Strength training only burns 110 calories?
Options
Replies
-
jaciejaciexoxo wrote: »marisaleib5086 wrote: »According to my fitness pal strength training/weight lifting only burns 110 calories in a 45/50 minute session? Is this accurate? I usually perform 8-9 exercises with 4 sets of 8 reps on days I’m lifting heavy and 12 reps if I’m lifting moderately heavy. If I’m only burning 110 calories that seems like all of my hard work during my gym session is worth nothing.
It's not for nothing. Think about it, the more muscle mass you obtain the more calories you burn naturally without effort.
Honestly, a person in calorie deficit is not likely adding muscle mass. Even under optimum conditions, ideal nutrition, calorie surplus and perfect training program, a man will add about 1/2 lb per week and a woman half that.
Even if someone did add muscle, the net calorie gain on 1 lb of muscle is somewhere around 6 to 8 calories per day. Gaining muscle mass is a great thing for many health reasons but burning substantially more calories is not one of them.3 -
For me , it's not about the calorie burn, it's about what it does for my health. Lifting weights constantly means less pain , makes me feel mentally better (it's my me time) and allows me to be more active in other areas of my life. Walking down the road to the shops, easy, carrying or dragging (In a small trolley) the groceries, strength training makes that possible. At work, I can push extra dollies of bread to help out the truck drivers, or the lazy , usually boys I work with. I can help take out waste dough to the bins, to help the guy who has come and helped me when I needed it and fallen behind. I can help my husband move a couch. All this is why I lift weights.4
-
jaciejaciexoxo wrote: »marisaleib5086 wrote: »According to my fitness pal strength training/weight lifting only burns 110 calories in a 45/50 minute session? Is this accurate? I usually perform 8-9 exercises with 4 sets of 8 reps on days I’m lifting heavy and 12 reps if I’m lifting moderately heavy. If I’m only burning 110 calories that seems like all of my hard work during my gym session is worth nothing.
It's not for nothing. Think about it, the more muscle mass you obtain the more calories you burn naturally without effort.
Honestly, a person in calorie deficit is not likely adding muscle mass. Even under optimum conditions, ideal nutrition, calorie surplus and perfect training program, a man will add about 1/2 lb per week and a woman half that.
Even if someone did add muscle, the net calorie gain on 1 lb of muscle is somewhere around 6 to 8 calories per day. Gaining muscle mass is a great thing for many health reasons but burning substantially more calories is not one of them.
I had an inBody body composition analysis done in January and in June. I don't have the papers on hand to check the exact numbers, but according to the analysis I gained about 2lbs of muscle while losing around 8lbs of weight, and my BMR had increased by maybe 30 calories. Those 30 calories per day is about 3lbs a year, which is not a lot, but still meaningful if you are a machine and everything else is balanced perfectly.
(Whether or not the analysis is accurate is a whole different debate, and no, I don't follow the suggestions of the analysis to the letter and I don't now eat 30 more calories daily)
To the actual question here: yeah, the calories sound about right. I usually get a 200-300 calorie burn (Fitbit reading) from an hour-long strength workout that includes a proper warm-up on the rowing machine. The warm-up alone is probably half the burn. I do strength training to, you know, train strength, increase stability and mobility, gain muscle and stay healthy. If I want to purely burn calories, I go for a long walk since that's something I can do comfortably for extended periods of time and burn at a decent rate (350-500 per hour depending on speed, carried load and uphills). Additionally, I work on my running for cardiovascular health, endurance and overall sanity. The fact that running burns at a good rate is a definite plus.0 -
That doesn't sound right. If you need 1500 calories to "maintain" an office job, and you burn that off in a day of largely mild to no activity, that's 1500/24 hours = 62 calories per hour. I doubt that strenous exercise burns only slightly more.
But I would believe that what some CALL strength training wouldn't burn much. In every gym I've ever seen you have some who lift something 5 - 10 times, then text, look in the mirrors, adjust the playlist, chat the next person, and call that a workout.
Each his own, but saying "strength training burns this much" is too general. Depends on what you're doing.9 -
jeffjeff85 wrote: »That doesn't sound right. If you need 1500 calories to "maintain" an office job, and you burn that off in a day of largely mild to no activity, that's 1500/24 hours = 62 calories per hour. I doubt that strenous exercise burns only slightly more.
But I would believe that what some CALL strength training wouldn't burn much. In every gym I've ever seen you have some who lift something 5 - 10 times, then text, look in the mirrors, adjust the playlist, chat the next person, and call that a workout.
Each his own, but saying "strength training burns this much" is too general. Depends on what you're doing.
I follow progressive powerlifting/hypertrophy programs and over five years of data has me burning about 150 calories per hour. So, yeah, it's pretty close.
I don't lift for calorie burn but I do like to know how much more to eat because I feel a big difference when I don't add in calories for it.5 -
Weight training will result in more calories burned as your body will work all day (assuming you workout in the AM) at rebuilding the muscles you've broken down. The MFP logging is just for the working within that time period, it can't judge the burn after the fact.
The muscle repair would also be more or less depending on what you fuel your body with and how much sleep you get.5 -
Tedebearduff wrote: »Weight training will result in more calories burned as your body will work all day (assuming you workout in the AM) at rebuilding the muscles you've broken down. The MFP logging is just for the working within that time period, it can't judge the burn after the fact.
The muscle repair would also be more or less depending on what you fuel your body with and how much sleep you get.
EPOC is highly overstated and hardly significant.5 -
Tedebearduff wrote: »Weight training will result in more calories burned as your body will work all day (assuming you workout in the AM) at rebuilding the muscles you've broken down. The MFP logging is just for the working within that time period, it can't judge the burn after the fact.
The muscle repair would also be more or less depending on what you fuel your body with and how much sleep you get.
EPOC is highly overstated and hardly significant.
True. I thought Lyle McDonald did a paper on this. f I get a chance later, I'll try and find it.3 -
Tedebearduff wrote: »Weight training will result in more calories burned as your body will work all day (assuming you workout in the AM) at rebuilding the muscles you've broken down. The MFP logging is just for the working within that time period, it can't judge the burn after the fact.
The muscle repair would also be more or less depending on what you fuel your body with and how much sleep you get.
EPOC is highly overstated and hardly significant.
True. I thought Lyle McDonald did a paper on this. f I get a chance later, I'll try and find it.
He did a research review on it. It's here: https://bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/research-review-effects-of-exercise-intensity-and-duration-on-the-excess-post-exercise-oxygen-consumption.html/2 -
Tedebearduff wrote: »Weight training will result in more calories burned as your body will work all day (assuming you workout in the AM) at rebuilding the muscles you've broken down. The MFP logging is just for the working within that time period, it can't judge the burn after the fact.
The muscle repair would also be more or less depending on what you fuel your body with and how much sleep you get.
EPOC is highly overstated and hardly significant.
True. I thought Lyle McDonald did a paper on this. f I get a chance later, I'll try and find it.
He did a research review on it. It's here: https://bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/research-review-effects-of-exercise-intensity-and-duration-on-the-excess-post-exercise-oxygen-consumption.html/
Yes, that's the one. You are the best! Thanks3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions