Logging Strength Training Workouts

kristaann27

When I used to do strength training, I would go under the "Strength" option and log how many crunches,squats, bicep curls, etc. I did, but noticed they don't take off any calories. I thought that sounded odd, cause I definitely felt like I was burning calories.

I asked a friend on myfitnesspal what she does, and she logs it as "Circuit Training - general," which is great since it's under "Cardio" and it's taking off calories, but now I think it's too many calories! For example, today I did 45 mins of warm up cardio, arms, abs, legs and cool down stretches and my app told me I burned 469 calories. I didn't think you could burn that many calories unless it was ALL cardio! Does this sound accurate to anyone? I've been shortening my work out to about 20 minutes (not in real life - just on my app) so it doesn't take away more than 200 calories, but even then I feel like I'm off. I want to make sure I'm still doing strength training, but it's so hard to log it correctly since I have no clue how much or how little I'm burning!

Help please

JodieP13

Under cardio, there is a listing for weight lifting. That's what I use. The calorie burn seems a little low to me, but it is what it is.

DebbieSusanne

I have a heart rate monitor and I log the entire session under cardio exercise as strength training/weight lifting (you may have to type in search bar). My heart rate monitor is usually pretty close to what MFP has me for the amount of minutes I put in this way, 469 does seem a bit high for 45 minutes.

spfldpam

I have a Polar FT7 Heart rate monitor on when I do all my workouts so it is all logged on it. For me, 25 minutes of strength training is usually about 100 cals burned. I usually do 20 min of cardio, strength training, then 10 more minutes of cardio and then usually an aqua class in the pool for 45 min to an hour. The heart rate monitors especially Polars account for it all. I can wear it in the pool also. They are great and I love it. Worth the $125 I feel!
Good luck!

jim180155

I have three main areas where I had been tracking calorie burns: Fitbit for general activity, bike riding, and strength training. I get pretty good estimates for the first two, and little more than a wild guess for the last. So today I decided to quit logging strength training on MFP. I still use MapMyRide for bike riding and strength training tracking, not for the calories but for tracking the type and duration of different exercises, but today I unlinked MMR and MFP so the strength training calories don't show up on MFP. (I'll manually add the bike riding calories.) I don't think I'm burning more than a couple hundred strength training calories anyway, so I'll just use the missing entries as a safety buffer.

mschicagocubs

I log it under cardio, weight training, but I log it as "1 calorie burned"

It is really hard to know how many calories you burn during weight lifting plus afterburn.

IMO, it is best to not log it as part of your calories burned. Just keep track of your progress on the weights

ottermotorcycle

There's a "weight lifting/strength training" option but it's a very low estimate, probably because it counts what you burn physically picking up weights and putting them down, while the majority of calorie burn from strength training is in recovery. But you do need the calories to recover.

I've heard people use "calisthenics" instead, it's probably somewhere between "strength training" and "circuit training" so that's probably a decent option. I'm thinking of switching to that instead of logging as strength/weights.

snappingosprey

I don't bother entering my weight training into MFP.

There is no accurate way to calculate calories burned lifting weights. As the person above me mentioned, many calories are burned after weight lifting during the recovery phase. Your heart rate may be at rest an hour later, but you continue to burn calories at an increased rate up to 3 hours after lifting (time and intensity of burn dependent on intensity of weight lifting, total muscle mass, and a ton of other variables)

If you lift for 20-30 minutes to exhaustion each time, eat close to your daily goal. You'll definitely be under in the calories, though it won't show in MFP.

vorgas

I have a heart rate monitor and I log the entire session under cardio exercise as strength training/weight lifting (you may have to type in search bar). My heart rate monitor is usually pretty close to what MFP has me for the amount of minutes I put in this way, 469 does seem a bit high for 45 minutes.

HRMs are not at all accurate for weight lifting.

First thing to understand: HRMs do not measure calories burned! They measure Heart Rate.

Second thing to understand: Your HR can change for any number of reasons. Caffeine, fear, adrenaline, excitement, etc.

Next thing to understand: A faster beating heart does not burn significantly more Calories. You can check this yourself by sitting perfectly still and hold your breath as long as you can. Repeat over and over. Watch your HR soar. Are you burning more calories? No. What if you burn 100 calories in a walk, then repeat the walk the next day immediately after having 3 cups of espresso. Are you burning more calories? No. Well, your HRM will say you did.

Important bit about HRMs: They use a CALCULATION based on the volume load from steady state aerobic exercise.

Volume load: When doing aerobics, your HR rises to move a greater volume of oxygen through your body. When you lift weights, your HR rises while blood vessels constrict to increase the blood pressure in the appropriate area. This is called pressure load. Pressure load is not volume load. Your heart is beating faster for a different reason than with aerobics. So, the calorie formula is no longer accurate.

Steady state: When you are doing aerobics, you are constantly moving with very little rest, and you are moving large portions of your body. When you lift weight, you are often not using your whole body, and taking longer rests. So, it's not accurate.

Aerobic exercise: Aerobic exercise is when your body mixes oxygen and fat to produce energy. This happens when the energy requirement is low. Lifting weights is anaerobic exercise. That means it uses the glycogen stored in the muscles for energy. Different energy source from aerobics (what most people call cardio), so the formula is inaccurate. (This is a simplifed explanation, the reality is a little more complicated, but the effect is the same).

To recap: The three important factors in determining a calorie burn from HR are all using DIFFERENT THINGS. There is NO WAY for it to be even remotely accurate. Ditch the HRM for weights.

c2111

Under cardio, there is a listing for weight lifting. That's what I use. The calorie burn seems a little low to me, but it is what it is.

I do the same, I also think the cal burn a little low

vorgas

Under cardio, there is a listing for weight lifting. That's what I use. The calorie burn seems a little low to me, but it is what it is.

I do the same, I also think the cal burn a little low

FWIW, the energy needed to lift a weight is .00032 Calories per pound per foot.

Of course, your body is horribly inefficient and can pretty easily spend 10 times that in lifting the weight. Free weights are probably higher. Machine weights might be lower.

Also, depending on how slowly you lower the weight will burn extra calories. But it's probably not as much as you might think it is.

dmeyerman

HRMs are not at all accurate for weight lifting.

First thing to understand: HRMs do not measure calories burned! They measure Heart Rate.

Second thing to understand: Your HR can change for any number of reasons. Caffeine, fear, adrenaline, excitement, etc.

Next thing to understand: A faster beating heart does not burn significantly more Calories. You can check this yourself by sitting perfectly still and hold your breath as long as you can. Repeat over and over. Watch your HR soar. Are you burning more calories? No. What if you burn 100 calories in a walk, then repeat the walk the next day immediately after having 3 cups of espresso. Are you burning more calories? No. Well, your HRM will say you did.

Important bit about HRMs: They use a CALCULATION based on the volume load from steady state aerobic exercise.

Volume load: When doing aerobics, your HR rises to move a greater volume of oxygen through your body. When you lift weights, your HR rises while blood vessels constrict to increase the blood pressure in the appropriate area. This is called pressure load. Pressure load is not volume load. Your heart is beating faster for a different reason than with aerobics. So, the calorie formula is no longer accurate.

Steady state: When you are doing aerobics, you are constantly moving with very little rest, and you are moving large portions of your body. When you lift weight, you are often not using your whole body, and taking longer rests. So, it's not accurate.

Aerobic exercise: Aerobic exercise is when your body mixes oxygen and fat to produce energy. This happens when the energy requirement is low. Lifting weights is anaerobic exercise. That means it uses the glycogen stored in the muscles for energy. Different energy source from aerobics (what most people call cardio), so the formula is inaccurate. (This is a simplifed explanation, the reality is a little more complicated, but the effect is the same).

To recap: The three important factors in determining a calorie burn from HR are all using DIFFERENT THINGS. There is NO WAY for it to be even remotely accurate. Ditch the HRM for weights.

Excellent post Vorgas!