Yoga calories burned

mbmaharaj

How do I determine how many calories I burn while doing yoga? I have a chronic illness and cannot work out like everyone else, so I’m trying to just do basic yoga for about 10-15 minutes. My heart rate is definitely up but I can’t seem to find a way to track the calories I would have burned.

springlering62

My Apple Watch seems to be pretty accurate. There’s a distinct and noticeable difference in calorie counts between types of classes, heated or unheated. It doesn’t seem to just “assign” a fixed amount for a fixed time.

Have also noticed calorie counts are way down doing the online classes at home. Teachers are reluctant to push students if they aren’t there to see in person that they can handle a more vigorous practice.

mbmaharaj

Thanks. Due to having fibromyalgia I’m barely able to do about 10 mins at a time so I suppose it’s not much burning of calories

yirara

springlering62 wrote: »

My Apple Watch seems to be pretty accurate. There’s a distinct and noticeable difference in calorie counts between types of classes, heated or unheated. It doesn’t seem to just “assign” a fixed amount for a fixed time.

Have also noticed calorie counts are way down doing the online classes at home. Teachers are reluctant to push students if they aren’t there to see in person that they can handle a more vigorous practice.

Temperature doesn't have an effect on calorie burn. If it had then people in warm countries would burn more calories for the same workout if everything else was equal. The heartrate might be a bit higher. If a device gets calorie burns from HR then that might be the explanation.

Redordeadhead

For 10 minutes of yoga a day, the calorie burn will be very low. Personally, I wouldn't bother adding it, but would just consider it a health benefit, getting a bit of movement and flexibility.

AnnPT77

For yoga, estimating it via the MFP exercise database is a reasonable strategy. You can pick the yoga entry that seems closest to what you're doing. It will use a research-based (METS-based) method, adjusted to your relevant demographic characteristics (mainly body weight) to give you a calorie estimate for the number of minutes you input. It will be a modest amount, for yoga, but seeing that added can be motivating, and the movement is for sure good and healthful!

mbmaharaj

Thank you everyone.

yirara

AnnPT77 wrote: »

For yoga, estimating it via the MFP exercise database is a reasonable strategy. You can pick the yoga entry that seems closest to what you're doing. It will use a research-based (METS-based) method, adjusted to your relevant demographic characteristics (mainly body weight) to give you a calorie estimate for the number of minutes you input. It will be a modest amount, for yoga, but seeing that added can be motivating, and the movement is for sure good and healthful!

Seriously? I don't know if there is user entered data in the workout database, but some look suspiciously off. 45 minutes stretching/hatha yoga would give me 123 calories, which sounds high for overall very little movement. Then nearly 400 calories for 45 minutes of bikram yoga? To be honest, that seems very unlikely.

mbaker566

yirara wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

For yoga, estimating it via the MFP exercise database is a reasonable strategy. You can pick the yoga entry that seems closest to what you're doing. It will use a research-based (METS-based) method, adjusted to your relevant demographic characteristics (mainly body weight) to give you a calorie estimate for the number of minutes you input. It will be a modest amount, for yoga, but seeing that added can be motivating, and the movement is for sure good and healthful!

Seriously? I don't know if there is user entered data in the workout database, but some look suspiciously off. 45 minutes stretching/hatha yoga would give me 123 calories, which sounds high for overall very little movement. Then nearly 400 calories for 45 minutes of bikram yoga? To be honest, that seems very unlikely.

the hatha yoga is pretty accurate. ]
bikram depends on the class i suppose.
for a hard class i find i burn about 250 cal for an hour per the yoga setting on my garmin and weight loss

Duck_Puddle

mbaker566 wrote: »

yirara wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

For yoga, estimating it via the MFP exercise database is a reasonable strategy. You can pick the yoga entry that seems closest to what you're doing. It will use a research-based (METS-based) method, adjusted to your relevant demographic characteristics (mainly body weight) to give you a calorie estimate for the number of minutes you input. It will be a modest amount, for yoga, but seeing that added can be motivating, and the movement is for sure good and healthful!

Seriously? I don't know if there is user entered data in the workout database, but some look suspiciously off. 45 minutes stretching/hatha yoga would give me 123 calories, which sounds high for overall very little movement. Then nearly 400 calories for 45 minutes of bikram yoga? To be honest, that seems very unlikely.

the hatha yoga is pretty accurate. ]
bikram depends on the class i suppose.
for a hard class i find i burn about 250 cal for an hour per the yoga setting on my garmin and weight loss

I don’t do bikram but can second that the hatha/stretching entry is really quite reasonable and also matches up to my Garmin, Polar & Apple Watch. It’s an exercise DB entry I actually trust as is.

AnnPT77

yirara wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

For yoga, estimating it via the MFP exercise database is a reasonable strategy. You can pick the yoga entry that seems closest to what you're doing. It will use a research-based (METS-based) method, adjusted to your relevant demographic characteristics (mainly body weight) to give you a calorie estimate for the number of minutes you input. It will be a modest amount, for yoga, but seeing that added can be motivating, and the movement is for sure good and healthful!

Seriously? I don't know if there is user entered data in the workout database, but some look suspiciously off. 45 minutes stretching/hatha yoga would give me 123 calories, which sounds high for overall very little movement. Then nearly 400 calories for 45 minutes of bikram yoga? To be honest, that seems very unlikely.

I admit that I had hatha yoga in mind when I said that, rather than the Bikram entry.

However, most yoga would be in the range where HRM are not super likely to be accurate (sub-aerobic, sources of strain that may raise HR including breath-holding, etc.) - might be right, but it's not their wheelhouse.

The Compendium of Physical Activities, which summarizes MET-based estimating values, has several yoga entries for yoga in its "Conditioning" category.** Most are from published literature, though Power Yoga is estimated. Hatha yoga is listed at 2.5 METS, slightly less than light-effort calisthenics (which is 2.8). The (estimated) power yoga value is 4.0 METS, in between moderate-effort calisthenics (3.8) and moderate-effort circuit training (4.3) both of which are drawn from published literature.

It's beyond my energy at the moment to back-engineer what MET value MFP is using in its calculations for the relevant categories, but it estimates 136 calories for me**** for an hour of hatha yoga, or 435 for an hour of Bikram. Calisthenics (light/moderate, not light, which would be the proper comparison) estimates 191, and circuit training (for which there's only one generic entry) estimates 435. So, it looks like MFP may be giving Bikram a little higher effective MET level (equal to circuit training), when it would be less if estimated at 4.0 METS, and the others at compendium values.

Those don't strike me as shockingly weird, especially if the alternative is a HRM, when yoga is not really in its sweet spot for exercise estimation. To a certain extent, exercise estimating is all a bit of a cr*apshoot, so it's a matter of trying to figure out what will give us the most plausible cr*p. I'd add that AFAIK all of these (including most HRM/fitness trackers) are giving gross calories, so effectively double-counting BMR during exercise for MFP purposes, which is potential a bigger distortion than the estimating error, yet most of us are sanguine about it. But the arithmetic impact of that magnitude simply gets lost, for most typical people's exercise (small fraction of their average day), as a practical matter, in the midst of estimating errors for NEAT, BMR (short of lab tests), food, etc. It works out.

Really, the key thing is consistent estimating of exercise, plus monitoring weight results and adjusting intake based on experience. Close enough for gubmint work.

As always, just my opinion, based on amateur understanding.

** https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/conditioning-exercise
**** for the bodyweight it thinks I'm at: I haven't updated it lately. Just truth in advertising.