Calories burned through weight training

Anniejazz
Anniejazz Posts: 35 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
This has probably been addressed here before but I've found nothing and, what with planning and executing my body and psyche rebuild whilst trying to run a 'normal, life and get enough sleep, time is somewhat at a premium 😊 Is there a list or formula I could use to calculate my weight training calorie spend? I found something on the web (bodyweight x minutes x 0.028 (moderate effort) or 0.039 (high effort), but I have no way of verifying this. I am due to start training this afternoon after a break in serious work (i.e. dedicated, sustained) of about 15 years. Any input will be dreadfully received.

Replies

  • Duck_Puddle
    Duck_Puddle Posts: 3,237 Member
    I also use the strength training entry under the cardio database section. Weight training just doesn’t burn a lot of calories though.

    It’s about 150 calories an hour for me too. But since that’s more than 10% of my net calorie goal, it makes a huge difference (in how I feel and adherence).
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,222 Member
    While I don't use the MFP exercise calorie estimates for everything (I try to pick the most-likely-to-be-close estimate for the activity, or the lowest estimate of several sources, depending), I do use it for strength training.

    Be aware that to get calorie "credit" for strength training, you add it as cardiovascular exercise using the "Strength training (weight lifting, weight training)" database entry.

    As with other CV exercises, MFP will automatically use your most currently-logged body weight and the number of minutes in the calculation.
  • rldeclercq4
    rldeclercq4 Posts: 269 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    @rldeclercq4
    Kinda surprised by some of the responses here.
    Don't worry you aren't alone in believing the myth that weights burns a lot of calories.

    Thanks for your insights and information. I’m always willing to be educated. Like I said, I couldn’t really back up my points with anything scientific, more of a gut instinct based on my own experience. I also know precisely what I’ve been through in losing 140 lbs over the last theee through a steady combination eating at a deficit, plenty of cardio, and regular weight lifting. So if I guess what I’m saying is, my comment was on the basis of personal experience and data tracking of my personal weight, height, intensity, and duration of exercise.
  • kami3006
    kami3006 Posts: 4,979 Member
    rldeclercq4 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    @rldeclercq4
    Kinda surprised by some of the responses here.
    Don't worry you aren't alone in believing the myth that weights burns a lot of calories.

    Thanks for your insights and information. I’m always willing to be educated. Like I said, I couldn’t really back up my points with anything scientific, more of a gut instinct based on my own experience. I also know precisely what I’ve been through in losing 140 lbs over the last theee through a steady combination eating at a deficit, plenty of cardio, and regular weight lifting. So if I guess what I’m saying is, my comment was on the basis of personal experience and data tracking of my personal weight, height, intensity, and duration of exercise.

    Congrats on losing 140!
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,222 Member
    edited December 2018
    rldeclercq4 wrote: »
    Kinda surprised by some of the responses here. Weight training is a killer calorie burner because studies have shown that a lifting session will keep burning calories loooong after the workout is over while cardio essentially stops once your heart rate is normalized. The other day I had a pretty intense lift sessions which I started with a quick mile run and interspersed with some sprints to keep my heart rate up. My Garmin gave me a result of 800 calories burned in about 75minutes. The next day I was more moderate and it was about 600 calories in an hour. But I usually include jump rope and some period on the treadmill to keep the heart rate up. The calculation you provided checks out - according to my body stats and workout intensity. Burning 100-150 cals an hour *seems* almost impossible since the body burns about half of that in an hour while sleeping. Seems even a moderate bit of exercise would triple/quadruple that at the very least. This isn’t a very scientific explanation, but it’s my way of saying you’re probably burning far more than 100-150 cals per hour of weight lifting

    To bolded #1: Speaking of cardio as if it were all one thing is iffy, very iffy. It's potentially lots of different things, many of which can be done at a very large range of different intensities. Those factors matter, for fitness, for calorie burn, and even for EPOC % (which, as that very smart guy above pointed out, is an arithmetically small contributor, even when the differences in the percentages seem relatively big: Math is hard. ;) ).

    To bolded #2: How things seem and feel isn't a very good guide to calorie burn. Research (like METS-based estimates) isn't perfect, but it's better than "seems". Also, one man's BMR is another woman's TDEE, so one really can't make inferences about someone else's numbers from one's own, without knowing their stats. Even knowing their stats, it can be dicey, because individuals differ. I figure about 100-150 calories an hour for strength training . . . but that probably is 2-3x my BMR/RMR.

    I think sometimes larger, younger, guy-er guys don't realize how much bigger, younger and male-er they are, or at least don't understand the arithmetic that goes with those differences. ;)

    ETA: I see you've already acknowledged some of the above while I was typing. Good show! :flowerforyou:
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    rldeclercq4 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    @rldeclercq4
    Kinda surprised by some of the responses here.
    Don't worry you aren't alone in believing the myth that weights burns a lot of calories.

    Thanks for your insights and information. I’m always willing to be educated. Like I said, I couldn’t really back up my points with anything scientific, more of a gut instinct based on my own experience. I also know precisely what I’ve been through in losing 140 lbs over the last theee through a steady combination eating at a deficit, plenty of cardio, and regular weight lifting. So if I guess what I’m saying is, my comment was on the basis of personal experience and data tracking of my personal weight, height, intensity, and duration of exercise.

    Wow - massive achievement, well done you!

    That you have found the right calorie balance doesn't however validate all the various estimates involved (BMR, activity multiplier, food intake, exercise), it just validates the sum of all those estimates.

    When I believed my HRM when it told me I was burning almost 1,000 cals in an hour of extreme cardio I still managed to lose at the desired rate for example. In reality I really wasn't burning that much (I wish!).
  • alexmester
    alexmester Posts: 1 Member
    Hello,
    I am confused..
    I'm 29yo 5'11" and weigh 195lbs (a bit chubby as of late)

    I have been lifting for almost 10 years now (not so much the last couple of years)... I mean .. I displace massive amounts of weight through time and space.. I do that to failure and only take 1 min between sets.. even then I walk around the gym.. never sit down (that's my day job). I do work up a decent amount of sweat.

    It sound preposterous to claim that I burn 150cal in a 1h super-workout.. at my size and weight.. I might as well take a nap to burn that..
    I mean 150cal BRUH(sound effect) ??? I must be burning at least 160cal..

    But seriously.. how can I know for sure?

    Thank you!
  • GrumpyHeadmistress
    GrumpyHeadmistress Posts: 666 Member
    kami3006 wrote: »
    The numbers MFP gives under cardio >strength training are spot on for me. I've used them for five years and I get 150 calories for an hour of lifting. Not a significant number of calories but enough for me to notice a difference in progression if I don't eat them. For reference, I'm 44, female, 5'3" and 125 lbs.

    ETA: the MFP formula is off the standard MET values for strength training and take into account rest periods between sets.

    Ditto. Even in a hard core, full 60 minute session at my absolute limit I rarely record more than 200 calories (5’4” female 125lbs).
  • kami3006
    kami3006 Posts: 4,979 Member
    edited January 2019
    alexmester wrote: »
    Hello,
    I am confused..
    I'm 29yo 5'11" and weigh 195lbs (a bit chubby as of late)

    I have been lifting for almost 10 years now (not so much the last couple of years)... I mean .. I displace massive amounts of weight through time and space.. I do that to failure and only take 1 min between sets.. even then I walk around the gym.. never sit down (that's my day job). I do work up a decent amount of sweat.

    It sound preposterous to claim that I burn 150cal in a 1h super-workout.. at my size and weight.. I might as well take a nap to burn that..
    I mean 150cal BRUH(sound effect) ??? I must be burning at least 160cal..

    But seriously.. how can I know for sure?

    Thank you!

    I'm sure you do burn more than 150 per hour. As I said, I am female, 125lbs and 5'3". You're going to burn more than me. Nonetheless, it's not a major calorie burn overall. Probably in the 200s, maybe 300s for you.

    The only way to know for sure is to go off your own, real-life numbers. Track how much you're eating and exercising and compare it to the results you're seeking. I have tracked mine with a food scale and have eaten all my exercise calories for five years so I know my numbers are correct for what I'm doing.

    Regardless, lifting is not for calorie burn, it's for body composition and health. It's good know the numbers so you're eating enough but not a good way to try to create a calorie deficit.
  • deputy_randolph
    deputy_randolph Posts: 940 Member
    The strength training option in MFP has been close enough to accurate for me to successfully bulk and cut multiple times. With my stats (5'3, 135, 39 female), MFP estimates around 300 calories for 2 hours of lifting. I compete in powerlifting, so the workouts can be intense for periods of time + "extended" rest times.
  • caindove11
    caindove11 Posts: 73 Member
    rldeclercq4 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    @rldeclercq4
    Kinda surprised by some of the responses here.
    Don't worry you aren't alone in believing the myth that weights burns a lot of calories.

    Thanks for your insights and information. I’m always willing to be educated. Like I said, I couldn’t really back up my points with anything scientific, more of a gut instinct based on my own experience. I also know precisely what I’ve been through in losing 140 lbs over the last theee through a steady combination eating at a deficit, plenty of cardio, and regular weight lifting. So if I guess what I’m saying is, my comment was on the basis of personal experience and data tracking of my personal weight, height, intensity, and duration of exercise.

    Congratulations on losing the weight!
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    Anniejazz wrote: »
    This has probably been addressed here before but I've found nothing and, what with planning and executing my body and psyche rebuild whilst trying to run a 'normal, life and get enough sleep, time is somewhat at a premium 😊 Is there a list or formula I could use to calculate my weight training calorie spend? I found something on the web (bodyweight x minutes x 0.028 (moderate effort) or 0.039 (high effort), but I have no way of verifying this. I am due to start training this afternoon after a break in serious work (i.e. dedicated, sustained) of about 15 years. Any input will be dreadfully received.

    It's really going to be highly variable though...I've run circuits which are by and large cardio with resistance and my burn is pretty much what you would expect from a good cardio session, because that's pretty much what it was.

    More traditional strength training with rest between sets is going to burn less...someone supersetting is going to burn a little more, etc.

    I always just used the strength training entry under the cardio section or circuit training when I was doing that and it seemed to be good enough. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good or good enough...this is all estimation.
  • pierinifitness
    pierinifitness Posts: 2,226 Member
    I just completed a “grease the groove” 20 minutes workout alternating between pull-ups and chin-ups, completing 62 reps in 20:51. 63 year young dude with morning BW of 187 lbs. All reps were good form.

    Garmin HR monitor says I burned 161 calories, MFP says 20 minutes = 172 calories. Elsewhere in internet, Madbarz website says 170 lb. male burns about 1 calorie per rep so this would be about 62 calories.

    What do I perceive I burned? At least 100 calories.

    There you have it folks, another “scientific” study.

    Now, back to my morning workout. Next up, kettlebell work.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    The most well-structured study I have found for a “standard” lifting workout—e.g. 8 standard exercises, 3 sets, 8-10 reps—came up with a gross calorie burn of about 320-300 cal/hour. That is in line with other studies I have read that have looked at individual exercises.

    That burn is within ACSM guidelines for the exercise support for a weight loss program. And then there is the EPOC which is often overstated, but which does exist, and adds a little more.

    So I have to respectfully disagree a little with those who say the calorie burn for lifting weights is “negligible”. If that’s you’re main focus, and you are lifting for 60+ minutes per workout, it can be sufficient. However, the actual burn is much less than the perceived exertion (and heart rate) would indicate.

    I think the MFP numbers that have been cited here are probably a little low, but they probably work well —better than I originally thought—for most people.

    The biggest problem with having this discussion is that there are so many kinds of workouts described. So it can be hard to have a consistent reference point. Many people use “weight training” to describe a circuit training workout, which is completely different. The inclusion of higher-intensity anaerobic/glycolytic excercses in a workout complicate things even more.

    As someone wrote earlier, ultimately, it’s going to be a trial and error process to find the right energy balance for each person.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    At the risk of being woo'ed again, it will depend on the intensity. I did 45 minutes this morning, but that includes the time to move weights around, rest between sets etc. Garmin shows 214, but I'm guessing closer to 150. I'm sure if I reduced the rest time, was more efficient in setting up and lifted heavier, it would be more. I also plan a 5km run today and that will be ~400 cals for 30 min (it's a bit icy so I take it a bit easy).

Categories