Do any of you find that you seem to burn more calories than "typical"?
Verity1111
Posts: 3,309 Member
I have been following my Fitbit for 3 months and it seems to be working for me. It claims I burn 500cal per hr walking 3.0mph and I have been eating back my calories a lot of times and losing quicker than usual. I lost 6lbs in 10 days and all I did was walk about 8-10 miles one day, 4 miles another, 6 another. I weigh my food. Besides that, the most I walked was about 2 miles per day extra and not every day. My average was 8000steps per day. I checked the step counter and it works fine. I weight 188lbs and I'm 5'4". Is it because I'm so out of shape? I didn't walk for 5 months last year due to injury. Maybe that's why? I always did lose weight fast, but I am always told it's wrong even though it works for me. Does anyone else here seem to burn according to their Fitbit/more than people claim? I also used to log each 12min walk to the store here as 110calories and it always worked out when I ate back the calories no matter how many times I walked it (so if I logged 440 and ate 440 I lost the amount of weight expected or more). But some people tell me I cant burn over 300per hr. Is it because I wear a heavy backpack while I walk sometimes or carry groceries? I'm just trying to understand what might make the difference or if some people just burn differently than expected.
0
Replies
-
The burn estimates are just that...estimates. Most people will burn slightly less than predicted and others will burn more.5
-
Most of what you hear from other people about calorie burns is wrong. Your calorie burn with exertion is determined by the aerobic intensity of your activity and your body weight. Two people the same weight doing the exact same workload will burn essentially the same number of calories. The issue is not that you are "burning more than is typical". It is that what you are being told is "typical" likely inaccurate.11
-
The burn estimates are just that...estimates. Most people will burn slightly less than predicted and others will burn more.
I know that to *some* degree. I wouldn't even ask this but some people on here seem so adamant that it's not possible I burn 500 calories per hr walking because I'm not large enough, but the results seem to say otherwise so I was wondering if it was me or them. lol. But thanks for the input!0 -
Most of what you hear from other people about calorie burns is wrong. Your calorie burn with exertion is determined by the aerobic intensity of your activity and your body weight. Two people the same weight doing the exact same workload will burn essentially the same number of calories. The issue is not that you are "burning more than is typical". It is that what you are being told is "typical" likely inaccurate.
That's what I figured but people kept arguing I'd need to be over 300lbs to burn 500 calories per hr on a walk. It has worked for me though so I was wondering if anyone else burns more than I was told. I was told 200-300 maximum and that's way off for me based on what I'm eating how much I'm walking etc and I have no other activity.0 -
I burn that amount for an hour of walking.1
-
I have a FitBit but I don't typically look at hour by hour or exercise by exercise adjustments. What is your average step count and total calories burned from FitBit? What is your calorie goal set to, and what is the full day adjustment on MFP?2
-
My fitbit underestimates my daily expenditure by 200-300 calories. When I was using an MFP-generated calorie goal I always ate back my exercise calories and lost weight fine. You just have to do what works for you.3
-
As long as you are eating a reasonable number of calories to lose weight, it doesn't really matter what burns you're getting. It's just a number4
-
Do the math over a month of history. If your calculated calorie deficit closely matches your measured weight loss, your logging is proved accurate.3
-
I find my Garmin is just about right. I'm lost a bit more than plan by not eating all my exercise calories back, so I decided to trust it and eat pretty much all of them back.3
-
I find, if I track accurately and am very compliant with my plan, that I drop weight much faster than predicted. I also seem to maintain on several hundred kcal more than standard formulae suggest. I imagine that it's due to some combination of these factors:
- I have a somewhat higher NEAT than many others - I don't sit still very well
- My %BF is lower than I think
- I underestimate my intentional exercise1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »I have a FitBit but I don't typically look at hour by hour or exercise by exercise adjustments. What is your average step count and total calories burned from FitBit? What is your calorie goal set to, and what is the full day adjustment on MFP?
It varies. Usually it says I burn 2500 with barely any steps (up to 6000) and 3000 about for higher amounts and when I did 26000 steps it said I burned 4000 calories.
Thanks everyone!
I was just wondering because I kept being told it wasn't possible but it's been working fine so I found that odd. I was wondering if it was me being weird or them being wrong! 0 -
I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk6 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
Why would you laugh? and 5k in 45 minutes is very quick. I can only make 2miles in that time and I would burn probably 200 calories. I see nothing wrong with that burn estimate.0 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
At least I burn that much. My FitBit is right for me. Does your over or underestimate for you?0 -
Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
Why would you laugh? and 5k in 45 minutes is very quick. I can only make 2miles in that time and I would burn probably 200 calories. I see nothing wrong with that burn estimate.
If i ate back 690 calories i would be gaining weight
300 cals i could see being right
Fitbit regularly insists ive burnt 3000 calories. Heck on thurday i took 813 steps the entire day and it told me i had burnt a smidge over 23001 -
Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
At least I burn that much. My FitBit is right for me. Does your over or underestimate for you?
I think it over estimates. My heart rate tends to be high when i exercise and since i use a charge HR it uses my heart rate to work out how hard im working
Mfp allocates me 1760 calories a day and i log my exercise and eat back 50 - 75% as i think mfp burns are inflated
Were all different though, your personal results will tell you how much you should eat1 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
Why would you laugh? and 5k in 45 minutes is very quick. I can only make 2miles in that time and I would burn probably 200 calories. I see nothing wrong with that burn estimate.
If i ate back 690 calories i would be gaining weight
300 cals i could see being right
Fitbit regularly insists ive burnt 3000 calories. Heck on thurday i took 813 steps the entire day and it told me i had burnt a smidge over 2300
if you have a charge HR the 3000 includes your BMR( what you burn by just being alive). it doesnt just show you calories burned from exercise,because there is no way I would burn 24-2500 calories a day in just exercise.even when I was heavier1 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
Why would you laugh? and 5k in 45 minutes is very quick. I can only make 2miles in that time and I would burn probably 200 calories. I see nothing wrong with that burn estimate.
If i ate back 690 calories i would be gaining weight
300 cals i could see being right
Fitbit regularly insists ive burnt 3000 calories. Heck on thurday i took 813 steps the entire day and it told me i had burnt a smidge over 2300
if you have a charge HR the 3000 includes your BMR( what you burn by just being alive). it doesnt just show you calories burned from exercise,because there is no way I would burn 24-2500 calories a day in just exercise.even when I was heavier
Oh i know it contains my bmr. I still think it over estimates for me1 -
Verity1111 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I have a FitBit but I don't typically look at hour by hour or exercise by exercise adjustments. What is your average step count and total calories burned from FitBit? What is your calorie goal set to, and what is the full day adjustment on MFP?
It varies. Usually it says I burn 2500 with barely any steps (up to 6000) and 3000 about for higher amounts and when I did 26000 steps it said I burned 4000 calories.
Thanks everyone! I was just wondering because I kept being told it wasn't possible but it's been working fine so I found that odd. I was wondering if it was me being weird or them being wrong!
What's your current height and weight?
For what it's worth, I'm 5'2 and maintaining at 120. I average 15k steps/day and FitBit says my total calories burned is 2100-2300 (depending on day to day activity). I've always eaten back the calories and was able to lose and now maintain, so I believe it's accurate for me.
Calculators estimate my calorie burn to be below 2000, but I trust FitBit.1 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
Why would you laugh? and 5k in 45 minutes is very quick. I can only make 2miles in that time and I would burn probably 200 calories. I see nothing wrong with that burn estimate.
If i ate back 690 calories i would be gaining weight
300 cals i could see being right
Fitbit regularly insists ive burnt 3000 calories. Heck on thurday i took 813 steps the entire day and it told me i had burnt a smidge over 2300
if you have a charge HR the 3000 includes your BMR( what you burn by just being alive). it doesnt just show you calories burned from exercise,because there is no way I would burn 24-2500 calories a day in just exercise.even when I was heavier
Oh i know it contains my bmr. I still think it over estimates for me
its possible. for me I thought it was overestimating too. I burn the same when I put in a lower weight than I do with my current weight so that for me is accurate. I just dont lose anything,but then again having a metabolic disorder makes it hard to lose weight(its still CICO I know). Im having a tough time.I walk about 12-15000 steps a day on top of other things I do.1 -
My Garmin underestimates my burn so I don't pay any attention to it. Today I ran 4.7, walked 2.3 and it said I burned 1800 for the day - including my BMR I assume.
Following the MFP numbers works better for me, though I had to increase my base level because I was losing more weight than I wanted. I am 60, 5' 6" and currently weigh 123.4. For maintenance it gave me only 1470 calories. I increased that to 1600, eat all my exercise calories, sometimes go over, and have been within 1 pound for the past six weeks.
4 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
At least I burn that much. My FitBit is right for me. Does your over or underestimate for you?
I think it over estimates. My heart rate tends to be high when i exercise and since i use a charge HR it uses my heart rate to work out how hard im working
Mfp allocates me 1760 calories a day and i log my exercise and eat back 50 - 75% as i think mfp burns are inflated
Were all different though, your personal results will tell you how much you should eat
Thank you. I know but I really am interested in the differences person to person. I was going to study nutrition and kinesiology in college until I switched to pharmacy so I just tend to like comparing I guess to see how we all differ. My HR is super high too but I think in my case it might be accurate as far as oxygen consumption (which sometimes correlates with a higher heart rate). Thanks for sharing. 0 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »I took a 45 minute 5k hike earlier with my son on my back and fitbit says i burnt 690 calories
I laughed
Go home fitbit your drunk
Why would you laugh? and 5k in 45 minutes is very quick. I can only make 2miles in that time and I would burn probably 200 calories. I see nothing wrong with that burn estimate.
If i ate back 690 calories i would be gaining weight
300 cals i could see being right
Fitbit regularly insists ive burnt 3000 calories. Heck on thurday i took 813 steps the entire day and it told me i had burnt a smidge over 2300
if you have a charge HR the 3000 includes your BMR( what you burn by just being alive). it doesnt just show you calories burned from exercise,because there is no way I would burn 24-2500 calories a day in just exercise.even when I was heavier
It may be odd but I have. But I also had an ED and I didn't know at one point in HS I excessively exercised. I'd go to class, go to drama club (which sometimes they kept us from 3pm-10pm it was ridiculous) but if I didnt or if I got let out Id exercise and sometimes 6 hrs nonstop. xD1 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Verity1111 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I have a FitBit but I don't typically look at hour by hour or exercise by exercise adjustments. What is your average step count and total calories burned from FitBit? What is your calorie goal set to, and what is the full day adjustment on MFP?
It varies. Usually it says I burn 2500 with barely any steps (up to 6000) and 3000 about for higher amounts and when I did 26000 steps it said I burned 4000 calories.
Thanks everyone! I was just wondering because I kept being told it wasn't possible but it's been working fine so I found that odd. I was wondering if it was me being weird or them being wrong!
What's your current height and weight?
For what it's worth, I'm 5'2 and maintaining at 120. I average 15k steps/day and FitBit says my total calories burned is 2100-2300 (depending on day to day activity). I've always eaten back the calories and was able to lose and now maintain, so I believe it's accurate for me.
Calculators estimate my calorie burn to be below 2000, but I trust FitBit.
I'm 5'4" 188lbs. Im 27 years old. I trust it now since it seems to be working lol0 -
Outrageously exaggerated calorie burns are most likely due to using inappropriate devices or misunderstanding of what those devices are telling you.
Weight loss results don't actually verify the accuracy - they just confirm that whether by luck or judgement people have stumbled across the correct energy balance. Just as probable that errors on both side of the equation have cancelled each other out.
Which is fine as that's the goal, estimating CI & CO is just the tool to achieve that goal.
BTW - heart rate is a dreadful way of comparing calorie burns between people, there's far too much variation. e.g. I have a low exercise HR and produce 30% more power (therefore burning 30% more calories) at same HR as a same age colleague who has a high exercise HR.5 -
Outrageously exaggerated calorie burns are most likely due to using inappropriate devices or misunderstanding of what those devices are telling you.
Weight loss results don't actually verify the accuracy - they just confirm that whether by luck or judgement people have stumbled across the correct energy balance. Just as probable that errors on both side of the equation have cancelled each other out.
Which is fine as that's the goal, estimating CI & CO is just the tool to achieve that goal.
BTW - heart rate is a dreadful way of comparing calorie burns between people, there's far too much variation. e.g. I have a low exercise HR and produce 30% more power (therefore burning 30% more calories) at same HR as a same age colleague who has a high exercise HR.
To me that made no sense. CI-CO obviously is right if the results are the same. It's not luck or judgment. It is accuracy when I am following what it is telling me. How else would it end up the same results it is telling me I should have? No matter how you look at it that would make it accurate because it is not like I am logging 100 calories from exercise. I am logging as much as 700+ per day and eating them back. Also, HR can vary but with SOME people HR can indicate higher oxygen consumption. Again, I said I think that is accurate for *me* because my HR skyrockets and I tend to burn more than other people I know. I did not say that is the case for everyone. I lose weight very easily 3+lb per week when the estimate is that I'd lose half of that, without doing much exercise at all and eating back the calories even when I do. I had my thyroid and all of that checked etc so I assume some people just tend to burn more calories in general day to day activity and/or during exercise.0 -
Verity1111 wrote: »Outrageously exaggerated calorie burns are most likely due to using inappropriate devices or misunderstanding of what those devices are telling you.
Weight loss results don't actually verify the accuracy - they just confirm that whether by luck or judgement people have stumbled across the correct energy balance. Just as probable that errors on both side of the equation have cancelled each other out.
Which is fine as that's the goal, estimating CI & CO is just the tool to achieve that goal.
BTW - heart rate is a dreadful way of comparing calorie burns between people, there's far too much variation. e.g. I have a low exercise HR and produce 30% more power (therefore burning 30% more calories) at same HR as a same age colleague who has a high exercise HR.
To me that made no sense. CI-CO obviously is right if the results are the same. It's not luck or judgment. It is accuracy when I am following what it is telling me. How else would it end up the same results it is telling me I should have? No matter how you look at it that would make it accurate because it is not like I am logging 100 calories from exercise. I am logging as much as 700+ per day and eating them back. Also, HR can vary but with SOME people HR can indicate higher oxygen consumption. Again, I said I think that is accurate for *me* because my HR skyrockets and I tend to burn more than other people I know. I did not say that is the case for everyone. I lose weight very easily 3+lb per week when the estimate is that I'd lose half of that, without doing much exercise at all and eating back the calories even when I do. I had my thyroid and all of that checked etc so I assume some people just tend to burn more calories in general day to day activity and/or during exercise.
It makes perfect sense.
Your exercise calorie estimates are wildly off. And something else is wildly off on the other side of the equation to even things out. It's simple maths, nothing remotely complex.
And high HR is a very poor indication of oxygen uptake. It's more likely an indicator of low fitness levels or an inefficient heart.
Normal speed walking calorie estimates are primarily a function of mass and distance - very little difference person to person. If you had continued your Kinesiology studies you would understand that. That your HR is high is an irrelevance.
All the wishful thinking in the world doesn't trump physics.7 -
Verity1111 wrote: »Outrageously exaggerated calorie burns are most likely due to using inappropriate devices or misunderstanding of what those devices are telling you.
Weight loss results don't actually verify the accuracy - they just confirm that whether by luck or judgement people have stumbled across the correct energy balance. Just as probable that errors on both side of the equation have cancelled each other out.
Which is fine as that's the goal, estimating CI & CO is just the tool to achieve that goal.
BTW - heart rate is a dreadful way of comparing calorie burns between people, there's far too much variation. e.g. I have a low exercise HR and produce 30% more power (therefore burning 30% more calories) at same HR as a same age colleague who has a high exercise HR.
To me that made no sense. CI-CO obviously is right if the results are the same. It's not luck or judgment. It is accuracy when I am following what it is telling me. How else would it end up the same results it is telling me I should have? No matter how you look at it that would make it accurate because it is not like I am logging 100 calories from exercise. I am logging as much as 700+ per day and eating them back. Also, HR can vary but with SOME people HR can indicate higher oxygen consumption. Again, I said I think that is accurate for *me* because my HR skyrockets and I tend to burn more than other people I know. I did not say that is the case for everyone. I lose weight very easily 3+lb per week when the estimate is that I'd lose half of that, without doing much exercise at all and eating back the calories even when I do. I had my thyroid and all of that checked etc so I assume some people just tend to burn more calories in general day to day activity and/or during exercise.
What are your gross and net calories on an average day?0 -
If you're using more muscle, you'll burn more calories. So if you have more muscle, you'll be burning more than a less muscular person of your size with an equivalent heart rate change. If you get more fit (better cardiovascular function and more muscle), you'll burn more calories, even though a heart rate monitor won't show it. The article I linked to explains a lot of this.
http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article folder/caloricexp.htmlThe energy released from the breakdown of ATP fuels the contraction of skeletal muscle, thereby adding to the energy demands of the body and raising caloric expenditure. Research has shown that during exercise the increase in caloric expenditure is almost entirely due to the contraction of skeletal muscle; the balance is due to an increase in the energy demands of the heart and the muscles used during ventilation.
I'm not saying heart rate monitors are useless, but they are better for checking heart health than calorie burn. The article I linked to also points out that an equivalent heart rate rise for lower versus upper body cardio doesn't indicate equivalent calorie burn. You burn more calories when you use big muscles, which is why cycling is such a high MET, high calorie burner.
People often say their body is more efficient when it's more muscular and fit, but that's just how they feel. The chemistry doesn't change in regard to ATP breakdown. So, yeah, you may burn more calories than a "typical" person when you exercise, and your heart rate monitor probably won't tell you.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