FORUM: Site/Technical Help
TOPIC:

# Tracking 'calories burned' - too low an amount?

 Search the Message Boards:

 CHRISTASP Posts: 1,620 7/29/13 11:11 A I - finally - figured out what was wrong. I had entered 'kilograms' when I started my account so I figured that was all right. But I now found out that when I use the option 'change goal' on my start page, I need to fill in my starting weight AGAIN and that one was set on pounds, so it said that I weight 87 pounds! Corrected that and now the 'calories burned' numbers are more in line with those of the other sites. Thanks to all for your support. Edited by: CHRISTASP at: 7/29/2013 (11:12) Christina

 YOGAGEEK SparkPoints: (1,672) Fitness Minutes: (1,241) Posts: 130 6/4/13 5:49 A "I do not know how far I walked, don't know how to find out."Try mapmyrun.com. They have a facility for creating maps of your trips, with distances in both metric and imperial, and I think it's worldwide (I know it works here in the UK, but it's not a British site).

MOTIVATED@LAST
Posts: 13,664
6/3/13 8:23 P

174 seems pretty close to the 184 you got on the other calculator. Given these are all estimates, +/- 10 calories is pretty close.

If you go to the walking calculator in that earlier link, it should allow you to enter any two of speed, distance and time (including in km), and it will calculate the rest. There is a specific walking calculator there, rather than looking up W in the list of activities.

M@L

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.

 current weight: 178.0

 220 203.5 187 170.5
154

 UNIDENT Posts: 33,498 6/3/13 3:11 P Yes, I meant distance travelled. You can use the Fitness Maps feature to plot out your route.Is your last "weigh-in" actually correct? Unusually low figures can be given by incorrect weights. Maybe you typo'd it or something? Deb, in New Zealand

 CHRISTASP Posts: 1,620 6/3/13 1:21 P Thank you both for your replies. Unident, I weigh 87 kg - 2 kg's off and I will not be in the 'obese' category any more. I filled that in both at the SP weigh in and at the sites I mentioned. Also if I count 6 calories burned per minute for walking, I would still get 180 calories for 30 minutes, not the 56 that appear on the SP tracker. I tried the calculator M@L mentioned: it says that for walking to work I burn 174 calories in 30 minutes. (I chose 'walking to work' because we use kilometers in our system, so I don't have an idea about miles.) I'm not sure what you mean by 'how far did you cover' - English is not my mother's tongue, I don't know what that expression means. Oh - (editing to add) I think you mean how far I walked? I do not know how far I walked, don't know how to find out. Thanks again for replying - I appreciate it. Basically I'm glad SP offers so many facilities. I just thought this was odd. I may be doing something wrong (but what??!!) Edited by: CHRISTASP at: 6/3/2013 (13:36) Christina

MOTIVATED@LAST
Posts: 13,664
6/3/13 6:17 A

Christa,

There is definitely something weird going on there.

Personally, I like the calculator at www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.php

It's comprehensive and pretty flexible (and works with both metric and imperial measurements). And you can then manually enter your calories into the exercise tracker at Spark.

M@L

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.

 current weight: 178.0

 220 203.5 187 170.5
154

 UNIDENT Posts: 33,498 6/2/13 6:12 P Both of those sites give numbers that seem HUGE.Both walking and biking are low impact activities and not big calorie burners. Exercise is typically something between about 6 and 10 calories per minute, so depending on your weight, a low level activity should be about middle of the numbers you've got (say 7cpm for 30 minutes = 210 cals).Are you very obese? Larger people do burn more per minute than smaller people and this may be why those sites are giving such high figures. Is your most recent weigh-in at Spark correct, and is that the same value you use for those sites?How far did you cover in the walk? A very rough guide is about 100cal per mile. Deb, in New Zealand

 CHRISTASP Posts: 1,620 6/2/13 2:28 P When I use the fitness tracker to track my fitness minutes biking and walking, it gives very low amounts of calories burned. I checked with other sites; they say that I burned a lot more than the SP tracker does!I wonder why? And if it can be fixed?I've checked, the weight number is correct.For example 30 minutes of BIKING:16-19 km/hour (I use the metric system, and have set the choice to 'metric' on my account): SP says 101 calories burned.I used this site (in my own language): http://www.wijvallenaf.nl/Berekenen/Calorieen-Verbranden.html - it says I burned 310 calories!A second site ( http://www.caloriecalculator.nl/calorieen-per-activiteit/ ) says 296 calories burned.So, 101 vs 310 vs 296 calories burned. Two of them give about the same number, SP is MUCH lower.Another example: 30 minutes of WALKING, on SP 6 km/ hour: SP says 56 calories burned.The other site says: walking 5.6 km/ hour: 184 calories burned!Another site (http://www.caloriecalculator.nl/calorieen-per-activiteit/) says 152 calories burned.So, 56 vs 184 vs 152.These are huge differences! Edited by: CHRISTASP at: 6/2/2013 (14:37) Christina

 Page: 1 of (1)