Calories burned are way off on MyFitnessPal?

Options
13kathysue
13kathysue Posts: 4
in Fitness and Exercise
People are telling me not to add exercise to my log because myfitnesspal gives way too much credit for calories for a particular exercise. I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this. So far I'm pretty much just logging food. But I'd really like to log exercise, too. Just not if it throws everything off. Thanks!
«1345

Replies

  • SL22268
    SL22268 Posts: 59 Member
    Options
    Unfortunately they are right =/ I invested in a HRM to more accurately track calories burned and manually enter them. MFP and the machines themselves are saying I am burning almost double as to what my HRM tells me.
  • hthrld
    hthrld Posts: 125 Member
    Options
    Bump
  • piesbd
    piesbd Posts: 196 Member
    Options
    I have found that some of the calorie estimates are way off, so I tend to rely on my HRM to determine caloric burn....

    However, I really try to not eat the calories that I burn, so I guess in the end it doesn't matter ;)
  • DopeItUp
    DopeItUp Posts: 18,771 Member
    Options
    MFP has no way of knowing your intensity level or fitness level or anything like that, so it's just a guesstimate. For some people it's high and for others it's low (like me). HRMs aren't even 100% accurate either, but they're reasonably close.
  • miss_mckenna
    miss_mckenna Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    Yes, the calories are off.

    I no longer have a heart rate monitor, but I use this calculator: http://www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.php and it seems to be pretty accurate (compared with what I was burning when I had a HRM, and compared to my Nike+ calculations).
  • kritik
    kritik Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    I have a heart rate monitor that I wear while exercising. I have found that MFP is off on some of the numbers, but is right on target for others. I really don't think that MFP is so far off that it wouldn't benefit you to log your exercise. If you are worried about the numbers being too far off, maybe try to get yourself a heart rate monitor. :smile:
  • k2quiere
    k2quiere Posts: 4,151 Member
    Options
    There are many facets to this conversation. I found MFPs calculations to be way too high, but I have friends who have found them to be too low. You have to try it for yourself and see how it works with what YOUR body is doing. Either way, if you are working out and not logging and exercise, I hope you are exactly at your calorie goal or going a little over regularly, so you are at least eating back some of those calories.
  • LilMsRobbinHood
    LilMsRobbinHood Posts: 6 Member
    Options
    Even if the calories are way off on MFP, it's really nice keeping track of how hard (and how often) you work. You shouldn't really be eating back much of your exercise calories at all, so it shouldn't really throw anything off for you.

    You can also use it to track how much more you can work out in x amount of time. When I first started working out at month ago, I could only do 20 minutes of the treadmill before giving up, and now 30 minutes at 3.4mph and 12% incline is an easy day for me. It's wonderful seeing the changes :-)
  • mgnmsn
    mgnmsn Posts: 133 Member
    Options
    I always cut my calories (or the time i did the activity) in half. they are way off. i still log, but i am much more conservative about it.
  • cramernh
    cramernh Posts: 3,335 Member
    Options
    The issue is that the calories that MFP reports for exercise tend to be either too low or too high.

    The best way to have as close-to-accurate caloric burn readings is to invest in an HRM that will track your heart rate, caloric burn, etc.

    I compared my exercises from MFP's numbers to the numbers my Polar FT4 read... and WOW what a difference! MFP's numbers were well over 250 calories more than what my HRM was reading. Im sticking by my HRM!!! lol!
  • mccrockl
    mccrockl Posts: 55 Member
    Options
    Because I couldn't get myself to buy a HRM, I just started logging half of my workout so a 60 minute swim I put in as 30 minutes. It seems to do a good enough job of fixing the problem. Good luck! I definitely like logging the exercise. More calories to eat!
  • LLStover09
    LLStover09 Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    I highly recommend getting a heart rate monitor. The other thing is if you don't eat down your cals, it wont really matter. You can just use it as motivation!
  • ChelleDJM
    ChelleDJM Posts: 161
    Options
    Example - For 45 minutes on the elliptical -

    MFP says 900+ cals burned
    Elliptical at the gym says 700+
    My hrm says 500ish
  • shellsrenee01
    shellsrenee01 Posts: 357 Member
    Options
    I have two different calorie estimators and they seem to match pretty closely with MFP. Then again, everyone is different and you get out what you put in. It can estimate all it wants but only I can determine how hard I work during any particular exercise. I say go with your HRM if you want a precise calculation.

    Speaking of...I'm considering getting one. I want one WITHOUT a chest strap (as my chest is 50+ inches around and I don't think the belt would fit on me). Anyone have any good recommendations on a good HRM that does NOT have a chest strap?

    Thanks! :bigsmile:
  • Jules2Be
    Jules2Be Posts: 2,267 Member
    Options
    you can enter your own calorie burn...you dont have to use the number that pops up.
  • LLStover09
    LLStover09 Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    I also would go w the cardio machines cal ct vs mfp
  • kateshape
    kateshape Posts: 25
    Options
    I found the opposite. I invested in an HRM (polar ft7) and found I burn way more during certain exercises. Other one's were spot on, but walking in particular I was burning a lot more (but that could be due to the fact I selected the wrong mph)
  • kateshape
    kateshape Posts: 25
    Options
    I have two different calorie estimators and they seem to match pretty closely with MFP. Then again, everyone is different and you get out what you put in. It can estimate all it wants but only I can determine how hard I work during any particular exercise. I say go with your HRM if you want a precise calculation.

    Speaking of...I'm considering getting one. I want one WITHOUT a chest strap (as my chest is 50+ inches around and I don't think the belt would fit on me). Anyone have any good recommendations on a good HRM that does NOT have a chest strap?

    Thanks! :bigsmile:

    Can you get an HRM without a chest strap? I can't see it providing that much of an accurate reading just from your wrist heartbeat...
  • LindaCWy
    LindaCWy Posts: 463 Member
    Options
    I burn way more the MFP says I do, according to my HRM
  • k2quiere
    k2quiere Posts: 4,151 Member
    Options
    I have two different calorie estimators and they seem to match pretty closely with MFP. Then again, everyone is different and you get out what you put in. It can estimate all it wants but only I can determine how hard I work during any particular exercise. I say go with your HRM if you want a precise calculation.

    Speaking of...I'm considering getting one. I want one WITHOUT a chest strap (as my chest is 50+ inches around and I don't think the belt would fit on me). Anyone have any good recommendations on a good HRM that does NOT have a chest strap?

    Thanks! :bigsmile:

    The belts are very stretchy and extendable. Also, they like to fit tight to get an accurate reading, which I just found out when I hadn't tightened mine in a while and it was too loose to get my rate. I think if you check the STATS on Amazon, or the like, it will tell you how far they expand. I have a Polar 4, and it fits around my 40" with PLENTY of room to spare, since I just had to tighten it :-)

Categories