MFP exercise calories expended WAY OVER actual?

DenverKos
DenverKos Posts: 182
edited October 7 in Fitness and Exercise
Anyone else have a problem with MFP calculating calorie expenditure in excess of "actual"? I use a HRM when I'm working out, as well as a fitness app on my phone. MFP always calculates a lot more calories burned than either my HRM or my phone app. It's kind of depressing to think it grossly over estimates calories burned - kinda makes tracking difficult if you're eating your exercise calories and end up over eating because MFP calculated high....

Replies

  • carolann_22
    carolann_22 Posts: 364 Member
    I have a bodybugg - I find that MFP is way over for some things (like the elliptical) and way under for others (like walking).
  • JenGranzow
    JenGranzow Posts: 116 Member
    I think MFP's figures are based on someone working out hard, hence the inflation. That's why using a HRM is so much better.
  • debilyn574
    debilyn574 Posts: 92 Member
    Yeah, I just put in what my HRM says and not the MFP calories since they're always so high! It does make me wonder if I'm not working out hard enough to burn the number of calories MFP estimates.
  • DenverKos
    DenverKos Posts: 182
    It does make me wonder if I'm not working out hard enough to burn the number of calories MFP estimates.

    I know i'm working out hard enough!! lol :) My HRM verifies that!
  • Troll
    Troll Posts: 922 Member
    i have the opposite problem. I had to log 562 minutes of high intensity cardio for it to equal my HRM for 36 minutes of interval training. I log over 10 hours of working out for it to equal my burn for 2 hours. It's unreal how innaccurate mfp is
  • DenverKos
    DenverKos Posts: 182
    i have the opposite problem. I had to log 562 minutes of high intensity cardio for it to equal my HRM for 36 minutes of interval training. I log over 10 hours of working out for it to equal my burn for 2 hours. It's unreal how innaccurate mfp is

    Wow! That is insane! I'm glad I figured out how to use my correct hours/intensity level and just change the calories burned for my diary. It's just so all over the place. My husband wenting hiking and burned 567 calories, but MFP wanted to make it over 1500 cal. All of my cycling calories are way over estimated on MFP, so the 1,000 or 1,500 I burn riding at 16-18mph are always MFP calculated to be 2-3000....
  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    i have the opposite problem. I had to log 562 minutes of high intensity cardio for it to equal my HRM for 36 minutes of interval training. I log over 10 hours of working out for it to equal my burn for 2 hours. It's unreal how innaccurate mfp is
    You can manually change the calorie number if you have one from a HRM; you don't have to inflate your time artificially.

    So far I've found that my HRM gives me a higher number for yoga and weight lifting, but a lower number for calisthenics. It also gives me a higher number for running but I don't necessarily believe that one because it's significantly above the "100 calories per mile" rule of thumb (I only weigh 130). Still need to try it out on the elliptical and see what it gives back. The number MFP gave me for cycling was right in line with the "40 calories per mile" rule of thumb; I didn't use a HRM at that time (haven't cycled since September, I think).
  • diiiimond
    diiiimond Posts: 23 Member
    wooow... what a bummer! soooo technically i havent been burning as many calories as i thought i was on the elliptical. :grumble: thanks mfp...
  • NovemberJune
    NovemberJune Posts: 2,525 Member
    All MFP can do is guess by your age, gender, weight. I have an HRM too, and I burn close to what MFP estimates, about 5-10% less for some activities. But I enter what my HRM says.
  • newCourtney
    newCourtney Posts: 168 Member
    I'm glad you posted this. I was talking to someone yesterday about the accuracy of the data MFP gave me. This is why I don't eat back my earned calories. I need to check in to a monitor.
  • Osu2k1
    Osu2k1 Posts: 116 Member
    I have a Body Media Fit band (like the body bugg) and MFP is not nearly as accurate but I think it's better than the machines at the gym. :smile: Those are way off.
  • milersad1323
    milersad1323 Posts: 14 Member
    I had to get an HRM because of how inaccurate MFP is. It can be depressing but I think it is better to know what you are actually burning then to eat more calories because MFP is over estimating. I love my HRM but it has been a sad couple of weeks when I realized that I am only burning 1100 calories when I thought I was burning 2000 :0)
  • DenverKos
    DenverKos Posts: 182
    I had to get an HRM because of how inaccurate MFP is. It can be depressing but I think it is better to know what you are actually burning then to eat more calories because MFP is over estimating. I love my HRM but it has been a sad couple of weeks when I realized that I am only burning 1100 calories when I thought I was burning 2000 :0)

    Yes, that's exactly my point. It hasn't been even remotely close for anything I do. And it can really sabotage a person's efforts if they are eating back all MFP expended calories. If in doubt, on food I overestimate what I've eaten, and underestimate my exercise.....

    I highly suggest a HRM or some sort of device to track you expenditure if you're exercising and watching what you eat.
  • minadee
    minadee Posts: 44 Member
    I too have a BodyMedia Fitand I've found that MFP appears to give too much credit for calories burned. I've been doing alot of Zumba on my Wii as well and I always wear my band. Where the game tells me I burned 650 calories, my BodyMedia says 300 or so. It's hard to pin down unless you use some sort of monitor.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories