Weights and fit bit?

New_determination

i have a couple friends on mpf that have huge burns for their weight training. I use my fit bit for everything and am getting only 100-120 cal burns for 30-45 mins of weights. I have read that the fitbit is accurate for only consistent workouts like running/cardio. Just curious if this is true? Still going to do weights cuz I love what it's doing to my body but curious if I'm burning more or what other ppl have experienced.

kerbeya1

If you have one with a heart rate monitor it will track calorie burn better than just the pedometer. I had one with out a heart rate monitor and it basically was worthless to me

malibu927

kerbeya1 wrote: »

If you have one with a heart rate monitor it will track calorie burn better than just the pedometer. I had one with out a heart rate monitor and it basically was worthless to me

Outside of the Charge HR/Surge, Fitbits are only meant to measure step-based activity (walking and running). Anything else will need logged to account for calories burned. And the heart rate feature doesn't work quite as well for lifting, only steady-state cardio.

SueInAz

Heart rate monitors are worthless for weight lifting. They are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (thinking running at 5 MPH for 3 miles or keeping a steady pace on an elliptical machine). Your friends are kidding themselves thinking they are really getting huge burns from weight lifting. I'd actually suggest giving yourself just a couple of calories, if any, for your weight sessions.

Lifting weights is awesome because it helps you to maintain muscle you would otherwise lose while you're losing "weight". You'll lose mostly fat if you're doing it right. That's the real benefit, not calorie burns.

revolucia78

SueInAz wrote: »

Heart rate monitors are worthless for weight lifting. They are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (thinking running at 5 MPH for 3 miles or keeping a steady pace on an elliptical machine). Your friends are kidding themselves thinking they are really getting huge burns from weight lifting. I'd actually suggest giving yourself just a couple of calories, if any, for your weight sessions.

Lifting weights is awesome because it helps you to maintain muscle you would otherwise lose while you're losing "weight". You'll lose mostly fat if you're doing it right. That's the real benefit, not calorie burns.

Agreed - it could be that they are using a HRM that is automatically putting in that information. For example, I have a Polar and it automatically syncs to MFP but I only take into consideration the calories I burn from cardio. The problem with weight lifting is that your heart rate goes up which tricks your HRM into believing that you are exerting yourself when in fact you aren't (not to the same capacity, anyways). The only reason why I continue to use the HRM for weight lifting is so that I can track my workouts in my Polar app to see which days I strength trained.

DaddieCat

I use a HRM during most exercise sessions, but I don't use it to track calories, just my peak heart rate. I then try to go back and readjust any calories given to me to 1, just so there is a log, but I know for a fact that I'm not burning 1200+ calories in my 90 minutes of lifting. That's just not possible.

kuroshii

There's a weight/resistance activity you can log manually in the fitbit app and it will override the sensor-estimate, but I don't know what fitbit estimates for calorie burn. My resistance training is in the middle of interval/circuit, so my heart rate is staying up throughout. I just have the Zip, though, so noting heart rate is more for me (sustained cardio for heart health).

jemhh

Are your friends using Fitbits to come up with their calorie count, the MFP strength training entry, or something else?

It's possible that they just eat more on their strength training days so they log the number of extra calories they eat and it doesn't directly correlate with how many they burn that day.

pinggolfer96

SueInAz wrote: »

Heart rate monitors are worthless for weight lifting. They are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (thinking running at 5 MPH for 3 miles or keeping a steady pace on an elliptical machine). Your friends are kidding themselves thinking they are really getting huge burns from weight lifting. I'd actually suggest giving yourself just a couple of calories, if any, for your weight sessions.

Lifting weights is awesome because it helps you to maintain muscle you would otherwise lose while you're losing "weight". You'll lose mostly fat if you're doing it right. That's the real benefit, not calorie burns.

You gain a metabolic advantage though with weight lifting. Increase in EPOC and the fact that the more muscle you have, the more calories you burn at rest. Your lose fat, but not calories statement does not make sense. Srength training is awesome for someone trying to lose weight, cardio is not needed. You can manipulate your diet and strength train to lose just as much fat as you would running an hour a day trying to burn an extra 500 cals, when the diet can just be altered. Fat loss is determined by an energy (calories) intake and and expenditure. The problem is too many people focus and stress on burning calories while strength training when trying to lose weight and not thinking about actually getting stronger and obtaining the physical benefits of doing so/:

SueInAz

pinggolfer96 wrote: »

SueInAz wrote: »

Heart rate monitors are worthless for weight lifting. They are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (thinking running at 5 MPH for 3 miles or keeping a steady pace on an elliptical machine). Your friends are kidding themselves thinking they are really getting huge burns from weight lifting. I'd actually suggest giving yourself just a couple of calories, if any, for your weight sessions.

Lifting weights is awesome because it helps you to maintain muscle you would otherwise lose while you're losing "weight". You'll lose mostly fat if you're doing it right. That's the real benefit, not calorie burns.

You gain a metabolic advantage though with weight lifting. Increase in EPOC and the fact that the more muscle you have, the more calories you burn at rest. Your lose fat, but not calories statement does not make sense. Srength training is awesome for someone trying to lose weight, cardio is not needed. You can manipulate your diet and strength train to lose just as much fat as you would running an hour a day trying to burn an extra 500 cals, when the diet can just be altered. Fat loss is determined by an energy (calories) intake and and expenditure. The problem is too many people focus and stress on burning calories while strength training when trying to lose weight and not thinking about actually getting stronger and obtaining the physical benefits of doing so/:

I don't think we're saying very different things and I strongly agree that strength training is better than cardio for long term health benefits.

The point is, the OP is looking for huge calorie burns while doing weight lifting because her friends are posting them. That's not how it works nor should it be the goal of weight lifting. Yes, the benefits later are more than worth it but the mentality that "I just lifted for 60 minutes and my HRM says I burned 500 calories so I can eat that many more today" is going to result in weight gain, not loss. Since it's nearly impossible to quantify the number of calories burned in a weight lifting session it's better to ignore the calorie burn entirely rather than eat any extra that you think you "earned."

Weight lifting while eating at a caloric deficit results in more maintained muscle while losing weight and for most people looking to lose weight now, that's the goal. Getting stronger is a nice side benefit but greater strength doesn't necessarily equal more muscle. Sure I can now lift more than I could a year ago but the ability to lift more is not necessary for my daily life; maintaining my lean muscle mass into my 50s and beyond is.

DawnEmbers

I don't have my fit bit connected to any sites, map or any other one. Don't want adjustments based on my steps as I have it covered in my general activity level. I find it useful to keep an eye on my general activity and the occasional many step day (got 30,000 in one day finally between 6 mile jog, work and a couple errands). For lifting I just put 30 minutes even though I spend just over an hour. It gives a little boost for the range I want calorie wise anyways (contemplating just going tree minus certain percent in near future) and still manage my deficit. I give the deficit the most credit for weight loss but the body shape people comment on is thanks in large part to lifting.

revolucia78

pinggolfer96 wrote: »

SueInAz wrote: »

Heart rate monitors are worthless for weight lifting. They are only remotely accurate for steady state cardio (thinking running at 5 MPH for 3 miles or keeping a steady pace on an elliptical machine). Your friends are kidding themselves thinking they are really getting huge burns from weight lifting. I'd actually suggest giving yourself just a couple of calories, if any, for your weight sessions.

Lifting weights is awesome because it helps you to maintain muscle you would otherwise lose while you're losing "weight". You'll lose mostly fat if you're doing it right. That's the real benefit, not calorie burns.

You gain a metabolic advantage though with weight lifting. Increase in EPOC and the fact that the more muscle you have, the more calories you burn at rest. Your lose fat, but not calories statement does not make sense. Srength training is awesome for someone trying to lose weight, cardio is not needed. You can manipulate your diet and strength train to lose just as much fat as you would running an hour a day trying to burn an extra 500 cals, when the diet can just be altered. Fat loss is determined by an energy (calories) intake and and expenditure. The problem is too many people focus and stress on burning calories while strength training when trying to lose weight and not thinking about actually getting stronger and obtaining the physical benefits of doing so/:

I agree with Sue - nobody here is arguing the benefits of strength training (as we both said that we still do strength training) but the OP was wondering where the discrepancy in measured burn lies. Even though calories are burned and you gain a metabolic advantage, research is still trying to determine an accurate energy expenditure with weight training so as of now I think it's safe to assume that the HRM is inaccurate and shouldn't be relied upon in terms of calories burned during strength training.

kuroshii

SueInAz wrote: »

I don't think we're saying very different things and I strongly agree that strength training is better than cardio for long term health benefits.

Erm. Well. I wouldn't say either is *better* for long term health. Both are recommended for overall health. In my specific case, sustained cardio is particularly important because of the heart health benefits I need thanks to my family history.

But I agree with the consensus here that resistance training isn't done to burn calories directly. It's done to build muscle, which in the long term helps your metabolism. Oh, and as you get older continued resistance training helps with things like balance and posture to keep you from falling and getting fractures.