I think we might ALL be off on calories for exercise

JNick77

I think way too much emphasis gets put on this subject. One important thing about exercise is NOT just that initial calorie burn that you see on an HRM, treadmill meter, etc, but also the continued burn you get for the rest of the day. Your body doesn't hit the OFF switch when you're done exercising.

rileysowner

When it comes down to it, all, not just some, of the calorie calculations we depend on are estimations. That includes all exercise calories, the food we eat and even your BMR. Sometimes these numbers will be really close, but other times they will be way off. I discovered in my reading that what is considered an acceptable margin of error can be as much as 30%. If you want to do that math go ahead, but I don't expect it will cause a whole lot of difference. For me the extra 69 calories I burn based on my estimated BMR per hour are not worth worrying about.

unmitigatedbadassery

I think way too much emphasis gets put on this subject...

If you want to do that math go ahead, but I don't expect it will cause a whole lot of difference. For me the extra 69 calories I burn based on my estimated BMR per hour are not worth worrying about.

That's what I said! lol :laugh:

llkilgore

I think you'll find its factored in by the MFP sofware

I don't think so. The site below delivers the same numbers (at least for my regular exercise activities) and they don't correct for for the BMR.

http://www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.php

daddyratty

You also need to consider that you are burning calories at a slightly higher rate for a few hours after exercise.... calories you don't 'count', but still burn at a higher rate than just sitting on the couch.

This is an excellent point. Seems to even out the tables a bit.

daddyratty

I have heard many people comment on the fact that MFP my be off on exercise calculations - I have found them to be on par with most other online calculators. An HRM is going to be the most accurate though.

That being said, I don't find it conducive to worry about every calorie. Your body isn't a binary system where a ONE or a ZERO changes everything - even if you are off by 100 calories it will most likely provide the same end result as if you were on the nose with the calculations.

I say keep up the good work - don't worry too much about the numbers - focus on how you feel.

I'm a MATH TEACHER ... it's my job to worry about numbers.

VStar55

No, you are burning the exercise calories including everything it takes to make your body function. Those 1100 calories are instead of the 120 calories. 120 calories is what your body would burn just to breathe, provide brain function, digestion and pump blood. Your HRM is actually a more accurate way of measuring exactly what your body is burning during the hour including all of the above and your exercise.

The thing is your basal metabolic functions are still happening when you exercise so while you would have burned X amount of calories on the couch you're still burning that PLUS what you're burning exercising so it works out that the HRM burned calories is still appropriate.

You also need to consider that you are burning calories at a slightly higher rate for a few hours after exercise.... calories you don't 'count', but still burn at a higher rate than just sitting on the couch.

jbug100

Sounds like micromanagement to me, but everyone is different:)

TourThePast

For me the extra 69 calories I burn based on my estimated BMR per hour are not worth worrying about.

Probably not for you, but when you're only on 1200 calories a day, 69 calories looks a lot more!

I do agree that there is no readily available accurate way of measuring actual calories burned, I just feel that where we are aware of a definite discrepancy, it makes sense to factor it in.

kateopotato

I have been subtracting my "BMR" calories from my HRM calories when I exercise for a long time now. It's amazing how much they add up, especially if you work out for a long time. I found a while ago that average is 1.3 calories per minute. I got my metabolic rate measured a few weeks ago and it was pretty right on. I actually burm 1.35 calories per minute according to my RMR (Resting metabolic rate) and the read out told me my metabolism is right on the border of normal and fast, but still in the normal range.

I worked out for 90 minutes today and that's 121.5 calories that I would be over-eating if I gave myself that. as it was, I burned 719 instead of 841 that my HRM told me I burned.

but to each their own! If you are only working out for 20 minutes then I can see where calculating it would be too much for some people, I also think it's something people need to look at if they find they are stalling or wondering why things arent working. Tweaking the little things sometimes is just what you need to get back on track.

daddyratty

I like this reply kateo.

I have to admit, I'm a little befuddled by the "not enough to worry about." So what *is* enough to worry about? In a 60-90 minute run, we're talking a discrepancy for me of 120-180 calories. If that's not worth worrying about, then I am not quite sure why I would track everything I eat. After all, that one cookie is *only* 100 calories. It's not enough to worry about.

cheshirechic

I've started to subtract BMR from my HRM readout, based on my BMR's calories per minute. It's about as exact as my not-math-minded-mind can manage.

sbwood888

You also need to consider that you are burning calories at a slightly higher rate for a few hours after exercise.... calories you don't 'count', but still burn at a higher rate than just sitting on the couch.

this is a really good point