How do you burn 1000 calories by exercise per day?
Options
Replies
-
Get put on a chain gang0
-
Most people do it by lying.
45 minutes cleaning, vigorous effort: 9013 calories.
COFFEE on Keyboard now! lol :grumble:0 -
2lb a week for someone your size is very ambitious.
I was that weight a couple months ago, I cut my calories pretty drastic and exercise almost daily. (sometimes over 2 hours) Most weeks I lose 1.5lb or less. I have some weeks I lose next to nothing and some weeks that I lose 2.5lb but on average 1.5lb is pushing it. (last month I was stuck for 3+ weeks)
I'm very happy with my progress, but if I tried losing 2lb every week, I'd be miserable.
If you aren't happy eating the same amount of calories every day. Maybe you can shake it up a bit. Eat 200 more calories one day and 200 less the next (or previous) or have a day you eat 300 more and 3 days you eat 100 less. You get the point. Just keep the average at the deficit you want.
As far as exercise. 1 hour vigorous morning walk (walk as fast as you can without running) and 1 hour vigorous evening walk. Or 40 min morning 40 min lunch 40 min evening. If you want to come close to burning 1000 cal. you have to feel like you're pushing yourself the entire time or you won't burn enough. By the way, unless you're in pretty good shape, this may be unhealthy.
All that said,.. You CAN lose weight,.. You CAN get there. Just don't get stuck on a specific number in a specific time frame. You'll burn yourself out.0 -
[/quote]
I have an HRM and a BodyMedia, the HRM shows that I hardly burning any calories when exercising, for example yesterday it showed that I burned 250 calories in a one hour zumba class which does not make sense.
[/quote]
250 calories is NOT "hardly burning anything" I typically burn 250-350 calories in a workout, and I also use an HRM. Keep in mind I'm about 90 lbs heavier than you are.0 -
Trying to lose 2 lbs per week, by exercising strictly, because dieting is not working for me.
To be honest this is close to impossible unless you're some kind of an athlete that is supposed to eat 4K calories per day... Personally my number 1 rule for weight loss is 80% nutrition, 20%exercise.... you would have to be walking at least 4 hours per day just to burn close to 1000 considering you're not extremely overweight.0 -
'Trying to lose 2 lbs per week, by exercising strictly, because dieting is not working for me.
Let us know how it goes!
We all know weightloss happens due to intake moderation. Prove us wrong.
0 -
Are you planning on doing this EVERY day? If so and you succeed, good for you. But a word of caution: I started out doing intense 60 - 90 min. cardio workouts 6 days a week. I sustained that for 3 years. Then, I started resenting all of that time that ate out of my schedule. I started dreading it. Also, I was concerned about overuse injuries (even though I alternated my days on the treadmill and the elliptical). I finally got smart and realized that if I was RELYING on that much cardio to maintain then I was doing something wrong.Get on the elliptical for 2 hours (120 minutes).
I will try this, thanks!
I completely changed my diet: high protein, moderate fat, low carb, low sugar, and now I can do 30 min. cardio sessions (HIIT) 3 days a week and maintain just fine. Plus, I'm happier! I got so much TIME back. So worth it to improve BOTH diet and fitness. (I also added 3 days of lifting and that changed my entire body even more.) Don't get caught up in cardio ONLY!0 -
Run 10 miles?0
-
Buy a mtn bike. Ride it uphill on trail for approximately 90 minutes. Voila.0
-
1) With 40 pounds to lose, a goal of 2 pounds per week isn't very realistic. Try for 1 pound per week instead. Make sure you're logging consistently and weighing as much solid food as possible for accuracy. Once you get an idea of how much stuff weighs, you can try to eyeball but still weigh now and then to keep tabs, especially if weight loss stalls.
2) the bodywieght (BW) x 10 thing is not exactly right, but it's meant to be your weight loss number, not your maintenance number. I believe maintenance is more like BW x 12 or 15 (depending on gender?). Or just go by what MFP gives you for a 1 pound per week loss. I weigh about the same as you and set a custom goal of 1450 per day plus exercise caloreis and it works well (when I follow it - will be honest and say I've been off track lately).
3) You will not get the same calorie burns as guys or people in general who weigh more than you. Gender, body weight and fitness level are all factors in how many calories your burn so take the feedback with that in mind As men tend to be taller and have more muscle mass than us, they naturally burn more calories. You'll probably burn about half as much, maybe 60%
The only time I've been able to burn 1000 calories in a day is going for a 2 hour run/walk. That is a lot of time to spend on exercise and frankly it's exhausting so not something I do very often.
Best of luck whatever you decide to do.0 -
I see a lot of negativity in these kinds of threads. What if you're athletic or very determined? Why can't you burn 1000 calories? And just because someone burns that kind of energy, doesn't mean they get hungrier than they normally do. I will tell you right now, when I wasn't walking 10 miles or riding 25 miles (before I started getting serious), and was just doing like 2 easy workouts a weak, I was eating like midnight supersized meals at Mcdonalds, sometimes even two meals. I don't do that anymore, ever. I eat things like oatmeal, turkey wheat sandwiches, chicken and brocoli. That's how it works for me. The more I exercise, the less I feel like pigging out. But when I'm not exercising, all those hours I end up spending working at my food instead of working out. So no exercise does not make you hungrier. The only thing that makes you hungrier is not exercising and trying to diet extremely hard. That makes you really hungry because you have no energy. So if an athlete can workout for 4 or 5 hours a day, who are you to stop an average person who wants to work their way towards that? Once your body adapts, it's not hard anymore. To each it's own.
To the OP, the body can do amazing things. Yes, get a bike and work your way up to 50 miles a day. I can bike 30 on a mountain bike, so a rode bike will be more enjoyable. And hike 12 miles a day. Do that every other day and do more intense shorter trainings on your alternative days and lift hard on those days. Don't listen to people saying you won't be able to do it. You have to be committed like a pro athlete. You can do it. As far as diet, focus on healthy common sense eating, make realistic improvements for life. Eat healthy stuff you like. Don't try to skip meals and kill yourself or become anorexic like I did before.
Wow, thank you so much , it is so nice to hear such words of encouragement!!!
Very motivational, just what I needed to hear!!!
I am starting today! Thank you!
If OP is extremely dedicated and athletic, I supposed it's possible to burn 1000 calories a day. However, considering that a) she isn't willing to even go through the effort of opening a link to use an accurate calculator and figure out how many calories she actually needs to eat; b) she is trying to lose 2 lbs a week even though she has maybe 40 pounds to lose; c) she "can't" eat less, and isn't interested in hearing that she probably doesn't have to eat as little as she thinks; OP sounds far more like someone looking for a quick fix than someone who is really dedicated enough to stick to such a big exercise goal. If that's the case, all that's going to happen is she's going to get burned out and come looking for some other quick fix that won't work, either.
^^This. OP has only responded to those giving quick answers with no consideration of the root cause of the problem or the viability and longevity of the proposed solutions.
OP I don't think you are considering these suggestions but I agree your estimate of 1700 daily burn is probably way underestimated, since you used one of the most generic formulas possible. Look into the scooby calculator, or get a FitBit to track your total calories burned (roughly) on a daily basis. Then set your goals more realistically, 2lbs/week is too aggressive for the amount of weight you want to lose. Finally, log consistently, weigh and measure your food. If you do all that, I promise you will find this experience much more pleasant and sustainable than going to the gym for 2+ hours/day in order to get that 1000 cal burn you think you need.
I agree with you and Michelle.0 -
OP, if you are hungry and find it hard to restrict calories currently, I think if you do enough physical activity to burn 1000 calories, you will probably feel famished!
Let us know how it goes 0 -
I don't understand this logic. When you're done losing weight, the need for a 1000 calorie deficit (or any deficit) disappears. Yes, you burn less after weight loss but that's true no matter how slowly you lose it, or how you did it.Trying to lose 2 lbs per week, by exercising strictly, because dieting is not working for me.
So you are going to continue doing 1000 calories a day burning for the rest of your life. Maybe little less once you hit your goal weight
Not that I think this is at all a workable plan for 99% of people.0 -
He has some honest points in there, surrounded by a bunch of other stuff.
Zumba is one of those workouts that first you get more efficient at the movements. So you burn less because of that eventually, depending on your skill of the movements. Dance well, probably faster. Me, it'll always be a workout if I even attempted it.
Next problem is eventually you can only go so fast with the movements. How fast can you step around, or swing arms, ect. In other words you can't increase the intensity anymore.
Walking you could add incline or weighted vest, running you go faster, lifting you add weight to the bar, ect.
And why is the ability to keep increasing the intensity important?
Because as you lose weight doing those types of workouts you burn less calories and it's easier, so you must increase the intensity to compensate.
If you don't, it will become easier and easier, and actually you will lose fitness doing just that.
It's like if you were doing squats at a certain weight on the bar, and lost say 50 lbs. If the weight on the bar didn't go up 50 lbs to compensate - you are doing an easier workout actually. And in a diet, you will lose muscle that is no longer needed.
Same with Zumba, eventually it will no longer be a workout for the body and heart that requires more improvements and the same calorie burn, and you will lose fitness doing it.
Of course if using HRM for calorie burn estimate, you will correctly keep eating less as you log it. So at least that is taken care of.
Very interesting butt load of theory from someone who's never attempted the class.
Since even walking can be very beneficial in a weight loss regimen, no, I don't agree that you must consistently increase intensity to see results. I do agree about measuring your output if possible and incorporating that in your calorie target/goals
You might reread what was written, you may have missed the most important qualifier, and it applies to walking too.
If you are of the thinking that someone must actually do something to be able to talk about it, then you better examine probably the majority of things you have learned, and tell the vast majority of olympic athletes to dump their coaches too.
The major qualifier was ..... If you lose weight with it.
If you are moving less weight now compared to earlier.
If you are moving less weight, you are burning less calories, if nothing else changes but weight - no way around that fact.
If your max speed walking is 4.5, and you keep doing that level, and you lose weight, it will become less and less of a workout for you. Fact.
You will burn less and less calories doing it.
Eventually it is also an easier workout, even if you go longer. You no longer need to supply so much oxygen to burn fuel, because you are burning less. Longer just means more fuel used, not more per breath or heart beat, your VO2max will go down, which is description of fitness level.
This is nothing new, what happens to athletes when they get injured and can only walk.
And I've watched many Zumba classes, because I was curious if I could see who was serious with the movements, and who was just swinging around taking it easy, you could tell usually. But since all of the motion I saw was to the music beat, there is max speed your arms are moving, there is max speed you are moving side to side, or stepping up, or whatever you are doing.
Only way to increase intensity or keep the same calorie burn and level of fitness as you lose weight, is to carry dumbbells - and despite this being a classroom loaded with them for other classes - no one had any. None at feet, none in hands. Perhaps others do that properly as they lose weight - but I'm betting not because they still sweat, and think that is a qualifier of a good workout.0 -
6 Mile walk at an aggressive pace. If you can add a little weight in a back pack, that is even better (i pack water bottles 15 lbs). While this would be pretty aggressive to do every day, it is very possible to do 3 xs per week and then do a fast paced UPHILL walk on the treadmill (highest invert) 2 days per week for 60 mins. This will definitely kick you into lose mode. Also, make sure you are in a caloric deficit. I try to keep my GROSS close to my NET goal which always keeps me pretty much in deficit even when i need to cheat a little.0
-
Oh my goodness, I am overwhelmed with the response I got to my question. Even though, your opinions differ so much and your outlook on heath issues and weight loss are so different, I appreciate each and every response and opinion I got.
I am sorry if some of you think I responded only to the comments I wanted to hear, but sometimes we want to hear the positive and encouraging words even though other people might not agree with it. But what I wanted to say is that even though I responded to those comments, I still learned a LOT from the others, so thank you to all !!!0 -
He has some honest points in there, surrounded by a bunch of other stuff.
Zumba is one of those workouts that first you get more efficient at the movements. So you burn less because of that eventually, depending on your skill of the movements. Dance well, probably faster. Me, it'll always be a workout if I even attempted it.
Next problem is eventually you can only go so fast with the movements. How fast can you step around, or swing arms, ect. In other words you can't increase the intensity anymore.
Walking you could add incline or weighted vest, running you go faster, lifting you add weight to the bar, ect.
And why is the ability to keep increasing the intensity important?
Because as you lose weight doing those types of workouts you burn less calories and it's easier, so you must increase the intensity to compensate.
If you don't, it will become easier and easier, and actually you will lose fitness doing just that.
It's like if you were doing squats at a certain weight on the bar, and lost say 50 lbs. If the weight on the bar didn't go up 50 lbs to compensate - you are doing an easier workout actually. And in a diet, you will lose muscle that is no longer needed.
Same with Zumba, eventually it will no longer be a workout for the body and heart that requires more improvements and the same calorie burn, and you will lose fitness doing it.
Of course if using HRM for calorie burn estimate, you will correctly keep eating less as you log it. So at least that is taken care of.
Very interesting butt load of theory from someone who's never attempted the class.
Since even walking can be very beneficial in a weight loss regimen, no, I don't agree that you must consistently increase intensity to see results. I do agree about measuring your output if possible and incorporating that in your calorie target/goals
You might reread what was written, you may have missed the most important qualifier, and it applies to walking too.
If you are of the thinking that someone must actually do something to be able to talk about it, then you better examine probably the majority of things you have learned, and tell the vast majority of olympic athletes to dump their coaches too.
The major qualifier was ..... If you lose weight with it.
If you are moving less weight now compared to earlier.
If you are moving less weight, you are burning less calories, if nothing else changes but weight - no way around that fact.
If your max speed walking is 4.5, and you keep doing that level, and you lose weight, it will become less and less of a workout for you. Fact.
You will burn less and less calories doing it.
Eventually it is also an easier workout, even if you go longer. You no longer need to supply so much oxygen to burn fuel, because you are burning less. Longer just means more fuel used, not more per breath or heart beat, your VO2max will go down, which is description of fitness level.
This is nothing new, what happens to athletes when they get injured and can only walk.
And I've watched many Zumba classes, because I was curious if I could see who was serious with the movements, and who was just swinging around taking it easy, you could tell usually. But since all of the motion I saw was to the music beat, there is max speed your arms are moving, there is max speed you are moving side to side, or stepping up, or whatever you are doing.
Only way to increase intensity or keep the same calorie burn and level of fitness as you lose weight, is to carry dumbbells - and despite this being a classroom loaded with them for other classes - no one had any. None at feet, none in hands. Perhaps others do that properly as they lose weight - but I'm betting not because they still sweat, and think that is a qualifier of a good workout.
Indeed. To know what the hell you're talking about, it helps to have experienced the topic for yourself. I don't even know where to start with your post. I feel like I've just read someone say that in order to make running more intense, you have to carry a bike on your head or something.0 -
He has some honest points in there, surrounded by a bunch of other stuff.
Zumba is one of those workouts that first you get more efficient at the movements. So you burn less because of that eventually, depending on your skill of the movements. Dance well, probably faster. Me, it'll always be a workout if I even attempted it.
Next problem is eventually you can only go so fast with the movements. How fast can you step around, or swing arms, ect. In other words you can't increase the intensity anymore.
Walking you could add incline or weighted vest, running you go faster, lifting you add weight to the bar, ect.
And why is the ability to keep increasing the intensity important?
Because as you lose weight doing those types of workouts you burn less calories and it's easier, so you must increase the intensity to compensate.
If you don't, it will become easier and easier, and actually you will lose fitness doing just that.
It's like if you were doing squats at a certain weight on the bar, and lost say 50 lbs. If the weight on the bar didn't go up 50 lbs to compensate - you are doing an easier workout actually. And in a diet, you will lose muscle that is no longer needed.
Same with Zumba, eventually it will no longer be a workout for the body and heart that requires more improvements and the same calorie burn, and you will lose fitness doing it.
Of course if using HRM for calorie burn estimate, you will correctly keep eating less as you log it. So at least that is taken care of.
Very interesting butt load of theory from someone who's never attempted the class.
Since even walking can be very beneficial in a weight loss regimen, no, I don't agree that you must consistently increase intensity to see results. I do agree about measuring your output if possible and incorporating that in your calorie target/goals
You might reread what was written, you may have missed the most important qualifier, and it applies to walking too.
If you are of the thinking that someone must actually do something to be able to talk about it, then you better examine probably the majority of things you have learned, and tell the vast majority of olympic athletes to dump their coaches too.
The major qualifier was ..... If you lose weight with it.
If you are moving less weight now compared to earlier.
If you are moving less weight, you are burning less calories, if nothing else changes but weight - no way around that fact.
If your max speed walking is 4.5, and you keep doing that level, and you lose weight, it will become less and less of a workout for you. Fact.
You will burn less and less calories doing it.
Eventually it is also an easier workout, even if you go longer. You no longer need to supply so much oxygen to burn fuel, because you are burning less. Longer just means more fuel used, not more per breath or heart beat, your VO2max will go down, which is description of fitness level.
This is nothing new, what happens to athletes when they get injured and can only walk.
And I've watched many Zumba classes, because I was curious if I could see who was serious with the movements, and who was just swinging around taking it easy, you could tell usually. But since all of the motion I saw was to the music beat, there is max speed your arms are moving, there is max speed you are moving side to side, or stepping up, or whatever you are doing.
Only way to increase intensity or keep the same calorie burn and level of fitness as you lose weight, is to carry dumbbells - and despite this being a classroom loaded with them for other classes - no one had any. None at feet, none in hands. Perhaps others do that properly as they lose weight - but I'm betting not because they still sweat, and think that is a qualifier of a good workout.
Indeed. To know what the hell you're talking about, it helps to have experienced the topic for yourself. I don't even know where to start with your post. I feel like I've just read someone say that in order to make running more intense, you have to carry a bike on your head or something.
Haybales is right however he seems to have made the mistake of thinking that the primary concern of the people doing the exercise is fitness rather than weight loss. It's true that over time your body will adapt to what it does regularly. And losing weight will also force calories to decline. So if you want to keep improving your FITNESS you do indeed have to keep upping the intensity.
If however all you want to do is burn a few more calories then stuff like walking and Zumba are totally legit. It's true that you will suffer a kind of diminishing returns. The more you do something the less benefit you get out of it as it becomes easier. However simply being active walking or doing Zumba will markedly increase your calorie burn and that is what this thread is all about. No one was asking about improving physical fitness.
It all depends on what your goals are. If you want to be a performance athlete you will probably need something with more scope than Zumba. If you just want something to help keep your waistline in order it's probably pretty legit.0 -
Is it calibrated correctly to your statistics? I know when I first got mine, (a cheapo chinese CRANE brand from ALDI lol) it was all jacked up lol.......and then I looked in the manual, and I was supposed to enter my age, sex, height, and weight, for it to "calibrate" the calorie burn properly.....NOW, it is fairly spot on with MFP, the machine (if I'm doing cardio)....but even then, I don't take that number for granted....I average the 3 numbers together, and that's what I log into MFP.....I wear a chest strap, and feel by averaging the 3 calorie burns, it gives me the most accurate number.....the machine, the HRM, and MFP - note: in my experience, MFP is always waaaayyyyy higher......at least by 100 calories or so....but by averaging it, I believe it all works out in the end (so far so good lol).I have an HRM and a BodyMedia, the HRM shows that I hardly burning any calories when exercising, for example yesterday it showed that I burned 250 calories in a one hour zumba class which does not make sense.
But yes, I gotta second the motion, if youre NOT using a digital food scale, get one! More than likely you're over-eating.....when I first started MFP, I was kinda scared to eat "nautral" foods, cause "ohhhh! No nutrition facts? How do I log this? etc" well, with a food scale (set to grams measure) it makes it a LOT easier to account for fruits and veggies that you're eating.....hell, I even measure out my pasta before I cook it :X haha
To answer your original question:
I've heard that the "Planet Fitness 30 Minute Circuit" is capable of burning 1000 calories, provided you follow the circuit properly, and keep active between stations.....I believe I read it in a thread here actually.....back when I first started....0 -
He has some honest points in there, surrounded by a bunch of other stuff.
Zumba is one of those workouts that first you get more efficient at the movements. So you burn less because of that eventually, depending on your skill of the movements. Dance well, probably faster. Me, it'll always be a workout if I even attempted it.
Next problem is eventually you can only go so fast with the movements. How fast can you step around, or swing arms, ect. In other words you can't increase the intensity anymore.
Walking you could add incline or weighted vest, running you go faster, lifting you add weight to the bar, ect.
And why is the ability to keep increasing the intensity important?
Because as you lose weight doing those types of workouts you burn less calories and it's easier, so you must increase the intensity to compensate.
If you don't, it will become easier and easier, and actually you will lose fitness doing just that.
It's like if you were doing squats at a certain weight on the bar, and lost say 50 lbs. If the weight on the bar didn't go up 50 lbs to compensate - you are doing an easier workout actually. And in a diet, you will lose muscle that is no longer needed.
Same with Zumba, eventually it will no longer be a workout for the body and heart that requires more improvements and the same calorie burn, and you will lose fitness doing it.
Of course if using HRM for calorie burn estimate, you will correctly keep eating less as you log it. So at least that is taken care of.
Very interesting butt load of theory from someone who's never attempted the class.
Since even walking can be very beneficial in a weight loss regimen, no, I don't agree that you must consistently increase intensity to see results. I do agree about measuring your output if possible and incorporating that in your calorie target/goals
You might reread what was written, you may have missed the most important qualifier, and it applies to walking too.
If you are of the thinking that someone must actually do something to be able to talk about it, then you better examine probably the majority of things you have learned, and tell the vast majority of olympic athletes to dump their coaches too.
The major qualifier was ..... If you lose weight with it.
If you are moving less weight now compared to earlier.
If you are moving less weight, you are burning less calories, if nothing else changes but weight - no way around that fact.
If your max speed walking is 4.5, and you keep doing that level, and you lose weight, it will become less and less of a workout for you. Fact.
You will burn less and less calories doing it.
Eventually it is also an easier workout, even if you go longer. You no longer need to supply so much oxygen to burn fuel, because you are burning less. Longer just means more fuel used, not more per breath or heart beat, your VO2max will go down, which is description of fitness level.
This is nothing new, what happens to athletes when they get injured and can only walk.
And I've watched many Zumba classes, because I was curious if I could see who was serious with the movements, and who was just swinging around taking it easy, you could tell usually. But since all of the motion I saw was to the music beat, there is max speed your arms are moving, there is max speed you are moving side to side, or stepping up, or whatever you are doing.
Only way to increase intensity or keep the same calorie burn and level of fitness as you lose weight, is to carry dumbbells - and despite this being a classroom loaded with them for other classes - no one had any. None at feet, none in hands. Perhaps others do that properly as they lose weight - but I'm betting not because they still sweat, and think that is a qualifier of a good workout.
Indeed. To know what the hell you're talking about, it helps to have experienced the topic for yourself. I don't even know where to start with your post. I feel like I've just read someone say that in order to make running more intense, you have to carry a bike on your head or something.
Haybales is right however he seems to have made the mistake of thinking that the primary concern of the people doing the exercise is fitness rather than weight loss. It's true that over time your body will adapt to what it does regularly. And losing weight will also force calories to decline. So if you want to keep improving your FITNESS you do indeed have to keep upping the intensity.
If however all you want to do is burn a few more calories then stuff like walking and Zumba are totally legit. It's true that you will suffer a kind of diminishing returns. The more you do something the less benefit you get out of it as it becomes easier. However simply being active walking or doing Zumba will markedly increase your calorie burn and that is what this thread is all about. No one was asking about improving physical fitness.
It all depends on what your goals are. If you want to be a performance athlete you will probably need something with more scope than Zumba. If you just want something to help keep your waistline in order it's probably pretty legit.
Agreed.
Also many people who take Zumba know that the path to higher intensity, if that's what is desired, often lies with trying out different instructors. With a high enough intensity in Zumba and many other classes, going at the highest options throughout the class will be challenging to impossible for most people, to the point that there's still room to improve yourself. And just because I burn 400 calories instead of 500 from my previous weight, doesn't mean that there isn't a proportional benefit to taking two of the classes. 800 > 500, no? And finally you wouldn't just randomly pick up weights in Zumba or any other class if that's not the format. That was just so random! :laugh:0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 997 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions