Strength training and HRM
Replies
-
I am 36, 5' 9", and weigh 203.2. I am doing new rules of lifting for women and according to the calculations for it, I burn 291 calories for 20 minutes of lifting. So, although everyone says HRM aren't good for strength training, your number doesn't seem unreasonable.
Yea, but you are comparing it to your obviously wrong number.0 -
I am 36, 5' 9", and weigh 203.2. I am doing new rules of lifting for women and according to the calculations for it, I burn 291 calories for 20 minutes of lifting. So, although everyone says HRM aren't good for strength training, your number doesn't seem unreasonable.
Yea, but you are comparing it to your obviously wrong number.
My wrong number or op's wrong number?0 -
I don't happen to have a degree in mathematics, so I am not going to get into algorithms...here is what I know. I wear my HRM while doing cardio (yes, even HIIT) and strength training. I really could give two rats *kitten* as how accurate it is or is not. I use that information as a guide in determining my menu plan. Ultimately, I use my mirror and clothes to accurately determine if I am burning enough calories.0
-
I don't happen to have a degree in mathematics, so I am not going to get into algorithms...here is what I know. I wear my HRM while doing cardio (yes, even HIIT) and strength training. I really could give two rats *kitten* as how accurate it is or is not. I use that information as a guide in determining my menu plan. Ultimately, I use my mirror and clothes to accurately determine if I am burning enough calories.
That's perfectly fine, especially if the scale is moving in the right direction. I only post the information for those to be aware who blindly follow the numbers it spits out and cant figure out why they aren't seeing progress or for those who don't have the funds to spend on fancy electronics but are told the must because it is "the most accurate".0 -
Hi everyone
This made me super upset as I tend to wear my HRM for my warm up (e.g. jog around my block) then for my work out.
I do 2 days of strength training per day and have relied on my HRM for the calories burnt. Its not as much as my cardio circuit days where I'm doing burpees, runs, etc. but its still around 80-100kcal for 20-30 minutes actual work.
However I am not doing a few reps of heavy weights, I am doing 4 round of 12-15 reps of kettle bell swings, goblet squats, squat jumps and fast lunges.
I get out of breath and take as short a rest as I can in between them.
DO you think that the calories burnt could be relatively accurate for this kind of thing?
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK
BTW I have a Garmin 5.0 Forerunner I think0 -
This made me super upset
That's perhaps a little bit of an over reaction if I'm honestDO you think that the calories burnt could be relatively accurate for this kind of thing?
No0 -
I want to go against what all these other people in here say.
If your heartrate is elevated during weight training you are burning more calories.
Yes you can easily burn 250-500 calories per hour or more even.0 -
A friend of mine on MFP made a comment about 3-4 days ago that said that HRMs are not that accurate for strength training due to the fact that the heart rate is not consistently higher... (rest periods)... He said that because of these ups and downs, that the HRM does not record well for strength training. The gentleman seems to know what he is talking about for the most part and has been a personal trainer for like 30 years or so. I would be cautious trusting that value... I usually use the strength training estimate in MFP and count each exercise component at about 15 minutes (even though, it usually lasts closer to 40 minutes each)... Seems to be relatively accurate for my usage. Yes you do burn calories in strength training; just not quite as much as your HRM would suggest.0
-
I want to go against what all these other people in here say.
If your heartrate is elevated during weight training you are burning more calories.
Yes you can easily burn 250-500 calories per hour or more even.
Heart rate elevated =/= caloric burn, otherwise we could just watch a scary movie.0 -
So if I put some really loud fast-beat music on while doing a weights workout I'll burn more calories?If your heartrate is elevated during weight training you are burning more calories.
Yes you can easily burn 250-500 calories per hour or more even.
Sure, the heart will use a few, but I'd suggest the amount is insignificant.
Where you get your information from and what type of strength training are you talking about?0 -
I want to go against what all these other people in here say.
If your heartrate is elevated during weight training you are burning more calories.
Yes you can easily burn 250-500 calories per hour or more even.
Here, use this claw hammer to screw a shelf to the wall...0 -
How long does it take you to do the 4 rounds and what's the calories burned according to your HRM?Hi everyone
This made me super upset as I tend to wear my HRM for my warm up (e.g. jog around my block) then for my work out.
I do 2 days of strength training per day and have relied on my HRM for the calories burnt. Its not as much as my cardio circuit days where I'm doing burpees, runs, etc. but its still around 80-100kcal for 20-30 minutes actual work.
However I am not doing a few reps of heavy weights, I am doing 4 round of 12-15 reps of kettle bell swings, goblet squats, squat jumps and fast lunges.
I get out of breath and take as short a rest as I can in between them.
DO you think that the calories burnt could be relatively accurate for this kind of thing?
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK
BTW I have a Garmin 5.0 Forerunner I think
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
250-350 yes. One could also only burn 150 calories due to rest time between sets. You can go against it out of disagreement, but you'd have to prove that calorie burned through anaerobic activity vs aerobic activity is EQUAL at the same heart rate for the same amount of time. The pathways for energy usage and oxygen are different. I'd love to see it.I want to go against what all these other people in here say.
If your heartrate is elevated during weight training you are burning more calories.
Yes you can easily burn 250-500 calories per hour or more even.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
My HR doesn’t go anywhere near as high during strength training as it does while running and obviously decreases significantly between sets. My calorie burn reflects this, as I generally burn less than half for a weight lifting session (6-7 cpm) than I do during the same duration of running at a rigorous pace (7mph+, rigorous for me anyways) (14+ cpm).
So it is not reasonable that strength training burns about half of what running does? If not, what is reasonable, 25%, 10%, 5%? Don’t tell me to Google it, I’m interested in what the MFP community has to say.0 -
My HR doesn’t go anywhere near as high during strength training as it does while running and obviously decreases significantly between sets. My calorie burn reflects this, as I generally burn less than half for a weight lifting session (6-7 cpm) than I do during the same duration of running at a rigorous pace (7mph+, rigorous for me anyways) (14+ cpm).
So it is not reasonable that strength training burns about half of what running does? If not, what is reasonable, 25%, 10%, 5%? Don’t tell me to Google it, I’m interested in what the MFP community has to say.
There is a link I posted earlier in the thread that does a comparison. It's titled something like THIS is why HRMs are for limited use or something like that.0 -
Give me an idea of your workout (sets/reps/weights) and I'll try and work it out. Doing it on time isn't great - someone doing a body pump class might be moving constantly with weights, while I will often take 5 minute rests between sets, but of course be using a hell of a lot more weight.So it is not reasonable that strength training burns about half of what running does? If not, what is reasonable, 25%, 10%, 5%? Don’t tell me to Google it, I’m interested in what the MFP community has to say.
The figures are still irrelevant because the 'after burn' can't easily be calculated and will likely be more significant.0 -
Give me an idea of your workout (sets/reps/weights) and I'll try and work it out. Doing it on time isn't great - someone doing a body pump class might be moving constantly with weights, while I will often take 5 minute rests between sets, but of course be using a hell of a lot more weight.So it is not reasonable that strength training burns about half of what running does? If not, what is reasonable, 25%, 10%, 5%? Don’t tell me to Google it, I’m interested in what the MFP community has to say.
The figures are still irrelevant because the 'after burn' can't easily be calculated and will likely be more significant.
I pulled my last workout from "pull" day:
Standing One-Arm Dumbbell Curl 3 8 40
Dumbbell Row, One-Arm, Bent-Over 3 8 60
Triceps Pull-down 3 8 80
Seated, Low Lat Pull-In, Two-Arm 3 8 90
Triceps Extension 3 8 70
Preacher Bench Medium-Grip Barbell Curl 3 8 80
(Sets / Reps / Avg Wgt across all sets). I took about 1 minute rest between sets (HR usually down to 40-50% max) with a drink of water between excercises. Thanks!0 -
As I say, the numbers don't mean much.
As an idea, if you were 100% efficient - you would have burnt 7.67 calories. I've had to take some slight liberties with the figures, but that should be about right. Vaguely based on my height - around 6' (shorter people will have less range of motion so burn less, taller more so burn more - can be seen in "world's strongest man" where stuff like dead-lift favours the shorter people.)
Oh and I've presumed that was lb as the figures make sense for that
One of the problems is that the more a body does a movement, the more efficient it becomes at it; I believe one of the reasons people can gain a fair bit of strength without gaining muscle.
So, the best I could find is the body being 18-26 efficient at transferring it's movement.
Those figures are for rowing and cycling. Even if we take it to be a good bit lower at 10%, you're talking 76 calories. More likely maybe 35-50 calories.0 -
A heart rate monitor (HRM) is capable of estimating calorie burn pretty accurately—but only for aerobic (cardio) exercise, not for strength training. Here's why:
A HRM won't give you an accurate idea of how many calories you burn during strength training, because the relationship between heart rate and calorie expenditure is not the same during strength training as during cardio exercise, which is what the HRM's estimate is based on. Unless your weight training is very vigorous circuit training, the heart rate monitor will be overestimating your calorie burn by a fair amount.
The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.
Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.
So while a series of strength training exercises may elevate your heart rate like aerobic exercise does, you're not actually using as much oxygen and burning as many calories as you would be if you were steadily using several large muscles all at once, as when walking, running, swimming, or doing aerobics for example.
The heart rate monitor doesn’t know whether your increase in heart rate is due to several large muscle groups working (cardio), an isolated muscle group lifting a weight (strength training), or even if adrenaline or excitement is increasing your heart rate. It just knows your heart rate, and the formulas it uses to estimate calories are based on studies of aerobic exercise, not other activities. So, it's going to overestimate your calorie expenditure when the rise in heart rate is stimulated by using isolated muscles at maximum intensity, which is what occurs during strength training.
Written by Dean Anderson, Certified Personal Trainer
source: http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75
I'm sorry, but this is totally incorrect.
There are 4 (3) chemical reactions/fuel systems that convert fuel (fat/carbohydrate) into chemical energy (ATP) that our muscle use to convert chemical into mechanical energy (movement).
Creatine-Phosphate
Anaerobic Glycogen
Aerobic Glyccogen
Aerobic Fat
Oxygen is only necessary for aerobic reactions (the creatine-phosphate system can be recharged aerobically, but in practice is recharged via mix). If you are only measuring oxygen useage for measuring calorie burn, you are totally missing the anaerobic energy systems.
Most strength training work is anaerobic exercise, the short term demand for ATP is far beyond what the aerobic system is capable of producing. The "drawback" of the anaerobic system is that it is a highly inefficient use of your fuel. 18 times more inefficient to be exact, by adding oxygen to the equation a far more efficient chemical reaction is created, the problem is that this is limited by the oxygen transport system. So you end up burning up lots and lots of fuel to produce a little energy.
While you end up sitting around most of the time when you are strength training, realize that your fuel use is highly inefficient, which makes up a lot of the difference.
MFP's entries for high effort calisthenics or circuit training are good estimates for all forms of high effort strength training; low reps, high reps, and everything in-between. Should be about 2/3-3/4 the burn you would get from running in the same amount of time. The uber low calorie numbers that some people use/believe are WAY OFF. If you don't believe this try your hand at bulking.
I've used the analogy many times, steady state cardio = driving a prius on a smooth sailing interstate; strength training = driving a hummer through downtown, spending most of your time at stop lights. HRM's in this analogy measure fuel usage via measuring wind speed with an anemometer on top of the vehicle, which is a reasonably decent approximation for the prius, utterly useless for the hummer.0 -
As I say, the numbers don't mean much.
As an idea, if you were 100% efficient - you would have burnt 7.67 calories. I've had to take some slight liberties with the figures, but that should be about right. Vaguely based on my height - around 6' (shorter people will have less range of motion so burn less, taller more so burn more - can be seen in "world's strongest man" where stuff like dead-lift favours the shorter people.)
Oh and I've presumed that was lb as the figures make sense for that
One of the problems is that the more a body does a movement, the more efficient it becomes at it; I believe one of the reasons people can gain a fair bit of strength without gaining muscle.
So, the best I could find is the body being 18-26 efficient at transferring it's movement.
Those figures are for rowing and cycling. Even if we take it to be a good bit lower at 10%, you're talking 76 calories. More likely maybe 35-50 calories.
Interesting, thanks for taking the time. Yeah, it is in lbs., sorry, I sometimes forget about the international nature of MFP! I’m 6 feet, 166lbs, I guess that is info I could have included, lol.
What do you recommend as a methodology for determining post-weight training nutrition? As I see it, an HR monitor calculated calorie deficit, even one that is over exaggerating calories burned, is serving as a reminder that I have additional nutritional needs as a result of working out. Will I eat back my calories precisely according to my established carb/fat/protein ratio? No, I will go heavier on protein and a little more on carbs (I also did cardio at the end).0 -
I'd say the best method is mirror, scales and keeping a track of the weight you can lift all over time.
These are the very best methods.
In the end, calories in and calories out are ALWAYS going to have big fudge-factors, until we've got star-trek like scanners that can deeply analyse everything we eat before we do.
One thing you could look at doing is having your BMR tested the day after doing weights. This will give you an IDEA of the extra calories you're burning, though I haven't looked in to exactly how accurate that is.
As it happens I do have one (but am several thousands miles away from you). For me, the elevated BMR it showed matched my consumption at the time and maintenance weight, so seems likely to be reasonably accurate.
The vast majority of things I've read suggest going for a static amount of protein - 1g/lb of body weight when losing, a bit less when eating a calorie surpless.
Your body can't use more than this, so you generally make it up with carbs.
Andy Morgan who writes the ripped body blog has some good info about how to set your macros and so on.
http://rippedbody.jp/2014/01/16/nutritional-hierarchy-importance-macros-fibre-alcohol/
That is the 2nd of a 5 part topic (5th part not out yet); it's worth reading it all. Note some sections focus on a lean gains style approach, but he also covers general aspects.0 -
How long does it take you to do the 4 rounds and what's the calories burned according to your HRM?Hi everyone
This made me super upset as I tend to wear my HRM for my warm up (e.g. jog around my block) then for my work out.
I do 2 days of strength training per day and have relied on my HRM for the calories burnt. Its not as much as my cardio circuit days where I'm doing burpees, runs, etc. but its still around 80-100kcal for 20-30 minutes actual work.
However I am not doing a few reps of heavy weights, I am doing 4 round of 12-15 reps of kettle bell swings, goblet squats, squat jumps and fast lunges.
I get out of breath and take as short a rest as I can in between them.
DO you think that the calories burnt could be relatively accurate for this kind of thing?
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEK
BTW I have a Garmin 5.0 Forerunner I think
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I'd need my HRM to check the history to be accurate but my most recent session on Monday would have taken me (after a 6minute kilometre jog)
Maybe 20 - 25 minutes of vigorous effort, I was out of breath, using only 8kg kettle bells and working as hard as I could.
My HRM gave me maybe 80kcal for the jog/run, and another 80 (ish) for the 4 rounds.
I am not "SUPER" upset I am just disappointed as I thought weight training was really effective at burning fat whilst maintaining muscle and am now kind of confused about how to incorporate strength training into my weight loss endeavours.0 -
Again - weight training can burn significant amount of calories afterwards and DOES help maintain muscle.
Certainly for me, I'd say it's the best way to burn calories when everything is considered (including 'afterburn') for the time spent.
If you don't include rest time (as I do them at my own place and do other stuff), but count times spent shifting weights around etc, it might be 10-15 minutes for hundreds of calories burnt over the two days after that.
From what I can see, the higher the intensity, the less calories burnt at the time, but the more burnt after.
It's entirely possible that the HRM is actually showing not too far off an accurate figure. But it's probably doing so from luck not judgement and it's not going to be accurate as far as calorie burn at that second goes.0 -
Again - weight training can burn significant amount of calories afterwards and DOES help maintain muscle.
Certainly for me, I'd say it's the best way to burn calories when everything is considered (including 'afterburn') for the time spent.
If you don't include rest time (as I do them at my own place and do other stuff), but count times spent shifting weights around etc, it might be 10-15 minutes for hundreds of calories burnt over the two days after that.
From what I can see, the higher the intensity, the less calories burnt at the time, but the more burnt after.
It's entirely possible that the HRM is actually showing not too far off an accurate figure. But it's probably doing so from luck not judgement and it's not going to be accurate as far as calorie burn at that second goes.
Thank you!
I am just worried that I will overeat my calories and have been doing so now... eek!
Thanks for the advice
0 -
If you're talking 80 calories, I wouldn't get stressed either way anyway.
I suspect you'll have bigger inaccuracies in logging on both sides of calories in vs calories out.0 -
Again - weight training can burn significant amount of calories afterwards and DOES help maintain muscle.
Certainly for me, I'd say it's the best way to burn calories when everything is considered (including 'afterburn') for the time spent.
If you don't include rest time (as I do them at my own place and do other stuff), but count times spent shifting weights around etc, it might be 10-15 minutes for hundreds of calories burnt over the two days after that.
From what I can see, the higher the intensity, the less calories burnt at the time, but the more burnt after.
It's entirely possible that the HRM is actually showing not too far off an accurate figure. But it's probably doing so from luck not judgement and it's not going to be accurate as far as calorie burn at that second goes.
The question is never whether or not strength training "burns calories" or even whether weight burns enough calories to contribute to maintaining a calorie deficit. The question is: can an HRM accurately estimate that calorie expenditure. To that question, the answer is unequivocally "no".
Both research and real-life experience support the idea that strength training alone, combined with diet! can generate sufficient calorie expenditure to maintain a calorie deficit.
However, the effectiveness of the "afterburn" is often significantly overstated. It's more like "a hundred" calories burned over two days, not "hundreds".
In a study that I recently discussed in another topic (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/with_user/176328), the amount of EPOC following one set of bench press amounted to "5" calories.
The other thing shown in the study was that intensity did NOT affect EPOC at all. At intensities ranging from 37% to 90% of 1 RM, there was no significant difference in EPOC.0 -
However, the effectiveness of the "afterburn" is often significantly overstated. It's more like "a hundred" calories burned over two days, not "hundreds".
In a study that I recently discussed in another topic (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/with_user/176328), the amount of EPOC following one set of bench press amounted to "5" calories.
The other thing shown in the study was that intensity did NOT affect EPOC at all. At intensities ranging from 37% to 90% of 1 RM, there was no significant difference in EPOC.
People are way too caught up in the oxygen = calories.
The strength training "afterburn" is NOT EPOC. EPOC is when the body recovers from the slow to recharge oxygen debt after high intensity cardio. The afterburn from strength training is repairing the physical damage to the muscle. Recovery is absolutely not a "free" process calorie-wise. Damage repair does not require oxygen.0 -
Im thinking of not counting caloric burn on my strength bc days. Like today was somewhat cardio because of the pace but it was all lower body with weights. It was 20 different exercises with 50 reps each, i used 10lb dumbells, included squats, box jumps no weight, forward and reverese lunge, bad dogs, scorpions,saddlebag busters with band, dead lifts,toe ups,heel rockers, calf raises,static hold squat, close to open squat combo,bridges, baddog scorpion combo, single leg squat ,sumo squats,single leg calf with 20 lbs.theres 2 more cant recall at the moment also 5 min cardio warmup and 10 min abs at end ,entire workout is 1 hour.After wearing a hr monitor for a lower body cardio class that was bust a$#, and seeing that i only burned 370 calories im figuring i miscalculate calories in enough to equal out. Btw im 53yrs 5'2" and 128lbs.If you're talking 80 calories, I wouldn't get stressed either way anyway.
I suspect you'll have bigger inaccuracies in logging on both sides of calories in vs calories out.0 -
Because I follow a 'lean gains' style approach, I just add 1000 calories on strength days regardless.
Cheers; this got me looking at a load of different studies. Unfortunately the results seem to be rather inconclusive.In a study that I recently discussed in another topic (http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/with_user/176328), the amount of EPOC following one set of bench press amounted to "5" calories.
Schuenke et. al.provides one extreme with a 180lb man upping his RMR by nearly 800 calories on average!
It does note that women aren't affected by this as much; interesting when a few of the other studies were female only.
At the other end, there's plenty that suggest as you do, that's it's pretty insignificant.
Another study noted that exercises need to be done to fatigue generally. While in this case it was, I wonder if one set of a bench press is enough - especially if that's isolating the arms. When compared to 3 sets of squats, you're using a lot less volume/weight of muscle for the bench press.0 -
I'd say the best method is mirror, scales and keeping a track of the weight you can lift all over time.
These are the very best methods.
In the end, calories in and calories out are ALWAYS going to have big fudge-factors, until we've got star-trek like scanners that can deeply analyse everything we eat before we do.
One thing you could look at doing is having your BMR tested the day after doing weights. This will give you an IDEA of the extra calories you're burning, though I haven't looked in to exactly how accurate that is.
As it happens I do have one (but am several thousands miles away from you). For me, the elevated BMR it showed matched my consumption at the time and maintenance weight, so seems likely to be reasonably accurate.
The vast majority of things I've read suggest going for a static amount of protein - 1g/lb of body weight when losing, a bit less when eating a calorie surpless.
Your body can't use more than this, so you generally make it up with carbs.
Andy Morgan who writes the ripped body blog has some good info about how to set your macros and so on.
http://rippedbody.jp/2014/01/16/nutritional-hierarchy-importance-macros-fibre-alcohol/
That is the 2nd of a 5 part topic (5th part not out yet); it's worth reading it all. Note some sections focus on a lean gains style approach, but he also covers general aspects.
Thanks for the information. I have used a number of different models to calculate my BMR / TDEE (just formulaic versions), and I’ve settled on about 2,350 calories per day. If I stay within 10% of this, eating back exercise calories, my weight is generally constant within a pound or two. I have been at a steady weight and am not looking to lose or gain. My goal is to be “functionally fit”, not a bulky bodybuilder, not a skinny runner, but built more like a welterweight MMA athlete, and I think I’m ballpark there. And I’m always looking to tweak my methodology to improve!
I eat roughly a gram of protein for each pound (about 30% of my intake), usually going a little over that on lifting days. I realize that my body may not be utilizing all of it. I’ll take a look at that link you posted, thanks!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions