3 ms·

I have a simple gps watch that uses my weight to estimate calories and doesn't measure heart rate. It gives me the same as you, just under 100kcal/km for the sa

I have a simple gps watch that uses my weight to estimate calories and doesn't measure heart rate. It gives me the same as you, just under 100kcal/km for the same weight. But I'm convinced this is a dramatic overestimation, I run a lot and have for years, and I'd be eating way more if I really burned that much. I think with regular exercise we become extremely efficient and the calorie burn goes way down. I don't know if heart rate accounts for that or not, but overall I'm sceptical about calorie counts.

civilitty 3y ago
It definitely depends a lot on metabolic adaption which already varies significantly person to person but I think for beginners just moving from a sedentary lifestyle it's a good estimate for a while (six months to a year is the number I've heard, depending on training intensity). The last few months I've gone from a sedentary lifestyle to calorie counting and using an Apple Watch to track exercise with an intense 7-10 mile walk/run/hike 5-7x a week. With the weightloss I've experienced it seems relatively accurate (within 20%) but that's with 2-3 hours of exercise (not including weight lifting) per session.