Disagree

2»

Replies

  • Justygirl77
    Justygirl77 Posts: 385 Member
    isulo_kura wrote: »
    Justygirl77 wrote: »
    And your metabolism will be stoked for a long time, like 12 hours. If you do another walk (it doesn't have to be at that intensity, though...just moderate) later today, you will have a 24hour burn going! Good job!
    Err Just No
    "Err Just No"
    Just No what??

    "The participants managed to burn 420 calories during the workout. The afterburn effect was measured in a metabolic chamber for over 14 hours, which revealed that the participants burned an additional 190 calories. "
    http://www.livestrong.com/article/437493-how-many-calories-can-you-continue-to-burn-after-a-workout/
  • DogRiverDude
    DogRiverDude Posts: 433 Member
    suzieJones55 wrote: »
    im on a treadmill incline between 10 an 15% walking 3.9-4.3 mph for 70 min and I burned 875 calories!! So if u weigh 250 lbs u probably did burn that many

    I'd love to know what your heart rate was... like 300 BPM ;-). In all seriousness, you might want to monitor it!

    Are you still with us SuzieJones55???
  • angelexperiment
    angelexperiment Posts: 1,917 Member
    sherbear702 wrote: »
    suzieJones55 wrote: »
    im on a treadmill incline between 10 an 15% walking 3.9-4.3 mph for 70 min and I burned 875 calories!! So if u weigh 250 lbs u probably did burn that many

    10-15% incline, 4 mph for 70 minutes. How did you manage that and not die? That's a pretty intense workout.

    Lol for real! That is like jog pace!
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    3dogsrunning wrote: »
    sherbear702 wrote: »
    suzieJones55 wrote: »
    im on a treadmill incline between 10 an 15% walking 3.9-4.3 mph for 70 min and I burned 875 calories!! So if u weigh 250 lbs u probably did burn that many

    10-15% incline, 4 mph for 70 minutes. How did you manage that and not die? That's a pretty intense workout.

    I couldn't do it without holding on, which, unfortunately pretty much defeats the purpose of jacking up the incline.

    so right!
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    suzieJones55 wrote: »
    im on a treadmill incline between 10 an 15% walking 3.9-4.3 mph for 70 min and I burned 875 calories!! So if u weigh 250 lbs u probably did burn that many

    is that what your HRM said .. and it was not on interval training .. if so it's probably a fairly accurate reading

    I can walk at 3.7mph at a 10% incline, but my shins will burn at around 10 minutes ...

    instead I choose to do HIIT from 3.5m/ph to jogging for 90 seconds at 5.5m/ph for 10 mins at a 1% gradient - great cardio workout - I only log about 100 calories for it though - adjusting my HRM
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    If you're not holding on, you may actually be burning more than 1000 calories in 70 minutes at that speed and incline if you're 250 pounds, but damn that would be one hell of an intense workout. I only go a maximum of 2.7 mph at 15% and I'm spent after a while.
  • NoIdea101NoIdea
    NoIdea101NoIdea Posts: 659 Member
    Well, this is confusing first thing in the morning.

    I also disagree. I have no idea what I'm disagreeing with, but.....No. Go home, you're wrong.

    But, I would quite like to know whether that calorie burn (875) was taken from the machine, MFP or an HRM. And whilst I can see the point of the argument in relation to the thread about the 1000 calorie burn which I assume this is in relation to, I have a hard time believing that a 250lb person could do the whole 10%-15% incline at 3.9-4.3mph for 70 mins (not holding on). So whilst in theory it may be possible, I'm not sure if it would be possible in reality-but hey, I may yet be surprised!
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    NoIdea101NoIdea wrote: »
    Well, this is confusing first thing in the morning.

    I also disagree. I have no idea what I'm disagreeing with, but.....No. Go home, you're wrong.

    But, I would quite like to know whether that calorie burn (875) was taken from the machine, MFP or an HRM. And whilst I can see the point of the argument in relation to the thread about the 1000 calorie burn which I assume this is in relation to, I have a hard time believing that a 250lb person could do the whole 10%-15% incline at 3.9-4.3mph for 70 mins (not holding on). So whilst in theory it may be possible, I'm not sure if it would be possible in reality-but hey, I may yet be surprised!

    Could it be that she meant 3.9 km/h? If that's the case then it's possible, and you do burn about 800 something calories doing that at 250 pounds. Maybe her treadmill is in kilometers instead of miles but she hasn't noticed?
  • jenilla1
    jenilla1 Posts: 11,118 Member
    beaninpool_zpsd6d3afca.jpg
  • NoIdea101NoIdea
    NoIdea101NoIdea Posts: 659 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    NoIdea101NoIdea wrote: »
    Well, this is confusing first thing in the morning.

    I also disagree. I have no idea what I'm disagreeing with, but.....No. Go home, you're wrong.

    But, I would quite like to know whether that calorie burn (875) was taken from the machine, MFP or an HRM. And whilst I can see the point of the argument in relation to the thread about the 1000 calorie burn which I assume this is in relation to, I have a hard time believing that a 250lb person could do the whole 10%-15% incline at 3.9-4.3mph for 70 mins (not holding on). So whilst in theory it may be possible, I'm not sure if it would be possible in reality-but hey, I may yet be surprised!

    Could it be that she meant 3.9 km/h? If that's the case then it's possible, and you do burn about 800 something calories doing that at 250 pounds. Maybe her treadmill is in kilometers instead of miles but she hasn't noticed?

    That would make more sense!

Categories