Resistance training calories

Whydahdad71
Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
edited December 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
I have noticed that MFP lists my resistance training calories higher than what other sites would list them. I am speaking directly about resistance training/weights & bands ( no cardio included). Has anyone else noticed this? What are your thoughts on this?
«1

Replies

  • L1zardQueen
    L1zardQueen Posts: 8,753 Member
    What other sites? How much higher? Calorie burns are guesstimates and tracking your intake for awhile will give you a good idea on whether your calorie burns are accurate or not.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    L1zardQueen wrote: »
    What other sites? How much higher? Calorie burns are guesstimates and tracking your intake for a while will give you a good idea of whether your calorie burns are accurate or not.

    I get most of my calorie estimates from Harvard Medical School. They are the most reliable IMO.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 35,148 Member
    For most people, IMO the realistic calorie burns from strength training are so minor it isn't worth agonizing over details, especially since typical strength workouts are relatively short (< 1 hour, say). More people overestimate them (usually by relying on HRM that aren't good at estimating strength exercise). I'm surprised that other sources award fewer calories than MFP's METS-based estimate, which is usually as reasonable as anything. I don't remember what it is, but I think it's around 3-3.5 METS? Granted, it calcs out to gross rather than net, but the numbers are so small . . .

    What are you getting from MFP (using what exercise database entry), and how does that compare to Harvard (link?)?

  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    edited June 2020
    How much higher?
    Give an example. One calorie an hour is a higher number......
    Which category did you select?

    Also is it just the Harvard Medical School estimate that is lower than MyFitnessPal or are you saying several sites?

  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    For most people, IMO the realistic calorie burns from strength training are so minor it isn't worth agonizing over details, especially since typical strength workouts are relatively short (< 1 hour, say). More people overestimate them (usually by relying on HRM that aren't good at estimating strength exercise). I'm surprised that other sources award fewer calories than MFP's METS-based estimate, which is usually as reasonable as anything. I don't remember what it is, but I think it's around 3-3.5 METS? Granted, it calls out to gross rather than net, but the numbers are so small . . .

    What are you getting from MFP (using what exercise database entry), and how does that compare to Harvard (link?)?

    I basically am getting numbers from MFP that are about four times higher than the Harvard numbers. As I said, I do not know how MFP calculates their numbers. You are spot-on regarding calorie burn and resistance training though.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Seems like majoring in the minors. Use MFP estimates. Back out BMR, eg BMR is around 70 calories for an hour for me. If MFP gives me 240 calories for a 1 hours weight training session, I back out 70 and log 170. The differences are going to be so minimal as not not even be measurable over time for a man.

    If I'm off by 50 calories high on the burn, that is going to mean 150 calories per week for 3 sessions out of some 17,500 calories total TDEE and 15,400 eating a deficit of 300 cals per day. With normal water weight fluctuations and who know what else that could affect daily weighing and results after 8 weeks of tracking, how would I even measure that difference.

    Don't get lost in the weeds.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    That's it, obviously, weight/resistance training will burn calories but it is more for body shaping. I am a men's physique, competitor and I train diet and cardio for body comp and use resistance training for body shaping and sculpting. It works for me, but I get concerned that there could be people who are somewhat confused and believe the incorrect tally. This would lead to a much slower weight loss possibly because they eat more calories than they actually have and possibly even worse than that they get discouraged and quit training together.😪🤨
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Any reason you didn't answer the questions as to what the difference is and what precise categories you are comparing?
    Three people have tried to get some actual data from you without success!

    Are you actually comparing the MyFitnessPal "Strength training (weight lifting, weight training) " database entry or something else?
    That comes from The Compendium of Physical Activities and is METS based.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    Sorry, I didn't get what you were asking me. I think I placed my workout into the "workouts section" of the app. And then when finished it was giving me the calorie count I was referring to. I don't know if that helps or not?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Sorry, I didn't get what you were asking me. I think I placed my workout into the "workouts section" of the app. And then when finished it was giving me the calorie count I was referring to. I don't know if that helps or not?

    It doesn't help in the slightest as only you know which category from the hundreds of options in the database you are selecting.

    I use this one....
    y4fskpknl644.png

    Although it's a gross calorie estimate I'd be surprised if another source estimated just 59 cals (a quarter) for an hour of strength training.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    There is so much about the whole line and direction of this thread that is really getting into the realm of silliness.

    First the OP references "sites", yet doesn't name a single one and offers only a vague reference to "Harvard". Harvard is a University. What source at Harvard published this info and what exactly did it say? What is the web address? And what other "sites" are so much lower than MFP with it's METs based calculations?

    And someone getting discouraged because they aren't getting results by logging their strength training and it's too high? Using the math I posted above, over an 8 week period of time, this would make a difference to the high side of exactly 1200 calories. If someone is set to lose 1lb per week, their anticipated gross deficit over that time would be 196,000 calories. Do you really think they are going to get discouraged or even notice those 1200 calories???

    Do you think their logging errors, compliance and consistency aren't going to mask that completely?? C'mon man. Get out of the weeds!!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    They calculate the numbers based on what you select and weight, from same database most sites use.

    I know on another thread you said 500 calories for like under an hour.
    And also never answered what entry you are using from the database.

    I just went through the website list and still nothing for Resistance training, or bands.

    Circuit training is highest - and it gives under 781 for 60 min.

    Lifting as mentioned is 3.5 MET's, so 293 for 60 min.

    Only entries that contain "band" are bands - and even marching band is 390/hr!

    Perhaps you made your own entry and are picking that. In which case you made up the calorie burn figure.
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    I basically am getting numbers from MFP that are about four times higher than the Harvard numbers. As I said, I do not know how MFP calculates their numbers. You are spot-on regarding calorie burn and resistance training though.

  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    They calculate the numbers based on what you select and weight, from same database most sites use.

    I know on another thread you said 500 calories for like under an hour.
    And also never answered what entry you are using from the database.

    I just went through the website list and still nothing for Resistance training, or bands.

    Circuit training is highest - and it gives under 781 for 60 min.

    Lifting as mentioned is 3.5 MET's, so 293 for 60 min.

    Only entries that contain "band" are bands - and even marching band is 390/hr!

    Perhaps you made your own entry and are picking that. In which case you made up the calorie burn figure.
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    I basically am getting numbers from MFP that are about four times higher than the Harvard numbers. As I said, I do not know how MFP calculates their numbers. You are spot-on regarding calorie burn and resistance training though.

    Seems to be consistent. Make a claim and not substantiate is with any detail...
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    Unfortunately, I am not going to recite every location I use for information. If you feel that the sources "vaguely" mentioned are not enough for you to hang your hat on then, please just keep it moving. The fact is that MFP lists an hour or so of resistance workouts as burning way more calories than those workouts actually do. You don't need a calculator or a Harvard doctor to know that 8 or so exercises of 3 sets of 8-12 reps does not burn 500 or more calories, common sense should be more than enough for that determination.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Unfortunately, I am not going to recite every location I use for information. If you feel that the sources "vaguely" mentioned are not enough for you to hang your hat on then, please just keep it moving. The fact is that MFP lists an hour or so of resistance workouts as burning way more calories than those workouts actually do. You don't need a calculator or a Harvard doctor to know that 8 or so exercises of 3 sets of 8-12 reps does not burn 500 or more calories, common sense should be more than enough for that determination.

    The overwhelming probability is that the problem lies with you and not the database.

    How on earth you don't know what item you are picking from the database is beyond me. Look in your diary!
    We can't but you can.

    You can also enter an hour into the category that I supplied above to see what number comes up. You could even share that number rather than just say one number from somewhere is higher than a number from somewhere else on the www.

    Did you notice that an hour for me came up with 233 cals? Nothing like your purported 500 and I'm assuming you don't weigh 360lbs.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,458 Member
    edited June 2020
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Unfortunately, I am not going to recite every location I use for information. If you feel that the sources "vaguely" mentioned are not enough for you to hang your hat on then, please just keep it moving. The fact is that MFP lists an hour or so of resistance workouts as burning way more calories than those workouts actually do. You don't need a calculator or a Harvard doctor to know that 8 or so exercises of 3 sets of 8-12 reps does not burn 500 or more calories, common sense should be more than enough for that determination.

    So, no. Don't use 500 calories.

    But you know that.

    If you have a calorie level you want to use, just change the calories in the box when you choose an exercise.


    Back in the day every time someone added a new Exercise to the database, it became "Public." Everyone could use it. That way the database was a crowd-sourced thing and it grew quickly. Most of those exercises and numbers were not entered by Myfitnesspal's admin. They were entered by members - so just like the Food database is way off on 80% the food, so it is also off on the Exercise database.

    You can create your own new "Exercise" and then use that going forward OR you can edit the calories in one that's already there.

    Then you use it for a while and see if you get the results in your weight that you would expect.

    Adjust if needed...as always.

  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 35,148 Member
    edited June 2020
    sijomial wrote: »
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Sorry, I didn't get what you were asking me. I think I placed my workout into the "workouts section" of the app. And then when finished it was giving me the calorie count I was referring to. I don't know if that helps or not?

    It doesn't help in the slightest as only you know which category from the hundreds of options in the database you are selecting.

    I use this one....
    y4fskpknl644.png

    Although it's a gross calorie estimate I'd be surprised if another source estimated just 59 cals (a quarter) for an hour of strength training.

    Exactly. That's why I asked. MFP suggests 177 calories an hour for that entry, for me. If I back out my estimated BMR (round numbers, 50 calories per hour), that's a net of 127 calories. Really not a lot of calories. A quarter of the gross would be 44 calories. A quarter of that net would be 32 calories (rounded to the whole calorie :lol::lol::lol: ) or about 1/2 calorie per minute.

    (I admit, I'm not bothering to log most of my strength work while in "shelter at home", and in maintenance, because the numbers are so small and I'm moving through the world much less . . . but 32 - even 44 - calories?!).

    I'm not willing to go all full-bore search mode over this, because if the OP has a link, and really wants to discuss this, he should provide it. The Harvard calorie source I can find suggests 90 calories/hour for weight training for someone 5 pounds lighter than I am (it's a table, not a calculator), which is lower than 127, but not 1/4 as high.

    What is the point of this thread, if unwilling to be specific about sources, specific entries used, etc.? Better topic for Debate section than General Health, Fitness & Diet, besides, IMO.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    cmriverside wrote: »
    Back in the day every time someone added a new Exercise to the database, it became "Public." Everyone could use it. That way the database was a crowd-sourced thing and it grew quickly. Most of those exercises and numbers were not entered by Myfitnesspal's admin. They were entered by members - so just like the Food database is way off on 80% the food, so it is also off on the Exercise database.

    You can create your own new "Exercise" and then use that going forward OR you can edit the calories in one that's already there.

    I guess I never looked through the database entries en masse to discover public created ones.

    I know looking through now makes me wonder if some of those are member entered, as I don't think they are in the METS database.
    Then again I recall MFP announcing they had added like Curves circuit training and other specific ones in the past - and from math all they did was using an existing METS entry and called it what they wanted.
    They've probably done the same with other entries.

    So people don't have to translate what they are doing into what is already exists - just add a new description with same workout.

    Now - I did notice on the website method anyway - when you go to database to search, you can also go off to the right and scroll through drop-down list of all entries - cardio with calorie burn rates, and what are the strength moves that should not have any.

    And if you pick an entry that has a burn rate, and then move to an entry that does not - it keeps the prior burn rate.

    Well, this whole effort did make me clean up my self-created workouts since based on ancient info and way of doing things, deleted all but 1. So some good came from it.

  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    Alright, I just created a "work out on MFP. Let's take a look, shall we?
    Bench press 3x8 150 lbs
    Squat 3x12 200 lbs
    Barbell row 3x8 90lbs
    Wide grip bicep curls 3x8 60lbs
    Tricep extensions 3x8 30 lbs
    Shoulder shrugs 3x8 90 pounds
    Sitting calf raises 3x15 45lbs
    Lat pulldown 3x8 50 pounds
    Plated sit-ups 3x20 25 pounds
    Shoulder press 3x8 80 lbs
    Wrist extensions 3x8 25 lbs
    Total time: 59 minutes
    Total calories: 401

    No freaking way is that exercise set burning over 400 calories.
    Sorry, but no it's not.

    Why? Well because each rep takes roughly four (4) seconds
    When you multiply that time by the actual time under tension or more simply put " your time working" you get 19.8 minutes..
    20 minutes of work broken up by 60-90 second rests, adjusting music, saying hello or drinking water will not get you over 400 calories expended.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    cmriverside wrote: »
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Unfortunately, I am not going to recite every location I use for information. If you feel that the sources "vaguely" mentioned are not enough for you to hang your hat on then, please just keep it moving. The fact is that MFP lists an hour or so of resistance workouts as burning way more calories than those workouts actually do. You don't need a calculator or a Harvard doctor to know that 8 or so exercises of 3 sets of 8-12 reps does not burn 500 or more calories, common sense should be more than enough for that determination.

    So, no. Don't use 500 calories.

    But you know that.

    If you have a calorie level you want to use, just change the calories in the box when you choose an exercise.


    Back in the day every time someone added a new Exercise to the database, it became "Public." Everyone could use it. That way the database was a crowd-sourced thing and it grew quickly. Most of those exercises and numbers were not entered by Myfitnesspal's admin. They were entered by members - so just like the Food database is way off on 80% the food, so it is also off on the Exercise Database.

    You can create your own new "Exercise" and then use that going forward OR you can edit the calories in one that's already there.

    Then you use it for a while and see if you get the results in your weight that you would expect.

    Adjust if needed...as always.

    I did not know that it was open-sourced, that explains a lot about the numbers. Thanks for passing that along.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    And when you log an hour under the category I supplied you get what number?
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    edited June 2020
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Alright, I just created a "work out on MFP. Let's take a look, shall we?
    Bench press 3x8 150 lbs
    Squat 3x12 200 lbs
    Barbell row 3x8 90lbs
    Wide grip bicep curls 3x8 60lbs
    Tricep extensions 3x8 30 lbs
    Shoulder shrugs 3x8 90 pounds
    Sitting calf raises 3x15 45lbs
    Lat pulldown 3x8 50 pounds
    Plated sit-ups 3x20 25 pounds
    Shoulder press 3x8 80 lbs
    Wrist extensions 3x8 25 lbs
    Total time: 59 minutes
    Total calories: 401

    No freaking way is that exercise set burning over 400 calories.
    Sorry, but no it's not.

    Why? Well because each rep takes roughly four (4) seconds
    When you multiply that time by the actual time under tension or more simply put " your time working" you get 19.8 minutes..
    20 minutes of work broken up by 60-90 second rests, adjusting music, saying hello or drinking water will not get you over 400 calories expended.

    Where are you accomplishing this that provides a calorie estimate for those entries?
    This is why you have everyone flumuxed and unbelieving.

    Here are my screen shots. No calorie burn calculated on those entries.
    a8wyk4o4ew38.png

    n2uu6w48nkaw.png

    Even if I create an exercise and correctly choose strength training - no calories.
    936djaovua0t.png

    Even if I create a strength lift incorrectly with cardio - I would have to enter the calories.
    9b2kquxh53qr.png


    Where are you finding this new fangled ability that no one seems to know about?
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,458 Member
    And if you pick an entry that has a burn rate, and then move to an entry that does not - it keeps the prior burn rate.

    Yeah @heybales , this part is annoying.

    I just created new exercises for myself and I don't even use any of the Myfitnesspal ones. That's the Beauty of this website. Regardless of whether or not previously crowd-sourced (like in 2009) or if they came from METS, I just don't trust 'em.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    Whydahdad71 wrote: »
    Alright, I just created a "work out on MFP. Let's take a look, shall we?
    Bench press 3x8 150 lbs
    Squat 3x12 200 lbs
    Barbell row 3x8 90lbs
    Wide grip bicep curls 3x8 60lbs
    Tricep extensions 3x8 30 lbs
    Shoulder shrugs 3x8 90 pounds
    Sitting calf raises 3x15 45lbs
    Lat pulldown 3x8 50 pounds
    Plated sit-ups 3x20 25 pounds
    Shoulder press 3x8 80 lbs
    Wrist extensions 3x8 25 lbs
    Total time: 59 minutes
    Total calories: 401

    No freaking way is that exercise set burning over 400 calories.
    Sorry, but no it's not.

    Why? Well because each rep takes roughly four (4) seconds
    When you multiply that time by the actual time under tension or more simply put " your time working" you get 19.8 minutes..
    20 minutes of work broken up by 60-90 second rests, adjusting music, saying hello or drinking water will not get you over 400 calories expended.

    Where are you accomplishing this that provides a calorie estimate for those entries?
    This is why you have everyone flumuxed and unbelieving.

    Here are my screen shots. No calorie burn calculated on those entries.
    a8wyk4o4ew38.png

    n2uu6w48nkaw.png

    Even if I create an exercise and correctly choose strength training - no calories.
    936djaovua0t.png

    Even if I create a strength lift incorrectly with cardio - I would have to enter the calories.
    9b2kquxh53qr.png


    Where are you finding this new fangled ability that no one seems to know about?

    I went into work out routines and clicked build routine. Then saved the work out and it comes up with the workout created.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    I am trying to post a screenshot of it but I can't seem to upload a photo when I am in a thread. I might be doing something wrong.
  • Whydahdad71
    Whydahdad71 Posts: 319 Member
    https://www.menshealth.com/fitness/a19546586/jumping-rope-workout-circuit-exercises/

    (For reference) Jumping rope burns about 10 calories a minute. So, I think anyone would agree that jumping a rope for 20 minutes should and would burn more calories than a weightlifting session that consists of 70% isolation exercises. With 90 second breaks in between sets.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I'm wondering if you could actually log that routine into the exercise database where the calories would actually count.

    Because in the cardio database you have either the line items with calorie burns that everyone is talking about that are correct actually.

    And you have the strength workout logging that has no calories associated with it.

    Those are the only 2 items that end up in the Exercise Diary.

    And with only calories from the cardio database (Strength Training, Circuit training, ect) adding to daily total - whatever that Add a workout is won't really effect your eating goal since it can't be logged.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories