Apple Watch App 1,000 calories burned?

JimnKC

Is this true?
Average HR 148 for 2 hrs 10 min.

nossmf

It's possible, but will depend on what the actual movement is. Two hours of walking on level ground will not give the same calorie burn as two hours of rock climbing. Heart rate can be misleading also, as two people can complete the same workout with very different heart rates, depending how fit each person is.

Lietchi

We have no way of knowing without knowing your personal stats and what the exercise was.

In case it was a run, you might find this calculator useful to compare:
https://exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs

cmriverside

Heart rate is not an accurate method of calculating calorie burn.

As the above posts say, there's no way to know since you gave us no context.

In general for two hours of moderate exercise if you're overweight I'd guess you could use half of that number and be okay. Try that and see how you do over time with weight changes and energy level.

JimnKC

For content I'm carrying a 22 pound Stihl BR600 back pack blower moving leaves and stick down hill. Ozark rocky terrain nothing flat. My movement is slowly walking backwards,sideways,downhill,uphill and resting when heartrate gets to 160 which close to max. 220-58=162. 5'10" 216 pounds. Recently retired due to physical health. Two months ago weight 238. Started Wegovy. Started counting calories again 1,500. Currently not eating calories and losing 2 pounds a week.

nossmf

Ok, weighted walking does burn more calories than without, and the hilly terrain also helps. But sounds to me like this did not burn 1k calories.

cmriverside

Yeah, I agree with nossmf. I stand by my, "Use half that."

You say you're not eating any of the "exercise calories?" Is that what this means?

Currently not eating calories

Because that's not good practice either. It may be okay for a little while (like a week or two) but at your height/weight/calories (1500) that's going to make you crash and burn.

Pay attention to 1.) extreme hunger 2.) binging 3.) lack of energy or focus 4.) fatigue 5.) over-sleeping 6.) depression or mood issues 7.) dry skin/cracking skin on fingers or feet. Fingernails cracking 8.) hair loss

^Any of the above, start eating more. My suggestion is that you're already under-eating and should definitely be eating those extra 500 calories from the exercise.

Retroguy2000

JimnKC wrote: »

Started Wegovy. Started counting calories again 1,500. Currently not eating calories and losing 2 pounds a week.

You risk losing quite a bit of muscle mass doing that, especially with no mention of frequent lifting and high protein.

JimnKC

Protein set for 94 daily, most days over 100+. After work outs 30 protein in protein drinks.

JimnKC

cmriverside wrote: »

Yeah, I agree with nossmf. I stand by my, "Use half that."

You say you're not eating any of the "exercise calories?" Is that what this means?

Currently not eating calories

Yes.

Because that's not good practice either. It may be okay for a little while (like a week or two) but at your height/weight/calories (1500) that's going to make you crash and burn.

Because of my high heart rate during this work I'm not positive that these calories are burnt.

Pay attention to 1.) extreme hunger 2.) binging 3.) lack of energy or focus 4.) fatigue 5.) over-sleeping 6.) depression or mood issues 7.) dry skin/cracking skin on fingers or feet. Fingernails cracking 8.) hair loss

^Any of the above, start eating more. My suggestion is that you're already under-eating and should definitely be eating those extra 500 calories from the exercise.

None of the problems above so far.

AnnPT77

JimnKC wrote: »

Protein set for 94 daily, most days over 100+. After work outs 30 protein in protein drinks.

That seems not a lot of protein for even an average-sized guy, especially when in a steep calorie deficit. (MFP estimates protein needs as a percent of calories. It may estimate that for you based on 1500 calories, but if 1500 calories is too aggressive (probable) then the protein estimate will also be too low, a bad combination). That's less protein than I get as a 5'5" mid-130s pounds woman (vegetarian, besides).

This is a good research-based source for protein recommendations:

https://examine.com/guides/protein-intake/

For your situation as I understand it, it says "Your optimal protein intake is at least 115
grams/day. Intakes of up to 229 grams per day may maximize improvements in body composition in individuals who perform regular exercise, based on limited evidence."

Starting lighter than you are now (183) I lost weight fine on 1400-1600 calories plus all carefully-estimated exercise calories (at age 59-60, female). One person's history doesn't predict another's results, but because we're so demographically different, that experience leads me to believe a flat 1500 is aggressive, for you. I could be wrong.

Also: Speaking as an experienced recreational cardiovascular sport athlete (with coaching education in my sport), 220-age is not gospel for determining HRmax. It's wrong for a large minority of people. If you're getting close to that HR, but not gasping for breath and fighting hard to stay at that intensity, high chances that's not your max HR. Max HR isn't mainly about athleticism; it's mostly about genetics. Being athletic can slow aging-related declines in HRmax, but exercise doesn't really improve HRmax. In the 220-age theory, my HRmax is 152. I'm just starting to breath hard around that, and can hold above 152 for at least 5 minutes plus (did so recently). It's not my HRmax. HRmax is around 180, tested a few years back.

It's fine to rest a spell when things get intense, don't get me wrong. But if you're doing it purely because of a number, that may be over-reaction. HRmax isn't necessarily a number we shouldn't exceed, it's a number a healthy person can't exceed. That said, overdoing is a bad plan in general if new to exertion.

Best wishes!

JimnKC

Raised my protein up to 30% 113g.