Calories burned exaggerations

Options
1…7891012

Replies

  • gunmetalsunrise
    gunmetalsunrise Posts: 131
    Options
    HRMs are a different story, I agree...its the people that say they burned 600 calories walking for 30 minutes and Im like...WHAAAATTT?!! Lol

    I have never gotten 600 calories burned while doing 30 mins of walking. Ever. The most I've ever gotten was 250 and that was while doing walking + some running. Lol.

    I just use the estimates because purchasing a HRM is out of my budget. Maybe in the future I can get one, but I've been losing weight pretty consistently w/ just estimates. *shrugs*
  • Fatboy960
    Fatboy960 Posts: 7
    Options
    HRMs are a different story, I agree...its the people that say they burned 600 calories walking for 30 minutes and Im like...WHAAAATTT?!! Lol
    I've never seen anything quite that extreme, but yes, the "estimates" aren't very reliable.

    Check out the calories burned for "Golf, pulling clubs" - it's ridiculous - but I use it anyway.
  • Bobby_Clerici
    Bobby_Clerici Posts: 1,828 Member
    Options
    I had to completely tweak the calorie burn rates for everything in the MFP data base.
    It just overestimated everything.
    I burn around 450 calories per hour where it said 600.
    I burn 600 where it said 800 and so on...
    Folks, these are educated guesses. Each person is different. You must find your own zone and stick with what works.
  • twistygirl
    twistygirl Posts: 517 Member
    Options
    That's why I do mine on Spark People it's more accurate to me.:glasses:
  • AJ_Pete
    AJ_Pete Posts: 863 Member
    Options
    Dear god, leave the OP alone. She's giving her opinion of people in her height/weight category. No need to attack anyone. I'm heavier and I sure as hell didn't take it as her attacking or trying to misguide anyone. Go do some cardio are work off your bad attitudes.
  • JMeka
    JMeka Posts: 26
    Options
    Agree with this as today MFP said i burned 1218 cal for 60 mins of Turbojam. According to my HRM i burned 880kcal, that is a 300+ difference. If i were to eat back all my work out calories well..i would certainly be over.
  • Globug62
    Globug62 Posts: 1
    Options
    MFP, has generally calculated anywhere from 10-30 calories difference than what I see on the exercise machine. I go by exactly what the machine says, as I put my weight and age in every time. I also have a website that I use to verify the numbers and they are usually pretty accurate to the machine. Sometimes, I eat the calories back and sometimes I don't. It just depends on whether i'm hungry or not.
  • obeserat
    obeserat Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    HRMs are a different story, I agree...its the people that say they burned 600 calories walking for 30 minutes and Im like...WHAAAATTT?!! Lol

    A few months back when I weighed 325lb my hrm said I was burning 850 calories for 1 hour cycling , MFP's estimate was fairly close to that , now I am 33lb lighter and quite a lot fitter I burn just over 500 on the same journey mfp is a bit out. I regularly check the HRM reading on this website http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
  • penrbrown
    penrbrown Posts: 2,685 Member
    Options
    :D MFP estimates WAY low for me. My HRM says I burned 300 calories on my 20 minute run. MFP? It says I burned 150!
  • obeserat
    obeserat Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    Could someone recommend a HRM that takes BMR into account? Or is there an easy way to do it without having to buy a new HRM?

    I'm thinking of this equation:

    My BMR (according to Klatch-Macardle formula) is 1300. That's 54 calories per hour. So if my HRM says I burned 600 calories in an hour, I actually burned 546? Do I have that right?

    I don't eat my calories back, by the way. That never works for me. I have consistent losses when I don't eat them back.

    This website is quite good , I use it to check the reading on my HRM and calculate my net burn http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
  • kelsafish
    kelsafish Posts: 39
    Options
    You go with your method. Leave other people to theirs. If it's working for them, why does it matter to you? And if it stops working for them, they'll likely change what they're doing, and again, it shouldn't matter to you.

    Agreed.
  • jaxandmaksmom
    jaxandmaksmom Posts: 262 Member
    Options
    AND THIS IS WHY I DONT EAT BACK MY EXERCISE CALORIES.. CAUSE NO ONE KNOWS...
  • thefreebiemom
    thefreebiemom Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    HRMs are a different story, I agree...its the people that say they burned 600 calories walking for 30 minutes and Im like...WHAAAATTT?!! Lol

    Why do you believe that's impossible? I keep my pace up and not only sweat like a crazy man during my walks, I'm still pouring for 20 mins when I get back to my desk.

    But why not use whatever numbers you want, and if you're reaching your weight loss goals, keep using it? I'm also noticing a trend where men seem to believe they've burned more calories than MFP states, and women swear they've burned less. I'm definitely in the "MFP is too low" camp.

    As a side note, I'm not sure why so many people are willing to take the number from a HRM as gospel. When it comes to calories burned, they've been shown to vary widely in accuracy. They aren't giving you a real number, after all. They are using an algorithm, the same as the elliptical or treadmill, and the same as MFP. Different algorithms, but all are still a best guess based on what an average person would burn.

    At the risk of being ridiculed for asking an ignorant question, does anyone know if there's a HR monitor out there that asks for not only your height, weight, and age, but also your BF% and VO2 Max? It seems to me that these would be directly related to how many calories you burn in your workouts, as well.

    There is a thread that someone created where they used VO2 and BF% to figure out an "adjusted" age so that HRM give you a more accurate calorie burn. It has the process and links to the calculators needed to figure it out. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/548645-setup-polar-hrm-for-more-accurate-calorie-burn-for-known-bmr

    Basically in the end you change the age on your HRM to what the calculator says and it is a little more accurate. I am 29 and it calculated 31 as the age I should put in. I haven't changed mine yet to see how it effects it though. But yes I think Polar lets you use your VO2 max figure but you would have to have some kind of test done to know your VO2 Max.
  • thefreebiemom
    thefreebiemom Posts: 191 Member
    Options

    Highly unlikely, in my opinion. 10 calories/minute is what most people MAX at. That's fit people, so obese people will burn more. But double? 20 calories/minute? I'd say maybe 15, and that's being generous.

    It doesn't hurt us the readers, it hurts the dieter. The MFP plan of 'adding back' exercise doesn't leave you much room for deficit, especially if you're smallish and use BMR as your floor instead of 1200. Then you get people who don't understand why they have to do so much math and why they're not losing. And it sucks for them.

    Just FYI, I have a HRM. I don't consider myself to be particularly fit. I still burn around 10 cal/min doing Turbo Jam, and roughly 5 cal/min hiking. "shrugs" My husband, who is far larger than me and far less fit, burns about double what I do simply because he's about double my size.

    That's funny. I'm about 50lbs more then my hubby and during hiking or 30DS he still burns more then me. He SUCKS!!! When I started C25K he decided out of the blue he was just going to run and see how far he got in a certain amount of time. 32min for 5k. Really??? No fair he hasn't run ever.
  • bikinibeliever
    bikinibeliever Posts: 832 Member
    Options
    MFP is off for me too, but in the other direction, it under estimates. But that's ok, I have my bodymedia. :happy:
  • FlittyGetsFit
    FlittyGetsFit Posts: 94
    Options
    I use the heart rate sensors on the machines to get my heart rate. I find the machines overestimate their calories count, MFP overestimates my burn on the elliptical and bike, but underestimates the treadmill. Probably as I have it on an incline. So I make a not of my heart rate according to the sensors, and work it out when I get home, entering that value for calories burned. Then, I only eat back around half of my exercise calories, just to be safe! It seems to be working :)
  • Airbear3
    Airbear3 Posts: 335 Member
    Options
    I've seen people say they burned 1,000 calories for an hour of Zumba. That's impossible. Plus, an hour long zumba class includes warm up and warm downs. You need to RUN 10/mph for an hour to burn that.
    sorry i believe you would be wrong here! i do run a 9 min mile and on rare occasions do zumba and is as much cardio as runnning! zumba is a great cardio workout
  • tenunderfour
    tenunderfour Posts: 429 Member
    Options
    I think if you don't have an HRM, it's ok to go with the estimate for a while and see if it works. If it doesn't work, adjust.

    I haven't read all 400+ posts in this thread, but I'm just going to go on the record and point out that a HRM is STILL an estimation!! There is NO way to know exactly how many calories you burn during a given activity. You can only estimate.... and the OP is right in underestimating whenever possible. I also happen to agree with NOT eating back the exercise calories.
  • LadyOfOceanBreeze
    LadyOfOceanBreeze Posts: 762 Member
    Options
    okay OKAY!!!! I am officially going to stop
    eating back my exercise like today:laugh: :wink: :laugh:

    Best!
  • kwin91
    kwin91 Posts: 128
    Options
    Yeah I don't just straight use the one on MFP I use this site instead

    http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc

Categories