Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
MOTIVATED@LAST Posts: 14,781
7/5/13 8:10 P

Using the figures quoted, I came up with 179 calories on a different calculator. Walking is a well studied and well understood activity, and online calculators tend to be reasonably accurate for this.

Did you enter your bodyweight on the treadmill? Were you using any incline?


The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
PDUFFM SparkPoints: (3,969)
Fitness Minutes: (4,539)
Posts: 19
7/5/13 7:28 P

Thanks! Heart Rate Monitors don't work for me because I take beta blockers and can't get my heart rate over 135 or so. I think you are correct to under estimate though.

Success is steady progress toward one's personal goals.
---John Rohn
7/5/13 7:24 P

Treadmills are known to be inaccurate as far as calories burned goes. If you want a more accurate measure, try wearing a heart rate monitor. Otherwise, I'd probably use the Spark tracker's information. That may just be because I would rather underestimate burned calories than overestimate though. emoticon

"Know your limitations. Then defy them."

Pounds Lost this Year:

January - 6 so far
PDUFFM SparkPoints: (3,969)
Fitness Minutes: (4,539)
Posts: 19
7/5/13 7:09 P

Why is there such a difference in calories burnt from my treadmill and SparkPeople? Today I walked 50 minutes at 2.5 miles per hour - my treadmill says I burnt 263 calories and when I enter my time in my Fitness Tracker it says I burnt 171.

Success is steady progress toward one's personal goals.
---John Rohn
Page: 1 of (1)  

Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Cross-trainers and ankle pain 9/10/2014 9:43:20 AM
When your knees hurt first 6/27/2014 6:46:10 AM
exercising with injury. 8/28/2014 10:09:30 AM
official SP June challenge? 6/4/2014 1:01:33 AM
Share your Favorite Playlist! 7/8/2014 10:22:03 PM