is my treadmil right?

twentypoundss2lose
twentypoundss2lose Posts: 6
in Health and Weight Loss
honest opinion needed here! the difference between what my treadmil tells me i burn and the fitnesspal data base, it's almost double! :/ which would you go with? i'm sure my weight, etc. goes into play here too, but i'm just having a hard time! i don't want to be under orrr over-estimating.
opinions?

Replies

  • dg09
    dg09 Posts: 754
    It's hard to tell with either (treadmill/myfp), the best way is to use a heart rate monitor.

    Does your treadmill calculate your calories burned based on your height/weight? If not, I'd go with MyFP for now.
  • BodyElectric1
    BodyElectric1 Posts: 120 Member
    I normally go with the amount on my treadmill or bike. I think MFP overestimates calories burnt sometimes.
  • MinnieInMaine
    MinnieInMaine Posts: 6,400 Member
    Usually machines are pretty close if you put in your age and weight but they can still overestimate if they're set for a certain gender of a certain average height. MFP tends to be WAY overestimated for some reason. Go with whichever is lower to be safe and start saving up for a good HRM.
  • jenj1313
    jenj1313 Posts: 898 Member
    Compared to my heart rate monitor (HRM), MFP grossly over estimates my calorie burn. IF I have to use the MFP numbers for an activity that I didn't wear my HRM for, I always cut the calories by at least half.

    If you don't want to get a HRM, I'd use the lower of the 2 numbers just to be prudent.

    Good Luck!
    Jen *

    Edited because I made a typo on my own name!
  • princessveggiecake
    princessveggiecake Posts: 49
    It's hard to tell with either (treadmill/myfp), the best way is to use a heart rate monitor.

    Does your treadmill calculate your calories burned based on your height/weight? If not, I'd go with MyFP for now.

    you can always trust the HRM!
  • Shayztar
    Shayztar Posts: 415 Member
    Compared to my heart rate monitor (HRM), MFP grossly over estimates my calorie burn. IF I have to use the MFP numbers for an activity that I didn't wear my HRM for, I always cut the calories by at least half.

    If you don't want to get a HRM, I'd use the lower of the 2 numbers just to be prudent.

    ^^This.
  • Anthonydaman
    Anthonydaman Posts: 854 Member
    I normally go with the amount on my treadmill or bike. I think MFP overestimates calories burnt sometimes.

    Agreed
  • jamielynas
    jamielynas Posts: 366 Member
    MFP overestimates calories burnt pretty heavily in my opinion.
  • taso42
    taso42 Posts: 8,980 Member
    Does your treadmill take height/weight/age/sex into account?

    For a ballpark estimate, figure about 10 calories per minute if you're running pretty intensely.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    I look at treadmill numbers this way - if you were to turn on the treadmill, input your age and weight, set your incline and speed, then sit in a chair nearby and read, it will still give you a caloric burn readout on the display.

    Add to that that most machines are calibrated towards men or an average between men and women, and ultimately you're going to end up high all the way around with the machines. MFP will be a touch better because it knows your gender as well as age/weight, but I still would recommend only eating half those numbers back.

    And your best bet is to get an HRM with a cheat strap, as that will be the closest estimate of your actual burn.
  • twentypoundss2lose
    twentypoundss2lose Posts: 6
    thanks everyone!
    it does not take age/weight/etc. into play. :(
    it's a nice treadmil but a little bit older and less, should i say, "smart".. lol

    as for everyone that said mfp usually over-estimates for them,
    the treadmil is actually the one that is doubling mfp!! crazy..

    (i only walked at about 3.0mph for 10 minutes)
    mfp told me near 25 calories.
    while the treadmil told me somewhere around 50. :/


    50 deffinetly seems a little too high.
    but as does mpf seem just a tad bit too low.
    it's eating away at me! lol

    a HRM sounds like a fantastic idea.
    are they hard to come by? (certain stores, etc)
  • dg09
    dg09 Posts: 754
    You should be able to find a HRM at a store like Walmart.
  • bemagnifeyed
    bemagnifeyed Posts: 7 Member
    I read somewhere that you should calculate your caloric burn using the following formula:

    Weight (in lbs) x .75 (per mile)

    For example, I weigh 146 and just finished walking/jogging 2 miles: 146 x 1.5 (.75x2 miles=1.5) = 219 calories burned.

    Not sure how accurate that is but it seems like a really good indicator, at least for me. I've been on ellipticals that give crazy caloric totals and when I use this formula, it just seems more accurate. Hope that helps.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,224 Member
    Only the threadmills that burn the most calories get sold off the showroom floors.....the rest end up recycled and made into something else, like a toaster....survival of the fittest, you know.
  • carrotstick2012
    carrotstick2012 Posts: 161
    If you're looking at an entry someone has created for themselves that is in the database and your treadmill is saying double, then it could be that you are running and the person that entered it is walking for the same time. I just manually enter the calories my treadmill tells me.
  • Di3012
    Di3012 Posts: 2,247 Member
    honest opinion needed here! the difference between what my treadmil tells me i burn and the fitnesspal data base, it's almost double! :/ which would you go with? i'm sure my weight, etc. goes into play here too, but i'm just having a hard time! i don't want to be under orrr over-estimating.
    opinions?

    The order I would input calories burned goes as follows:

    HRM (as this contains all my personal info which is up to date)
    Treadmill
    MFP is last as the calorie burns are input via other users and not accurate to my own specifications.

Categories