How are people burning so many cals?
Options
Replies
-
jenniferinfl wrote: »My Polar HRM said I burned 415 calories for my 5k walk this morning.
You can't use an HRM for activity like that and expect accurate numbers. The only way to get that burn on that distance is to weigh 450 pounds. Since you're around 200 pounds, that's a 100%+ over-estimate!
There really needs to be a sticky for HRMs....
0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »My Polar HRM said I burned 415 calories for my 5k walk this morning.
You can't use an HRM for activity like that and expect accurate numbers. The only way to get that burn on that distance is to weigh 450 pounds. Since you're around 200 pounds, that's a 100%+ over-estimate!
There really needs to be a sticky for HRMs....
Why not? Walking fast gets your heart rate up. I mean, I'm confused... can't use HRMs for intervals, can't use HRMs for lifting, can't use HRMs for steady cardio... then why bother with HRMs at all?
450 calories for 3.5 miles doesn't seem that crazy for a 200 pounds person, if she's walking fast, especially if there are hills etc.0 -
Don't worry about how many calories you burn!!
Work out your daily calorie in take, and work out as per your routine. You shouldn't be calculating your eating habits around what your workouts are like..
Also, calorie burning goes on after you leave the gym depending on what you do.
Personally, a 1 hour MMA training session burns around 700 calories for me. But I don't track this; I generally add it to my weekly's cardio requirements.
When I do heavy squats or intense leg days, I might only burn 300 calories in the 2-3 hours I'm at the gym, but calories burned through the day will be much higher, so .. essentially, it's impossible to tell how your body reacts to exercise.0 -
Yeah it's all just bullsh*t. You can't trust anything these expensive gadgets say...
0 -
My average daily ride with a Garmin HRM of 2 hours at 22-26km per hour, I will burn 950+ calories, using the Garmin calculations. I also tend not to use the MFP or Strava calculations as the tend to give much higher burns.0
-
jenniferinfl wrote: »My Polar HRM said I burned 415 calories for my 5k walk this morning.
You can't use an HRM for activity like that and expect accurate numbers. The only way to get that burn on that distance is to weigh 450 pounds. Since you're around 200 pounds, that's a 100%+ over-estimate!
There really needs to be a sticky for HRMs....
Why not? Walking fast gets your heart rate up. I mean, I'm confused... can't use HRMs for intervals, can't use HRMs for lifting, can't use HRMs for steady cardio... then why bother with HRMs at all?
450 calories for 3.5 miles doesn't seem that crazy for a 200 pounds person, if she's walking fast, especially if there are hills etc.
The algorithms are based on steady state moderate intensity cardio. I can't remember the exact definitions but I do not believe walking would fall under that.
But to your other point - why bother using them at all - for heart rate training. Hrms were meant for use as that. They are not calorie counters. They can give estimates but their degree of accuracy will strongly depend on how they are used.
This is why it bothers me so much when people tell new people they need to get a HRM.0 -
christinev297 wrote: »Yeah it's all just bullsh*t. You can't trust anything these expensive gadgets say...
Outside of a lab you can't trust any one method of calorie estimating. Every method, from the exercise tables to fancy gadgets have their strengths and their limitations. Understanding how they work will give help figure out where to start. Then following a method and tracking over a period of time will tell you how accurate it is.
0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »My Polar HRM said I burned 415 calories for my 5k walk this morning.
You can't use an HRM for activity like that and expect accurate numbers. The only way to get that burn on that distance is to weigh 450 pounds. Since you're around 200 pounds, that's a 100%+ over-estimate!
There really needs to be a sticky for HRMs....
Why not? Walking fast gets your heart rate up. I mean, I'm confused... can't use HRMs for intervals, can't use HRMs for lifting, can't use HRMs for steady cardio... then why bother with HRMs at all?
IMO most people shouldn't be messing with HRMs at all. Heart rate and calorie burn don't correlate well except under very specific conditions. This has been covered at length on MFP, many many time.
Believing in HRM burn numbers is no different than believing in fad diets.450 calories for 3.5 miles doesn't seem that crazy for a 200 pounds person, if she's walking fast...
It's about double the real burn. Whether that's "crazy" or not depends on how someone views a 2x estimate.especially if there are hills etc.
Hills add about 1 calorie per 1kg (2.2 pounds) of body weight, per 1 metre of elevation change (going up only, no double counting). So if your walk has a 50m climb, and you weight 220 pounds, you can add another 50 calories.
0 -
jenniferinfl wrote: »My Polar HRM said I burned 415 calories for my 5k walk this morning.
You can't use an HRM for activity like that and expect accurate numbers. The only way to get that burn on that distance is to weigh 450 pounds. Since you're around 200 pounds, that's a 100%+ over-estimate!
There really needs to be a sticky for HRMs....
Why not? Walking fast gets your heart rate up. I mean, I'm confused... can't use HRMs for intervals, can't use HRMs for lifting, can't use HRMs for steady cardio... then why bother with HRMs at all?
450 calories for 3.5 miles doesn't seem that crazy for a 200 pounds person, if she's walking fast, especially if there are hills etc.
I use my HRM to track heart beats to include how fast my heart rate lowers after periods of increased exertion such as running or cycling up a hill. That data is a constant across every app I send the file to. Calorie estimations for the same data file can vary by over 700 calories on my 30ish mile rides.
3.5 miles * 200 lbs * .3 = 210 calories ... a rough net expenditure based on a study reported in Runner's World.
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »3.5 miles * 200 lbs * .3 = 210 calories ... a rough net expenditure based on a study reported in Runner's World.
Also consistent with MET - a 3mph-ish walk on level ground has a net MET of 2.5, so ~220-ish.
All in the same ball park located a long way from 400+0 -
Here is how I burnt mine today.
Today's ride,
Www.Bikecalculator.com
Avg speed 14.4
Time 150 minutes
Distance 36 miles
Assent 3500 ft
Grade 1 % ( distance/total assent )
Rider weight ready to ride 210 lbs
Bike weight 20 lbs
Other stats, hoods, clinchers, 0 wind factored
fwiw, I use a garmin cycle computer and strava to collect the data.0 -
If I get between 10-12k steps a day my Fitbit tells me I burned about 350 extra calories which seems about right for my 200 lb body (I don't log my walking as separate exercise). My hour of swimming laps logs in at 550 calories at the slowest type (leisurely swimming) and I get about 250 for my 40 minutes of water aerobics (I only count the first cardio part. The strength and stretching I don't count). I assume the MFP logging for the two water workouts is high so I only eat back about 25% of those calories. I do eat back most of my walking calories.
If I am going to be off, I would rather be off by underestimating my burn. It is working for me. I have MFP targets set to lose 1 lb. a week and I am actually averaging about 1.4 which is in my sweet spot.0 -
Running. Burns the MOSt calories for me. It does suck that I run with my friend and she burns more than me every time because my weight is lower... you burn less and less as you lose weight.0
-
I'm pretty sure I burned well over 1k calories doing the Spartan Super this past weekend lol0
-
I can easily burn over 1500 calories. If you don't think it is possible to burn that much, then you don't know exactly how it works. Of course it will never be exact, it is almost impossible to find the exact number.
But I am currently 225, and for a 3 hour hike, using MET with a 6 intensifier puts me at over 1800 calories burned.0 -
wow guys such good responses. thanks! feel more confident now with my workouts. not losing weight and keeping to my cals and working out i thought there was something wrong but maybe its just time i need.0
-
RodHudson1229 wrote: »is a heart rate monitor being used in the calculation?
This is frequently the reason that many people hugely overestimate their calorie expenditure.
0 -
-
3dogsrunning wrote: »jenniferinfl wrote: »My Polar HRM said I burned 415 calories for my 5k walk this morning.
You can't use an HRM for activity like that and expect accurate numbers. The only way to get that burn on that distance is to weigh 450 pounds. Since you're around 200 pounds, that's a 100%+ over-estimate!
There really needs to be a sticky for HRMs....
Why not? Walking fast gets your heart rate up. I mean, I'm confused... can't use HRMs for intervals, can't use HRMs for lifting, can't use HRMs for steady cardio... then why bother with HRMs at all?
450 calories for 3.5 miles doesn't seem that crazy for a 200 pounds person, if she's walking fast, especially if there are hills etc.
The algorithms are based on steady state moderate intensity cardio. I can't remember the exact definitions but I do not believe walking would fall under that.
But to your other point - why bother using them at all - for heart rate training. Hrms were meant for use as that. They are not calorie counters. They can give estimates but their degree of accuracy will strongly depend on how they are used.
This is why it bothers me so much when people tell new people they need to get a HRM.
One wonders what delicate flower sees this as abusive enough to report it.-1 -
GalactusEmpire wrote: »I can easily burn over 1500 calories. If you don't think it is possible to burn that much, then you don't know exactly how it works.
So for me, that's about 2 hours of reasonable paced running, about 13-14 miles worth.
Hardly easily.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions