how many calories burned?

Options
i have a question. (keep in mind i do not have a hrm but would like one)
i have a stepper that goes off to the side more like a running motion tan just the straight up and down. i am wondering how to figure out how many calories i am burning in this time. it keeps takes of the steps and even gives how many calories are burns. but how can it figure that out. and how right is it. i am trying to log it and i am not sure what to put. i also know that calorie burned depends on ones size correct?

i am 5'-3" and 127lbs and i use it for 45 minutes

thank you for the help.

Replies

  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    usually those machines estimate calories for an average size person (I beleive about 160lbs) so your burn should be less than that. The only way to know is an HRM, but in the mean time just estimate by taking off some of what the machine is saying.
  • rmccully
    rmccully Posts: 319
    Options
    usually those machines estimate calories for an average size person (I beleive about 160lbs) so your burn should be less than that. The only way to know is an HRM, but in the mean time just estimate by taking off some of what the machine is saying.

    do you know a good hrm to get?
  • rmccully
    rmccully Posts: 319
    Options
    BUMP
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    For a movement such as this, there are 2 ways they would use to calculate Calories burned.

    One: they used a metabolic cart to analyze oxygen uptake on a number of subjects and used that data to derive an algorithm which was programmed into the display. If so, they probably would have farmed the research out to some graduate student somewhere who used a sample size of about 50 which means you are getting a larger standard of error.

    Two: They took a related activity (stepping, walking), extrapolated the numbers and applied them to their machine. Esp if the machine does not require you to input your weight, this method is really more of a gimmick--like one of those toys you squeeze that "estimates" your romantic skills.

    Given your age and weight, a good yardstick would be 350-400 Calories per hour, working at a light to somewhat hard level of exertion.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    For a movement such as this, there are 2 ways they would use to calculate Calories burned.

    One: they used a metabolic cart to analyze oxygen uptake on a number of subjects and used that data to derive an algorithm which was programmed into the display. If so, they probably would have farmed the research out to some graduate student somewhere who used a sample size of about 50 which means you are getting a larger standard of error.

    Two: They took a related activity (stepping, walking), extrapolated the numbers and applied them to their machine. Esp if the machine does not require you to input your weight, this method is really more of a gimmick--like one of those toys you squeeze that "estimates" your romantic skills.

    Given your age and weight, a good yardstick would be 350-400 Calories per hour, working at a light to somewhat hard level of exertion.
  • havingitall
    havingitall Posts: 3,728 Member
    Options
    For a movement such as this, there are 2 ways they would use to calculate Calories burned.

    One: they used a metabolic cart to analyze oxygen uptake on a number of subjects and used that data to derive an algorithm which was programmed into the display. If so, they probably would have farmed the research out to some graduate student somewhere who used a sample size of about 50 which means you are getting a larger standard of error.

    Two: They took a related activity (stepping, walking), extrapolated the numbers and applied them to their machine. Esp if the machine does not require you to input your weight, this method is really more of a gimmick--like one of those toys you squeeze that "estimates" your romantic skills.

    Given your age and weight, a good yardstick would be 350-400 Calories per hour, working at a light to somewhat hard level of exertion.

    How do you estimate the calories burned by age and weight? I have a HRM that shows I burn about 360 caloires in 45 minutes on the elliptical. It is a Lifecycle elliptical and I usually have it on level 14 going 62 - 70 rpms. I am sweating buckets on this and it would be difficult to hold a conversation. The elliptical says I burn 820 calories and MFP says I burn 790 calories. I am 47 and weigh 260 lbs. I am 5' 10". Any idea what would be an estimate for what I burn or is the HRM accurate?
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    For a movement such as this, there are 2 ways they would use to calculate Calories burned.

    One: they used a metabolic cart to analyze oxygen uptake on a number of subjects and used that data to derive an algorithm which was programmed into the display. If so, they probably would have farmed the research out to some graduate student somewhere who used a sample size of about 50 which means you are getting a larger standard of error.

    Two: They took a related activity (stepping, walking), extrapolated the numbers and applied them to their machine. Esp if the machine does not require you to input your weight, this method is really more of a gimmick--like one of those toys you squeeze that "estimates" your romantic skills.

    Given your age and weight, a good yardstick would be 350-400 Calories per hour, working at a light to somewhat hard level of exertion.

    How do you estimate the calories burned by age and weight? I have a HRM that shows I burn about 360 caloires in 45 minutes on the elliptical. It is a Lifecycle elliptical and I usually have it on level 14 going 62 - 70 rpms. I am sweating buckets on this and it would be difficult to hold a conversation. The elliptical says I burn 820 calories and MFP says I burn 790 calories. I am 47 and weigh 260 lbs. I am 5' 10". Any idea what would be an estimate for what I burn or is the HRM accurate?

    You need to have weight and intensity to calcluate Calorie burn. The challenge with ellipticals/cross trainers is that there is no common movement, so every manufacturer has to determine their own method of estimating--using the methods I described earlier.

    You mention that it's a "lifecycle" elliptical--do you mean a "Life Fitness" product? If so, what is the model number and how old is it? Life Fitness, esp since 2005, has been very scrupulous about doing research on their equipment and developing their equations--they are the best in the business by far. (However, testing these things is expensive and so they only use 40-60 subjects, which means there is still some variability).

    For now, let's analyze your numbers. Again, Calorie burn is based on intensity x weight. Intensity is based on oxygen uptake. The unit of measurement commonly used is the MET. To keep it simple, let's just say that the higher the METS, the higher the oxygen uptake and the higher the calorie burn. Since we don't know the exact MET value (intensity) of your effort, let's test your HRM number by sneaking in the back door.

    To calculate calories burn per hour, you multiply the intensity (MET level) times body weight (in Kg). If your HRM says 360 calories in 45 min, that translates to 480 Cal/hour. Divide your body weight (118 KG) into 480 and you come up with 4 METS. Now, 4 METS is the equivalent of walking 4 mph on level ground (15 min/mile). Ask yourself: if you are walking 4 mph, is your effort level the same as when you are working on the elliptical?

    Given your description of your effort, I am going to assume the answer is "NO", that you are working much harder. If so, that is a good indication that your HRM reading is low.

    Now let's look at the number the elliptical gives you (MFP numbers for ellipticals are pretty useless IMO). 820 Calories translates into 1090 for an hour, or 9.25 METS. That's the equivalent of running almost 6 mph (10:00 mile). Can you do that for 45 minutes? Once again, I am going to speculate and say "NO". So, that's kind of the upper limit.

    My guess, based on your age, the cross trainer resistance level, your reports of exertion, etc, is that you are in the 7 MET neighborhood. That would suggest that your aerobic fitness capacity is in the "Good" category for your age, which I think is reasonable.

    A 7 MET workload would translate to a 45 min calorie burn of 600-620 calories, which sounds pretty reasonable to me.

    So why is your HRM reading so low? The first thing I would check is the VO2 max setting. When you do the "fitness test" it calculates that value for you, but you can set it manually as well. Chances are, it is set too low for your fitness level. Look in your manual and find that number. If you can override it, set it at "35" and see what kind of calorie burn you get. It should be closer to either the machine number or the one I gave you.
  • havingitall
    havingitall Posts: 3,728 Member
    Options
    I didn't see anything for the VO2 Max... I will have to look at it again. Your #'s seem a lot more reasonable to me.

    Thanks for the help
  • rmccully
    rmccully Posts: 319
    Options
    For a movement such as this, there are 2 ways they would use to calculate Calories burned.

    One: they used a metabolic cart to analyze oxygen uptake on a number of subjects and used that data to derive an algorithm which was programmed into the display. If so, they probably would have farmed the research out to some graduate student somewhere who used a sample size of about 50 which means you are getting a larger standard of error.

    Two: They took a related activity (stepping, walking), extrapolated the numbers and applied them to their machine. Esp if the machine does not require you to input your weight, this method is really more of a gimmick--like one of those toys you squeeze that "estimates" your romantic skills.

    Given your age and weight, a good yardstick would be 350-400 Calories per hour, working at a light to somewhat hard level of exertion.


    WHAT WOULD BE A GOOD HRM TO GET FOR AROUND $100 OR SO?
  • Laceylala
    Laceylala Posts: 3,094 Member
    Options
    I would personally use your HRM for final calorie count. It takes into account weight, age, height, heart rate, etc.

    I have a Polar F6 that I got for $100 on drugstore.com and I LOVE it!