Massive Calorie Burns!!

Options
2

Replies

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    It usually takes me 2 hours (or close to it) of high intensity cardio to break into the 1,000's.

    At about 100 cals/ mile about 1000 cals is 10 miles, so about 90 minutes worth of effort. I find the rowing machine gets me about 60-70% of the calorie consumption by time of running, and road cycling is about 50-60% of running consumption.
  • joanthemom8
    joanthemom8 Posts: 375 Member
    Options
    Yikes! I was looking for help among my friends regarding HRMs and activity trackers.... now this topic is making me more indecisive! I know we want an accurate calorie burn, but I never "eat back" all of my exercise calories anyway (well, at least not intentionally)...
  • sticky130
    sticky130 Posts: 101 Member
    Options
    Good call on StrongLifts, I'm starting on Saturday.

    In that case I would say that 450cals is very low if that includes your 2 hour walk also? Do you have a HRM?

    450 would be the burn above the the usual metabolic burn (which is 50~150 cals already included in your MFP numbers, woops) so it isn't too high for a two hour walk.

    Most HRM are useless for either low intensity work like walking or high HR/low oxygen consumption work like lifting - the calibration curves are not intended for those activity curves - there are a few watches that do take those into account but they tend to cost more.

    High burns for me would be 4-8 hrs of mountain biking or alpine trekking.

    ETA: 450 estimate would be for walking ... if you are also rowing for 20-30 minutes AND weightlifting seriously for 30-45 minutes - it is likely an underestimate.

    I don't think its included in my MFP numbers as I have MFP set at sedentary, so if I don't do the work, I don't get to eat it back if that makes sense. Also the 4-450 calories is all the activity, not just the walking. I also don't record activity using MFP as I don't trust the numbers, it's always way higher that Fitbit so I stick with those figures. :ohwell:
  • jdgerscs
    jdgerscs Posts: 3
    Options
    Sunday morning gym session with Polar heart monitor 1700 + calories (2.5hrs In Total)
    Treadmill Run 5k, Spin Class & Kettlercise, all cardio with some strength training thrown In
    on the bike & kettles
    Works for me, hope this helps ....
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    Those that are recording burns of 800-900 always have me wondering as well...for example 1 hour of zumba...over 800 calories...yah no...

    It's related to mass and intensity.
    The other day, @ 165lbs, I burned 830 KCal in 47.5 minutes running.

    Yah I did Zumba at my heaviest and put a lot of effort into it...i love dancing...

    no way it burned over 800 calories for me...I was about 190lbs...

    Zumba can be quite intense if you put a lot into it and jump a lot and do the moves very exaggerated...but then there is the lull between sets, the warm up the cool down...so in reality you are probably really only going "hard" for about 40mins...

    but that means HRM aren't good for this as it's not steady state.

    For me to burn 800 calories would require a 2 hour walk at 4mph, 1h 40min @ 4.5mph (both of which are my normal pace) or ride my bike at a moderate pace for 90mins...and I am at 152lbs...

    Trust me the biking is more strenuous than Zumba could ever be.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    Yikes! I was looking for help among my friends regarding HRMs and activity trackers.... now this topic is making me more indecisive! I know we want an accurate calorie burn, but I never "eat back" all of my exercise calories anyway (well, at least not intentionally)...

    The purpose of an HRM is not to measure calorie consumption, it's an additional capability that's available as a result of using HR as a proxy for calorie consumption.

    If you're not eating back the calorie expenditure, without exploring whether that's sensible or not, then it's pointless to spend the money on something that doesn't really do what you need and you wouldn't actually be using the information from anyway.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    Sunday morning gym session with Polar heart monitor 1700 + calories (2.5hrs In Total)
    Treadmill Run 5k, Spin Class & Kettlercise, all cardio with some strength training thrown In
    on the bike & kettles
    Works for me, hope this helps ....

    300 Cals from the run, the rest is probably over-estimated
  • jdgerscs
    jdgerscs Posts: 3
    Options
    It may well be, I'm only posting what It has recorded ...
    200Lbs In weight 47yr old so I'm working hard & the HR Is set to my exact weight, height, age etc
    It recorded :
    Run 472, not jogging, running at pace
    Spin 681
    Kettles 614
    I'm already warmed up & my heart rate Is higher from the treadmill, so the calorie burn I would expect to be higher
    at each of the next classes ..
    If nothing else It's a great motivator :)
    Get one ...
  • steveocy1
    steveocy1 Posts: 19 Member
    Options
    i didnt think HRMs were effective for strength training?

    When I lift I use my HRM, but I record the time in MFP as cardiovascular circuit training for the amount of time that I spent lifting (i.e 45 minutes). That nets me about 65-70% of what my HRM tells me. I have 18 months of spreadsheets with tons of data and this method is pretty much spot on for me and my results reflect this.
  • levitateme
    levitateme Posts: 999 Member
    Options
    HRMs are only accurate when calculating calories burned for steady state cardio (running, jogging, walking, eliptical)

    I don't trust the accuracy of zumba burns. Sure "it's intense" but you are not maintaining the same HR for the entirety of the workout, no way.

    I also base it on myself. At 160 I burned ~300 calories in a 1/2 hour with an average HR of 180, which is 90% my max effort. When I see people log 30 minutes walking or jogging as 300-400, I assume that they are over logging and probably have no idea.

    I switched to TDEE method a while back and I like it better because I don't do as much cardio. I'm totally unsure how much I burn lifting, so it's easier just to eat the same goal every day.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    200Lbs In weight 47yr old so I'm working hard & the HR Is set to my exact weight, height, age etc
    It recorded :
    Run 472, not jogging, running at pace

    Probably close given the weight, normal rule of thumb for running is about 100 cals per mile, but accounting for some inefficiency and weight it's probably only a little high.
    Spin 681

    The reason that this is probably high is that most HRMs are designed for steady state or smooth transitions of HR. The use of HR as a proxy for consumption depends on the assumptions built into the processing being adhered to. A spin class involves a number of transitions of HR, sometimes spiking and sometimes smooth. The level of error won't be huge, but it will be significant enough to misinform.
    Kettles 614

    This is probably where the biggest error lies, as the transients of HR are significant and you go into the anaerobic range reasonably regularly in a class like this. The algorithm completely breaks down when you're in anaerobic activity.
    I'm already warmed up & my heart rate Is higher from the treadmill, so the calorie burn I would expect to be higher
    at each of the next classes ..

    This is a fairly common misunderstanding in the weight losing exerciser; HR does not drive calorie expenditure. If anything the elevated HR is a contributor to the errors in the figures from the subsequent sessions.
    If nothing else It's a great motivator :)
    Get one ...

    I have one, I use it to inform my training, as in I use it as a Heart Rate Monitor, so when I'm on a session I can tune my pace according to where my HR is sitting. As a result of training with it my pace is improving, and I can work out when to push a session harder, or ease back.

    There is a lot of misinformation about the utility of HRMs in weight loss and performance improvement. They're a good tool for performance improvement, they're useful from a weight loss perspective, but they're very vulnerable to error as a result of using them inappropriately.
  • fleetzz
    fleetzz Posts: 962 Member
    Options
    Calories per mile depends on your weight---

    best estimate: Weight in lbs * 0.62 * number of miles run.

    an estimate of 100 calories per miles only works for you if you weigh 161 lbs. If you weigh more you will burn more.

    In general, if you run faster it just means that you burn the calories faster.
  • Ready2Rock206
    Ready2Rock206 Posts: 9,488 Member
    Options
    This is why I do the TDEE method and don't even bother tracking exercise calories. Also when I did use my HRM my burns were ridiculously low anyway. I just don't burn much even when I feel like I'm dying so it is super frustrating and I would wonder why I was even bothering. Who needs that stress? And everything is completely inaccurate anyway. Better to just do TDEE for me and not stress about it.
  • jdgerscs
    jdgerscs Posts: 3
    Options
    MeanderingMam
    Top reply, I enjoyed reading It, I agree with everything you say ...
    I've lost 17lbs in last 5-6 weeks so something Is working
    ;)
  • missomgitsica
    missomgitsica Posts: 496 Member
    Options
    MFP does tend to overestimate burns. I have an HRM, that's the only thing I trust to give a decent estimate of calories burned when I work out. Honestly, the FitBit doesn't monitor heart rate, so it's really just a pedometer IMO.
  • Loiselaine
    Loiselaine Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    This is really a question, not a comment. Is it absolutely necessary to record exercise? Am I in danger of eating too little if I don't account for my exercise?? Does it really take 1200 calories a day just to nourish my organs???
  • JG762
    JG762 Posts: 571 Member
    Options
    I know everybody says MFP overestimates calories burned, but are people really burning that much?? I'm set at sedentary on MFP and record all exercise throught FitBit. On a really good day I'll burn about 4-450 cals through rowing, walking briskly for about 2 hours and weight lifting. Some friends through who record through MFP are getting between 7-800 calories for going for a walk or cleaning the house! I know people will burn more if they are heavier but I'm no skinny minny at over 200lbs and it amazes me some of these massive burns. Sometimes I feel as though I'm not doing enough or are my counts just more accurate??

    How do you record yours?

    I let MFP decide what the calorie burns are, I don't really care what the burn is listed as because I don't eat back the exercise calories so it's just a number that I use to judge how well I did that day. I will say that when I go to the gym I don't screw around, when I'm on the elliptical I give it as close to 100% of what I have for every minute I'm on it. When my time on it is over I'm usually completely spent, gasping for breath and trying to figure out if I'm gonna stroke out or not! I have a lot of comments on my listed caloric burns but I just don't worry about what they are, it's all exercise and to me it's just progress, the only number I worry about is the one on the scale.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    Is it absolutely necessary to record exercise?
    No, it depends how you establish what your calorie consumption should be to maintain health and fitness whilst losing, or gaining, weight.
    Am I in danger of eating too little if I don't account for my exercise??

    Potentially, depending on your goal calorie intake, the amount and intensity of exercise you do and how your macros are made up to account for the exercise.
    Does it really take 1200 calories a day just to nourish my organs???

    1200 cals is at the bottom end of the various national recommendations for minimum intake. If you're expending energy in training and not compensating for that then you do risk a progressive degradation.

    Your choice, lots of people don't replace the expended energy. Essentially if you're only burning a couple of hundred calories in a session then the various measurement errors may net off. If you're burning 1000 calories in a session then that makes up a fairly significant part of your day.
  • rbear713
    rbear713 Posts: 220 Member
    Options
    I also noticed that the MFP calories burned are always way higher than my HRM. I swear by my Garmin HRM for all cardio activities. It usually takes me 2 hours (or close to it) of high intensity cardio to break into the 1,000's.

    This. If you can maintain high intensity steady state cardio (spin, elliptical, jogging, swimming, arc trainer, stepper, rower), you should find it possible to break into the 1000s.

    I try to hit the gym for a 630 am spin class every day. After, I try to sneak in 30mins of lifting on my way to the elliptical for a 10k. I wear an hrm, and depending on the spin instructor/class length, my calorie burns are (Gross numbers) from about 1100 - 1400 cals. Sooo, my workout is mostly steady state cardio, and usually in the 2 - 2.5 hour range....I weigh about 225lbs. My workout goal is to keep my avg gross cals burned at or over 10/min. If I do that, I know Im working hard...

    MFP's estimates are ALWAYS higher than my HRM - the machines at the gym are usually inflated as well...HRM is the way to go, especially if you can wrap your head around the fact that there is no truly and fully accurate method of computing calories burned....
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    Options
    Good call on StrongLifts, I'm starting on Saturday.

    In that case I would say that 450cals is very low if that includes your 2 hour walk also? Do you have a HRM?

    HRM monitor arrives today!!

    I thought that may be the only way to definitively find out. And yes this also includes my 2 hour walk.

    HRMs aren't very accurate for walking (they are better estimates for higher heart rates) and they are useless for lifting. They are useful for estimates when it's a moderate to high intensity steady state cardio activity such as running or cycling.

    A descent rough estimation for your walks would be 80 - 120 calories per mile depending on your weight. Weight lifting won't give you high calorie burns. I estimate my 60 minute lifting sessions at around 200 calories.

Categories