How to measure accurately calories burned?

jpmman
jpmman Posts: 5
in Fitness and Exercise
I when I use my elliptical for 60 minutes, the machine says I burned 600 calories. The same activity for the same time with MFP says 750! I just don't know what to believe anymore. Every device says something different. I've gotten to the point where I look at the machine (the lower number) and take off 10 percent to come up with my calories burned. I have the same issues while jogging with Fitbit and MFD. Help. Any suggestions here?

Replies

  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,148 Member
    Best bet is getting a HRM that tracks calories. I'm still searching for one.
  • BaconMD
    BaconMD Posts: 1,165 Member
    Buy a heart rate monitor, seriously. Polar ft7 is the one I would suggest.
  • spectralmoon
    spectralmoon Posts: 1,179 Member
    Ditto on Polar HRM. I use an FT4 and am loving it.
  • marpeters
    marpeters Posts: 205 Member
    In the mean time, I always use the lower value. Better to judge too little than eat too much.
  • Toddrific
    Toddrific Posts: 1,114 Member
    Do you put your height/weight in the elliptical? Does it measure your heart rate?

    There was also a discussion about how you would normally burn X calories an hour
    just sitting around. Some calculations subtract that out.
  • littlecar1
    littlecar1 Posts: 36 Member
    I use a polar as well & love it, although I have found that the calories calculated by MFP are very accurate, usually within 10%.
  • Larry0445
    Larry0445 Posts: 204 Member
    Polar FT4
  • papastu
    papastu Posts: 737 Member
    heart rate monitor :love:
  • thirtyandthriving
    thirtyandthriving Posts: 613 Member
    Buy a heart rate monitor, seriously. Polar ft7 is the one I would suggest.

    I have this one it is great.
  • Atarahh
    Atarahh Posts: 485 Member
    polar FT4. Especially for a machine where you cant put in weight and it it usually defaulted for a 150 lb person.

    Try bodytronics.com. I got my FT4 for $62. I ordered it Monday, was at my house Thursday. It is great!
  • hesn92
    hesn92 Posts: 5,966 Member
    Heart Rate Monitor.

    I want one but don't want to spend the $$$
  • hesn92
    hesn92 Posts: 5,966 Member
    I've heard a lot of people say that the amount calculated by MFP is very accurate, though.
  • Charabbidan
    Charabbidan Posts: 24 Member
    Personally, I go by the machine for now until I eventually get round to getting a HRM. If the cross trainer says I've burned 500 calories I then just reduce the time on MFP until it shows the same (MFP says more calories burned in my case too). I'd rather not risk thinking I've burned off way more than I actually have as I personally try to make sure I eat back my burned calories. It's been working ok for me so far. :smile:
  • ATT949
    ATT949 Posts: 1,245 Member
    I when I use my elliptical for 60 minutes, the machine says I burned 600 calories. The same activity for the same time with MFP says 750! I just don't know what to believe anymore. Every device says something different. I've gotten to the point where I look at the machine (the lower number) and take off 10 percent to come up with my calories burned. I have the same issues while jogging with Fitbit and MFD. Help. Any suggestions here?
    Dieting is rife with "recording errors" - what you're hitting is one of the bigger ones, though.
    Looking up your exercise values is, at best, a WAG ("wild asked guess") - pity the poor soul who thinks that they're actually "eating all of their calories" when, in fact, they're eating their way back to obesity. I digress…
    A simple way to get a fairly accurate count is to get an HRM that uses your heartbeat to calculate calorie expenditure. The Garmins that end in 10 have that feature. Even my Garmin 305, a superb HRM, is inaccurate because it only estimates on age, gender, weight, and distance.
  • ATT949
    ATT949 Posts: 1,245 Member
    I've heard a lot of people say that the amount calculated by MFP is very accurate, though.
    :-)
    Highly INaccurate, don't you mean?

    I've seen values in MFP, in both the exercise and in the food databases, that are wildly incorrect. It's unfortunate because folks appear to think they're accurate and then wonder why they're not losing weight.
  • janf15
    janf15 Posts: 242 Member
    Let us get this straight. The calorie calculators in any heart rate monitors are based on a formula imbedded in the software, and the 'calorie burned calculators' on websites are the same way. Bottom line - they are not 100% accurate.

    HOWEVER, if you use the same 'instrument' like the MFP website, Garmin, HR monitor etc, your tool has internal consistency and will give you a - consistently and reliable number to work with.

    I think where things go haywire is when people start to look across instruments and compare.

    When you run or do cardio, keep your HR in the aerobic zones (some people call it the fat burning zone), where you are using your fat storage as fuel - instead of the glycogen. This morning I ran for an hour - nothing to eat before in a heart rate zone of 80% max heart rate. A little faster than I wanted - but that is OK.
  • Nigerianebony
    Nigerianebony Posts: 182 Member
    HRM along with a metabolic test. I was able to get my heart rate zones and VO2 max. It was a good investment. It turns out that my warm-up zone is 155 -165 bpm. My Max HR was 230bpm. Before the test, i was working out around 140-150 bpm. I was really undertraining. I would tell myself that I was buring 400-500 each workout when i was really burning 200. Major adjustments had to be made.
  • jpmman
    jpmman Posts: 5
    WOW, lots of interesting comments. Thanks to everyone for weighing in on this... Get it?
    In the mean time it looks like Polar FT4, Polart FT7 and Garmin are mentioned quite a bit. Anyone know the differences. In my old age now (57) Im going for quality and not that concerned about price. It does sound like a HRM is the way to go and I agree with one person about using too many measuring devices. I need to stick with one.

    Thanks guys for all the great input!
  • barrattandrew
    barrattandrew Posts: 148
    In the mean time, I always use the lower value. Better to judge too little than eat too much.

    This is what I do, I normally work on the basis that the MFP calculation is about 40% off!

Categories