have a great reason to believe one is theoretically better than the other, would be to use the lower of the two estimates consistently.
  • Retroguy2000
    Retroguy2000 Posts: 1,890 Member
    1100 sounds way off. What do you enter to get that? I'm around 220 pounds and when I enter walking 3mph (not incline admittedly so it will be lower than it should be for this example) MFP gives me 331 cals.

    As Ann says, go with the lower estimate. Also, I would subtract my resting calories from that. If the machine says you burned X during that hour, your base TDEE estimate for the day already includes Y for that hour. Your additional calories burned are actually X-Y. What is Y? Well in your case it's going to be over 100 calories, so I would take that machine 586 estimate and call it about 480.
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 2,265 Member
    The lower absolutely 1,100 is way off.
  • zebasschick
    zebasschick Posts: 1,071 Member
    most treadmills, bikes and steppers i've used give a very high calories burned estimate. i pretty much ignore their calorie estimates except as a laugh. i also had one bike that underestimated calories. i ignored it, too.
  • pridesabtch
    pridesabtch Posts: 2,493 Member
    Honestly, both seem a little high, even with the incline. I would go with the lower and do as @Retroguy2000 suggests and substract resting cals. Good luck!

    I'm a little smaller than you, but I've always heard a good estimate for running/purposeful walking is 100cal/mile. Just to get you in the ballpark.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,760 Member
    pridesabtch wrote: »
    Honestly, both seem a little high, even with the incline. I would go with the lower and do as @Retroguy2000 suggests and substract resting cals. Good luck!

    I'm a little smaller than you, but I've always heard a good estimate for running/purposeful walking is 100cal/mile. Just to get you in the ballpark.

    Running/walking calories are greatly influenced by body weight. If it's actual running or walking, this calculator is a conservative option that takes body weight into account:

    https://exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs

    Be sure to select "Net" in the energy box - that effectively subtracts the resting calories. (I didn't suggest this calculator in my PP, because the incline and intervals are a complicating feature in OP's estimate. But estimating it as flat-terrain walking would be a conservative way to look at it.)
  • nossmf
    nossmf Posts: 12,300 Member
    I like that calculator, @annpt77. The number it spits out for my workout from this morning almost exactly match what my treadmill gave me, which is reassuring.
  • csweightlossjourney
    csweightlossjourney Posts: 1 Member
    both seem a bit high. however I do interval training on the treadmill on my cardio days, and I'm around your weight as well, and I've gotten around 580 calories calculated by my Apple Watch when doing this type of exercise. I find that the treadmills at the gym aren't that off from my Apple Watch either so I'd trust the treadmill more than MFP.
  • JaysFan82
    JaysFan82 Posts: 853 Member
    edited March 2023
    Go by the treadmill. The calculator Ann posted matches what the treadmill says.

    I'm 231 and run 30 minutes at 6.0mph and I burn around 540 calories at that. MFP has me well over that total.
  • Allieoop33
    Allieoop33 Posts: 2 Member
    Thank you everyone for the feedback I’ll go by the treadmill because I go pretty hard on my intervals and I’m always reading 500+ on the treadmill and Apple Watch so that must be accurate. I thought there’s no way it’s 1100 lol
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,760 Member
    Allieoop33 wrote: »
    Thank you everyone for the feedback I’ll go by the treadmill because I go pretty hard on my intervals and I’m always reading 500+ on the treadmill and Apple Watch so that must be accurate. I thought there’s no way it’s 1100 lol

    Something like an Apple watch - any fitness tracker - is just another kind of estimate. It's not in any way a measurement of calorie burn. Fitness trackers are better at estimating some kinds of exercise, worse at others, but they're definitely not a magically accurate insight. Sometimes people over-trust them, because it's technology. It's good technology, yup, but not perfect.

    I think you're making the right choice in this specific scenario to go with what the machine says.

    It's useful to get in the ballpark with exercise calorie estimates, of course. But a reasonable estimate that's a little off can be quite workable . . . as long as you're consistent in using it.

    Once you have 4-6 weeks experience doing your exercise routine, hitting your calorie goal, using consistent logging methods throughout, you can use your actual results to adjust your calorie goal if necessary. That can make up for any minor overs/unders in your consistent logging practices. Assuming you have monthly cycles still, compare your bodyweight at the same relative point in at least two different monthly cycles to estimate average weekly weight loss, as a basis for adjusting calories. Hormonal water variations can distort things otherwise.

    Best wishes!

Categories