Quickest ways to burn 500 calories?
Replies
-
rodsteph777 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »TavistockToad wrote: »Eat less. Takes no time at all.
Not eating burns calories?
No, but eating 500 calories less than you are now does the same work as burning it off -- and is much faster.
I can burn 500 calories in less than an hour. (I have a direct force power meter.)
That's fun, but it's also over and done with a lot faster than being hungry all day.
I don't know what sense of the word "faster" could possibly apply here?
How do u do that?
Cycling ... as I mentioned earlier.
Do you ride a bicycle?
What do you do for exercise?
Yes I have an elliptical and I burn 500 in 1.5 hrs . I was looking for more ideas.1 -
You could also climb 83 flights of 20 stairs. Up and down + landings.1
-
Jumping rope burns as many calories as running or possibly slightly more. Problem is it’s very difficult to do long enough to get that kind of burn, but if you could, you would burn 500 in about an hour I suppose.1
-
monkeefan1974 wrote: »Jumping rope burns as many calories as running or possibly slightly more. Problem is it’s very difficult to do long enough to get that kind of burn, but if you could, you would burn 500 in about an hour I suppose.
Yea good idea. I can do 3 sets of 20 minutes throught the day or two sets of 30 min jumprope2 -
rodsteph777 wrote: »monkeefan1974 wrote: »Jumping rope burns as many calories as running or possibly slightly more. Problem is it’s very difficult to do long enough to get that kind of burn, but if you could, you would burn 500 in about an hour I suppose.
Yea good idea. I can do 3 sets of 20 minutes throught the day or two sets of 30 min jumprope
That’s better than I can do, I’ll stick to running a 10K a few times a week over 5 minutes of jumping rope any day! It’s about finding what works for you. Good luck!3 -
Try for 10000 steps. That should get you 500cals.
Or reduce cals by 250 and walk for an hour.
What would work best for you... More food or more movement?1 -
Fastest way, that i can somewhat keep track of, is using the stair or step master. You burn calories like crazy on that.0
-
rodsteph777 wrote: »...Plus eating less but not exercising leaves ur skin saggy and loose. I prefer to exercise and tone as fitness and shape are my goals not just weight...
You’ll want to start strength training too
1 -
Christine_72 wrote: »My way isn't quick as it takes me all day because i do 15-30 minute blocks at a time scattered all through out the day. But walking, plain and simple.
Now i take this number with a grain of salt, but it's 3:30pm here right now, and so far I've done 14,100 steps (9.7kms) and I've had an extra 563 calories imported into mfp from Fitbit. I'm set at sedentary which is why the calorie adjustment is so high.
You should use the apps that earn money for steps with all the steps you do lol1 -
-
collectingblues wrote: »
As I said... "I'll comment very generally..."
I routinely burn 500+ in an hour. So what's your point? Or did you just want to correct someone because that's what we do on MFP?3 -
collectingblues wrote: »
As I said... "I'll comment very generally..."
I routinely burn 500+ in an hour. So what's your point? Or did you just want to correct someone because that's what we do on MFP?
And I could ask the same question of you.
3 -
rodsteph777 wrote: »Hey I figured om order to get fitter and remain in calories i have to burn 500 cal a day. What are the quickest ways to do this
Run 5 miles, I burn around 100 Calories a mile depending on terrain, incline etc1 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »
Bwhahahahahahah your awesome1 -
purplebobkat wrote: »Try for 10000 steps. That should get you 500cals.
Or reduce cals by 250 and walk for an hour.
What would work best for you... More food or more movement?
This always shocks me. My Apple Watch gives me about 93 calories for 10,000 steps.
My cardio calorie burner is swimming. But while an hour swim will burn prob 500 cals for most adults (140 lb +) not everyone can or likes to swim.0 -
collectingblues wrote: »
I'm very petite too, 5'1", and when maintaining around 105 lbs, I can easily burn 500+ calories easily running 7-7.5 miles in 1 hour. So really, depending on your fitness level/exercise output.2 -
collectingblues wrote: »
I'm very petite too, 5'1", and when maintaining around 105 lbs, I can easily burn 500+ calories easily running 7-7.5 miles in 1 hour. So really, depending on your fitness level/exercise output.
While factual, it's not necessarily helpful to tell someone starting off on a fitness journey that the easy thing to do is run 8 miles.8 -
stanmann571 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
I'm very petite too, 5'1", and when maintaining around 105 lbs, I can easily burn 500+ calories easily running 7-7.5 miles in 1 hour. So really, depending on your fitness level/exercise output.
While factual, it's not necessarily helpful to tell someone starting off on a fitness journey that the easy thing to do is run 8 miles.
Well we know that's your opinion anyway. When you make a thread asking for exercise suggestions I'll be sure not to suggest running. I didn't read anything about excluding running here as a suggestion though, and it's what I know, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
ETA: I said 7 - 7.5 miles/hour, not 8.5 -
stanmann571 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
I'm very petite too, 5'1", and when maintaining around 105 lbs, I can easily burn 500+ calories easily running 7-7.5 miles in 1 hour. So really, depending on your fitness level/exercise output.
While factual, it's not necessarily helpful to tell someone starting off on a fitness journey that the easy thing to do is run 8 miles.
Well we know that's your opinion anyway. When you make a thread asking for exercise suggestions I'll be sure not to suggest running. I didn't read anything about excluding running here as a suggestion though, and it's what I know, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
ETA: I said 7 - 7.5 miles/hour, not 8.
So it's your opinion that someone with no other fitness experience should just jump in and run 7 miles. Genius.6 -
Running.3
-
stanmann571 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
I'm very petite too, 5'1", and when maintaining around 105 lbs, I can easily burn 500+ calories easily running 7-7.5 miles in 1 hour. So really, depending on your fitness level/exercise output.
While factual, it's not necessarily helpful to tell someone starting off on a fitness journey that the easy thing to do is run 8 miles.
Well we know that's your opinion anyway. When you make a thread asking for exercise suggestions I'll be sure not to suggest running. I didn't read anything about excluding running here as a suggestion though, and it's what I know, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
ETA: I said 7 - 7.5 miles/hour, not 8.
So it's your opinion that someone with no other fitness experience should just jump in and run 7 miles. Genius.
dude. it's not that serious. why are you trying to get in a debate about this?3 -
stanmann571 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
I'm very petite too, 5'1", and when maintaining around 105 lbs, I can easily burn 500+ calories easily running 7-7.5 miles in 1 hour. So really, depending on your fitness level/exercise output.
While factual, it's not necessarily helpful to tell someone starting off on a fitness journey that the easy thing to do is run 8 miles.
Well we know that's your opinion anyway. When you make a thread asking for exercise suggestions I'll be sure not to suggest running. I didn't read anything about excluding running here as a suggestion though, and it's what I know, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
ETA: I said 7 - 7.5 miles/hour, not 8.
So it's your opinion that someone with no other fitness experience should just jump in and run 7 miles. Genius.
She didn't say "everybody should run 8 miles tomorrow." She said that calorie burns depend on fitness not on weight, and offered as evidence the fact that she easily ran enough miles to burn 500 calories in an hour, despite not weighing a lot.5 -
Not only that - but the OP says she spends a continuous 1.5 hours on the elliptical and jumps rope for 30 minutes at a time... I think she's probably capable of running some distance. lol4
-
rodsteph777 wrote: »Thank u to all who replied back with real answers. I will add those to my list. I just wanted to compare ways of burning 500 cal by cardio so I can change my daily cardio routine.
To me it is better to eat more and exercise than to torture myself by eating less .
Plus eating less but not exercising leaves ur skin saggy and loose. I prefer to exercisd and tone as fitness and shape are my goals not just weight.
I have burned 500 calories daily by cycling so to all the negative downers I wasn't asking for your opinion or smart *kitten* comments.
diet and exercise wont affect how your skin reacts to weight loss. That's determined by things like your age, genetics, amt of time overweight, etc. Exercise is good for you and will shape your body , but it wont change your skin1 -
jseams1234 wrote: »Not only that - but the OP says she spends a continuous 1.5 hours on the elliptical and jumps rope for 30 minutes at a time... I think she's probably capable of running some distance. lol
LOL. her cardio might be. Her knees, ankles and hips aren't5 -
HIIT on a machine such as an elliptical (I use a Bowflex M5) is the fastest calorie burn I've seen. I burn approximately 225-275 calories in 14 minutes on my machine (depending on several factors, resistance level, and how hard I push during rest cycles. I've done 2 of those sessions back to back to burn 500 calories, but it's tough. Generally I will do one session, then go work my upper body for a while and come back and do another session.
For me, 14 minutes on a Bowflex M5 @ level 16 = 260ish calories +/- 20 calories
Run a 5k (3.1 miles) = 350ish calories (That's around 35 minutes for me, if I do it in under 30 it's closer to 300 cals)
So quickest way to burn 500 cals, for me it's going to be HIIT on a machine of some sort. I'm assuming a good elliptical with high resistance would do just as well, even if it doesn't have a program to use for HIIT, you simply go at a slower pace (rest) for 1-1.5 minutes, then at max effort for 20-30 seconds, repeat that for a 15 min or 30 minute session.2 -
stanmann571 wrote: »jseams1234 wrote: »Not only that - but the OP says she spends a continuous 1.5 hours on the elliptical and jumps rope for 30 minutes at a time... I think she's probably capable of running some distance. lol
LOL. her cardio might be. Her knees, ankles and hips aren't
You seen very confident in your diagnosis, doctor. Kill that strawman dead!4 -
The problem with threads like these is that most people come into them offering advice based on their own experiences, which may or may not be even remotely applicable to the OP. Even those who aren't confined to their own experiences don't know enough about the OP to offer any meaningful advice, so we either speak overly generally (like I did with my first post), or we make assumptions in an attempt to be helpful.
Then the piling on begins about who is right and who is wrong when, in reality, there's no way to know for sure. But since we all know everything, we're all right and everyone else is wrong.11 -
Spliner1969 wrote: »HIIT on a machine such as an elliptical (I use a Bowflex M5) is the fastest calorie burn I've seen. I burn approximately 225-275 calories in 14 minutes on my machine (depending on several factors, resistance level, and how hard I push during rest cycles. I've done 2 of those sessions back to back to burn 500 calories, but it's tough. Generally I will do one session, then go work my upper body for a while and come back and do another session.
For me, 14 minutes on a Bowflex M5 @ level 16 = 260ish calories +/- 20 calories
Run a 5k (3.1 miles) = 350ish calories (That's around 35 minutes for me, if I do it in under 30 it's closer to 300 cals)
So quickest way to burn 500 cals, for me it's going to be HIIT on a machine of some sort. I'm assuming a good elliptical with high resistance would do just as well, even if it doesn't have a program to use for HIIT, you simply go at a slower pace (rest) for 1-1.5 minutes, then at max effort for 20-30 seconds, repeat that for a 15 min or 30 minute session.
Those estimates for HIIT seem very, very inflated. The recovery periods drag down the average.
The fastest way to burn calories involves steady and constant high effort not fast/slow intervals.
Are you using heart rate to get your estimate by any chance?
0 -
Those estimates for HIIT seem very, very inflated. The recovery periods drag down the average.
The fastest way to burn calories involves steady and constant high effort not fast/slow intervals.
Are you using heart rate to get your estimate by any chance?
No, those estimates are based on the power meter built into the machine. If I use a HRM to estimate the burns are much higher (300-325 range). At level 16 on the M5 at max effort/dial pegged (it took over a year to be able to do that by the way, it's a beast) my heart rate can easily hit 160 or a hair over 90% of my max. No way I can keep that up for much longer than the 22-25 seconds for that workout. You can adjust the workout if you want in the settings, and my rest periods on the machine are likely about 3x higher than the default, but so is the max setting. I expect the estimates to be overrated, however over time I've found them to be more accurate than I thought they were. I've tried, over a period of months, eating 100% of those calories back without weight gain. Everyone is different though, I'm 6'2" tall, around 15% body fat and about 185lbs, so it's tough to say how accurate they would be for someone else with different stats.
Edit: The estimates for running I posted are based on my own estimates (based again on a period of months of calories consumed back of the ~400 given by a HRM/app combo. A HRM/app combo will show ~400+ calories burned running a 5k, but that's WAY over estimated. Typically it's probably 250-300 calories for a 3.1 mile run for the average person from my research. Again, it's different for everyone and depends greatly on your own stats and the effort you put into it. I figure the only way to be accurate at any of this is to eat those calories back, and watch for weight gain/loss over a period of time. If you gain, you're eating back too many of those calories and it's an overestimation, if you lose, you probably are under-estimating the calories. I started trying to calculate accuracy on my HRM about two years ago based on my equipment readouts, and the app/HRM combo compared to calculators available on the web. Most people tell me a power meter is the most accurate way to estimate calories, but I don't buy into that 100% either, again because everyone is different. The M5's calculations were surprisingly accurate for me anyway. Let's say 85-90% accurate anyway.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions