Why do the more you do an exercise, the less calories it burns

Orphia

OP hasn't been back to Community since this post on Jan 5 US time:

BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »

I greatly appreciate all the feedback that you guys have given. I did not mention my calorie in-take above, but I try to only consume 1,200 to 1,300 calories a day. I do track my food in-take by using MFP, and I track my fitness by using my Apple watch and MFP. MFP has my calory in-take of 1,430 in order for me to get down to my goal weight. Sometimes I am full from just 1,200 calories a day, so I don't eat more than that. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry, so I don't go by the MFP calory in-take that much.

Again, I'm voicing my concerns if she ever comes back that she might be grossly undereating.

If she's exercising like crazy and not losing and only eating 1200 calories, it could be adaptive thermogenesis here.

ceiswyn

Are you perhaps burning fewer calories because you weigh less?

I need to walk 20 minutes now to burn the calories I used to in 10, but that’s because I’m moving a lot less weight!

mmapags

skinnyjingbb wrote: »

Here is some reasons that your scale didn't move.
1. If you started to exercise more just recently, it could be just your body retained more fluid and you'll see a drop when your body is used to the new intensity of excercise.
2. You could gained more muscle weight and balanced out the fat loss, have your checked your waist or arm, did your cloth fit better?
3. How accurate is your logging? Try weight your food if you want more accurate data. If you really is consuming 1200 to 1300 a day and didn't eat back any excercise calorie, your should see a very fast weight drop because you have a huge deficit

1. Is accurate.
2. Is not. No one can gain muscle on a one to one basis with fat loss. You can lose 5 lbs of fat in a few weeks. To gain that amount of muscle would take months.
3. I think this is the real issue. Lack of accurate logging and exercise burns. Underestimating one and overestimating the other. There is the possibility that, if the cals are correct, cortisol is causing water weight that is masking fat loss. But my guess is lack of accuracy in food and exercise logging.

BlaqueDiamond1989

aeloine wrote: »

BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »

I greatly appreciate all the feedback that you guys have given. I did not mention my calorie in-take above, but I try to only consume 1,200 to 1,300 calories a day. I do track my food in-take by using MFP, and I track my fitness by using my Apple watch and MFP. MFP has my calory in-take of 1,430 in order for me to get down to my goal weight. Sometimes I am full from just 1,200 calories a day, so I don't eat more than that. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry, so I don't go by the MFP calory in-take that much.

Hey Bianca! You're really on track to succeed here! Just a quick thing, though. How are you counting your calories? Are you using measuring cups or actual weights? I know that it seems like a tedious extra step, but I think you might be surprised about the huge discrepancy between weights and volume measurements (like cups). Amazon has a number of highly rated talking scale, and even one that pairs with Alexa, if you have one.

Oh wow! I had no idea that there were measuring cups and scales accessible with Aleixa. How do I search for these items? I do use a combination of both scales and measuring cups to measure my foods.

BlaqueDiamond1989

Live_life_well wrote: »

Something just doesn't add up for me. Eating only 1,200 calories while excercising 6 days a week and walking a lot? How are you not passing out or dizzy at the gym?

How long have you done this and what is your age, height, and weight?

I just started this routine about a month ago. I am 28, five feet 2 inches, and currently I weigh 181.

heybales

So you'll be making progress no matter how badly things are done with only a month in.

Not the best progress possible if done right, but some that could make it feel like it's being done right.

But you'll plateau quicker and get less improvements then you could.

BlaqueDiamond1989

Ok guys. I think I know what the problem is. I am depending too heavily on my apple watch to track my heart rate and calories burned. When I do certain exercises, my watch says I burn fewer calories than MFP says I burn doing the same exercise for the same amount of time. For instance, I walk on my treadmill for 30 minutes and my heart rate monitor says I only burned 125 calories, but I walked for 1.66 miles in 30 minutes. Also, it says that my heart rate was 120 BPM. When I am done working out, I am usually covered in sweat and breathing hard, so I know I am exerting energy while I walk. My pace is usually as brisk as I can make it. I have to hold on to the bars to keep myself steady since I am blind, so I probably am not walking as fast as I probably could if I had my hands free. I think I am going to just stick to what MFP says my calorie burn is and use the watch as a secondary tracker. I just felt disappointed when I saw the amount of calories that I was burning was much fewer than it had been only a week ago. I have never used a wearable until now, so it is still taking some getting used to. Usually I would just go by what MFP says, and I would lose the weight. I guess having two ways of tracking my fitness is causing my confusion.

bagge72

BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »

Ok guys. I think I know what the problem is. I am depending too heavily on my apple watch to track my heart rate and calories burned. When I do certain exercises, my watch says I burn fewer calories than MFP says I burn doing the same exercise for the same amount of time. For instance, I walk on my treadmill for 30 minutes and my heart rate monitor says I only burned 125 calories, but I walked for 1.66 miles in 30 minutes. Also, it says that my heart rate was 120 BPM. When I am done working out, I am usually covered in sweat and breathing hard, so I know I am exerting energy while I walk. My pace is usually as brisk as I can make it. I have to hold on to the bars to keep myself steady since I am blind, so I probably am not walking as fast as I probably could if I had my hands free. I think I am going to just stick to what MFP says my calorie burn is and use the watch as a secondary tracker. I just felt disappointed when I saw the amount of calories that I was burning was much fewer than it had been only a week ago. I have never used a wearable until now, so it is still taking some getting used to. Usually I would just go by what MFP says, and I would lose the weight. I guess having two ways of tracking my fitness is causing my confusion.

I don't think you focusing you exercise calories is the problem at all. If you aren't eating those calories back it doesn't matter. You are eating less than what MFP gives you as calories so you should be losing weight. If you aren't you are eating more than you think you are.

HoneyBadger302

If you've gone from no working out to doing nearly 2 hours a day in the gym, your body is also going through a huge adjustment period. Your muscles are needing to repair themselves (this is a good thing), so they will be retaining water (which will affect the scale by a LOT sometimes). I'd also recommend getting measurements done weekly as that can be a better indicator of weight loss.

Going to the gym has tons of benefits outside of weight. Not only does it help with so many "diseases" your body also heals faster and better, is better able to fight off sickness and other issues, etc, etc. The list goes on and on. Keep up your workouts regardless of the scale

mmapags

BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »

Ok guys. I think I know what the problem is. I am depending too heavily on my apple watch to track my heart rate and calories burned. When I do certain exercises, my watch says I burn fewer calories than MFP says I burn doing the same exercise for the same amount of time. For instance, I walk on my treadmill for 30 minutes and my heart rate monitor says I only burned 125 calories, but I walked for 1.66 miles in 30 minutes. Also, it says that my heart rate was 120 BPM. When I am done working out, I am usually covered in sweat and breathing hard, so I know I am exerting energy while I walk. My pace is usually as brisk as I can make it. I have to hold on to the bars to keep myself steady since I am blind, so I probably am not walking as fast as I probably could if I had my hands free. I think I am going to just stick to what MFP says my calorie burn is and use the watch as a secondary tracker. I just felt disappointed when I saw the amount of calories that I was burning was much fewer than it had been only a week ago. I have never used a wearable until now, so it is still taking some getting used to. Usually I would just go by what MFP says, and I would lose the weight. I guess having two ways of tracking my fitness is causing my confusion.

Using an online calulator, at 180 lbs and walking at a 3.0 MPH pace you would burn around 5 calories per minute. That come out to about 150 calories in 30 minutes. If you walk faster, you burn more. Your pace is slightly faster. So, maybe 175 calories?

Heart rate is only loosely correlated with calorie burns and sweat and being out of breath have no relationship. They only tell you that you are not in strong condition yet. No surprise after the short time you've been at it.

BlaqueDiamond1989

So, guys I am back with an update. I have finally started seeing the numbers go down on the scale. Even though I am focusing more on my measurements than pounds lost, it is still good to see the weight coming off. I am still using both MFP and my Apple watch to track my fitness routines. I am still eating no more than 1,300 calories a day, and I have lost five pounds since January first. Thanks so much for all of your input. I think I have myself on track now. With my work out routine, I am losing at least one pound a week, and I think that is good.

heybales

Well, do remember.

It's eating less than you burn that is causing weight loss.

NOT the exercise routine.

Get that principal wrong and you'll be aggravated in the future.

The workouts are helping you look better for when the fat is gone.