How many calories does 1 hour of walking burn for a 135 lb female?
Replies
-
Try Nike+Running. It calculates via gps and your pace. Also tracks if you go up hill.0
-
So we established further up that hr monitors and most tracking devices or sports apps grossly overestimate calorie burn. Yet people still take those numbers for face value. You don't even know if the numbers displayed are gross or net calories. If they are gross, which I'm pretty certain they are than you're basically double dipping to start with as gross includes your BMR.0
-
@SinomenJen
Using HR is only a proxy for oxygen uptake it's not a measure of energy. It's making an assumption based on lab tests that a certain exercise HR equates with a approximate and average amount of calories burned by a sample of age/weight/gender.
Walking is going to have enormous variance in HR between individuals. Walking briskly I'm probably only at about 80bpm, someone less fit but same weight could well be far, far higher but let's assume 100bpm.
Same weight, same distance moved our actual energy expenditure (calories) would be almost identical but the less fit person using HRM numbers would get 25% higher apparent burns than me.
Remember than feelings of working hard are irrelevant when trying to estimate energy!
It's why using physics mass x distance x efficiency ratio (efficiency ratio doesn't vary much from person to person for walking) is more accurate than using a device designed to be accurate for HR (only) and with an added feature of giving "reasonable" calorie estimates under a limited set of circumstances.2 -
deleted0
-
Before I got my vivosmartHR, I had found a site that you could estimate calorie burn by using your heartrate. http://www.calories-calculator.net/Calories_Burned_By_Heart_Rate.html
You enter your age, weight, HR and minutes of exercise. I guess if you don't have a heart rate monitor, you could take your pulse a few times for 6 seconds and add a zero to the end, or for more accuracy, take your pulse for 15 seconds and multiply by 4. Then just average it out to get an estimate.
This is one of the main reasons I got my vivosmartHR though....I LOVE being able to get a more accurate idea of how many calories I'm burning during all kinds of exercise.0 -
Before I got my vivosmartHR, I had found a site that you could estimate calorie burn by using your heartrate. http://www.calories-calculator.net/Calories_Burned_By_Heart_Rate.html
You enter your age, weight, HR and minutes of exercise. I guess if you don't have a heart rate monitor, you could take your pulse a few times for 6 seconds and add a zero to the end, or for more accuracy, take your pulse for 15 seconds and multiply by 4. Then just average it out to get an estimate.
This is one of the main reasons I got my vivosmartHR though....I LOVE being able to get a more accurate idea of how many calories I'm burning during all kinds of exercise.
80 minutes of slow running
Calorie Burned(kCal): 1436.207
No way! As explained above HR is not part of the equation for estimating calorie burn.
0 -
I'm currently 5'7 and 134lbs. Walking at a 12min/mile pace for 1 hour burns about 380 calories according to my Apple Watch.
What? I know you are quite a bit taller than me, but you can WALK a 12 min/mile? Are you sure? Have you verified distances with your car or on mapmywalk.com? I just can't comprehend.0 -
For me, I'd give it tops 100 cals.0
-
blues4miles wrote: »I'm currently 5'7 and 134lbs. Walking at a 12min/mile pace for 1 hour burns about 380 calories according to my Apple Watch.
What? I know you are quite a bit taller than me, but you can WALK a 12 min/mile? Are you sure? Have you verified distances with your car or on mapmywalk.com? I just can't comprehend.
I have legit powerwalked a ten minute mile and I'm 5'9" and a slow runner. Maybe leg length is a big factor? I am sure I could not maintain that pace for an hour though.
All of the calorie in and out calculating, it's estimates at best - you can't really micromanage diet and exercise, you have to adjust as you go. If your weight goes up, eat less or work out more, if it's going down keep doing what you are doing (or eat more, if you are trying to maintain your body mass.)0 -
Heart rate monitor is not a good choice for estimating walking calories, your HR is probably out of the range where it can have reasonable accuracy.
Simplest way (not necessarily most accurate) is use a phone app such as Runkeeper or one of the many other GPS based apps.
Once you know your distance you can verify the numbers with this formula:
Net Walking calories Spent = (Body weight in pounds) x (0.30) x (Distance in miles)
So if you walked 3 miles it would be 121.5 cals
Sounds like good advice. I would still say get a chest strap HR monitor. It has ekg accuracy, you may just need to work up a light sweat in order for it to get an accurate reading. Many will also sync to the treadmills at the gym as soon as your in range (standing on the treadmill).0 -
scorpio516 wrote: »oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
Speed = distance / time
Easy way: some kind of stop watch and Google maps.
But speed doesn't matter. Weight and distance do.
Speed does matter. It takes more to RUN a mile than to walk a mile (3.5 METS for walking vs 10 for running).
No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.0 -
Thanks for all of the awesome responses every one!!!
I'll check out mapometer and use some of the other websites you all mentioned. I asked my husband the other day if I could use our bicycles computer to track my speed and he asked me if I had a wheel to put the sensor on 
and then he just died laughing. I wish there really was something that could accurately track how fast you're going when you walk. 0 -
oneallmama wrote: »I'm scouring the internet trying to find a good answer... Some sites say 450, and some say 130. I have no idea. Has anyone tracked this on a heart rate monitor? Thanks in advance!
240 exactly.
/end thread1 -
oneallmama wrote: »I wish there really was something that could accurately track how fast you're going when you walk.
Sorry if I missed something and am stating the obvious but Strava or MapMyFitness apps on your phone (plus a tonne more) will track your speed if you have your phone with you whilst walking/running and you have signal? Link the accounts to MFP and it'll input your calorie burn to your diary automatically.0 -
scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
Speed = distance / time
Easy way: some kind of stop watch and Google maps.
But speed doesn't matter. Weight and distance do.
Speed does matter. It takes more to RUN a mile than to walk a mile (3.5 METS for walking vs 10 for running).
No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.
False.
Walking 15min mile (4mph)= 4.9 METS
Walking 20min mile (3mph)= 3.3 METS0 -
scorpio516 wrote: »No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.
MET does increase as pace increases for both walking and running, however for walking the effect is negligible until moving above walking at 5mph, then there is a step change in impact, which is down to mechanical efficiency.
There is a significantly higher MET for running cf walking, and similarly the value increases as pace increases, but the effect isn't all that significant.
0 -
Depending on speed, averages to about 150 calories net and 200 gross per hour for a 3 mph walk.
http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html
I love this calculator because it has the option to calculate net calories, calories burned by exercise without the calories you would have burned by doing nothing, in addition to incline.0 -
I use the Runtastic app and love it. It tells me how fast I'm walking.oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
0 -
oneallmama wrote: »I'm scouring the internet trying to find a good answer... Some sites say 450, and some say 130. I have no idea. Has anyone tracked this on a heart rate monitor? Thanks in advance!
0 -
I use an app called MapMyWalk. You hit start and it uses a gps system to record how far and how fast you walked. It also syncs with MFP and automatically puts in your calories burned.0
-
oneallmama wrote: »I'm scouring the internet trying to find a good answer... Some sites say 450, and some say 130. I have no idea. Has anyone tracked this on a heart rate monitor? Thanks in advance!
The average is 100 calories per mile according to my nutritionist0 -
scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
Speed = distance / time
Easy way: some kind of stop watch and Google maps.
But speed doesn't matter. Weight and distance do.
Speed does matter. It takes more to RUN a mile than to walk a mile (3.5 METS for walking vs 10 for running).
No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.
False.
Walking 15min mile (4mph)= 4.9 METS
Walking 20min mile (3mph)= 3.3 METS
Because MET has time in the denominator, pace doesn't matter. What you posted is a rounding error from being the same per mile, proving my point.
Want further proof? Use the calculator posted in other attempts to refute. Set the walking speed to X and the time to Y. Now set the walking speed to 2X and the time to 0.5Y. The total calories expended are within rounding errors. Also note that the calculator isn't accurate above 4.9 mph, so pick your speed appropriately.
1 -
scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
Speed = distance / time
Easy way: some kind of stop watch and Google maps.
But speed doesn't matter. Weight and distance do.
Speed does matter. It takes more to RUN a mile than to walk a mile (3.5 METS for walking vs 10 for running).
No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.
False.
Walking 15min mile (4mph)= 4.9 METS
Walking 20min mile (3mph)= 3.3 METS
Because MET has time in the denominator, pace doesn't matter. What you posted is a rounding error from being the same per mile, proving my point.
Want further proof? Use the calculator posted in other attempts to refute. Set the walking speed to X and the time to Y. Now set the walking speed to 2X and the time to 0.5Y. The total calories expended are within rounding errors. Also note that the calculator isn't accurate above 4.9 mph, so pick your speed appropriately.
The difference is not very significant, like under 20 calories in most cases, but it's there.0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
Speed = distance / time
Easy way: some kind of stop watch and Google maps.
But speed doesn't matter. Weight and distance do.
Speed does matter. It takes more to RUN a mile than to walk a mile (3.5 METS for walking vs 10 for running).
No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.
False.
Walking 15min mile (4mph)= 4.9 METS
Walking 20min mile (3mph)= 3.3 METS
Because MET has time in the denominator, pace doesn't matter. What you posted is a rounding error from being the same per mile, proving my point.
Want further proof? Use the calculator posted in other attempts to refute. Set the walking speed to X and the time to Y. Now set the walking speed to 2X and the time to 0.5Y. The total calories expended are within rounding errors. Also note that the calculator isn't accurate above 4.9 mph, so pick your speed appropriately.
The difference is not very significant, like under 20 calories in most cases, but it's there.
@amusedmonkey
What are those numbers based on? I guess the small difference for energy expenditure for running is really just rounding error? Would love to run the same for my weight (57kg)0 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »scorpio516 wrote: »oneallmama wrote: »I guess my next question would be how to find out how fast i'm walking lol...
Speed = distance / time
Easy way: some kind of stop watch and Google maps.
But speed doesn't matter. Weight and distance do.
Speed does matter. It takes more to RUN a mile than to walk a mile (3.5 METS for walking vs 10 for running).
No, speed does not matter. If you are running, you aren't walking...
But walking an 8 min mile burns the same as walking a 20 minute mile.
Most people can't walk an 8 min mile though.
False.
Walking 15min mile (4mph)= 4.9 METS
Walking 20min mile (3mph)= 3.3 METS
Because MET has time in the denominator, pace doesn't matter. What you posted is a rounding error from being the same per mile, proving my point.
Want further proof? Use the calculator posted in other attempts to refute. Set the walking speed to X and the time to Y. Now set the walking speed to 2X and the time to 0.5Y. The total calories expended are within rounding errors. Also note that the calculator isn't accurate above 4.9 mph, so pick your speed appropriately.
The difference is not very significant, like under 20 calories in most cases, but it's there.
@amusedmonkey
What are those numbers based on? I guess the small difference for energy expenditure for running is really just rounding error? Would love to run the same for my weight (57kg)
The values are based on regression formulas adapted by The American College of Sports Medicine in their handbook ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription. I don't have the handbook so I can't tell you for sure if there was any rounding. I doubt it's just a rounding error though, else you would have seen jumps up and down in efficiency instead of a slow but steady decline. It looks to be following a curve with a consistent function. That 14 calorie difference between the smallest and the largest running value is just too large to be considered a rounding error.0 -
Ok, thanks a lot. There's not enough data there to adjust for my own weight then. Oh well.. I'm fine with estimates, even though I'm planning a long distance walk with about 40km daily.0
-
-
sarabushby wrote: »There's a website called mapometer which you can use to measure out a route for walking / jogging. That'd give you your distance and you already know your time.
http://gb.mapometer.com
Thanks for this recommendation! I just put my walking route on there and it knows that there's hills and everything!!!0 -
Here are a couple more sites that you may find useful
http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html
I find this gives me an accurate estimate.
http://www.calculator.net/pace-calculator.html?ctype=pace&ctime=01:30:00&cdistance=10&cdistanceunit=Kilometers&cpace=00:08:10&cpaceunit=tpm&printit=0&x=33&y=16
This is a good one for figuring out pace, mph, and kmph.
At 5'1 my race walking pace is close to 4.2 for a 10km, slightly higher for a 5 km.
I weigh 100 and my burn is about 185 cals per hr.
Cheers, h.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions