Suspicious of calories burned by "exercise"

frosty73

When you first join MFP, they ask if your lifestyle is sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc.
I said lightly active, although as a stay-at-home mom, my activity levels always vary throughout the day.
The other day I was teaching a dog-training class for 2 hours, which is entirely on your feet and a fair amount of walking, but never at more than a moderate-slow pace, with lots of stops and breaks. I tried to balance this out by adding "exercise-- walking the dog-- moderate pace-- 45 minutes" (instead of the 2 hours I was teaching) and it said that would be 246 calories.

That just seems like an awful lot of calories burned, when I can work hard on the elliptical machine for 30 minutes and according to the heart rate monitor on the machine, only burn 200 calories. Thoughts?

UponThisRock

5-10 calories per minute is typical for cardio. A non-exercise type activity would probably be less.

That said, I think changing your calorie intake based on an estimation of calories burned from exercise is unnecessary nitpicking for most people.

stylistchik

Don't count work as exercise, your lifestyle accounts for that. I'm a hairstylist and stand on my feet 8 hours a day, usually with my arms in the air and I don't count that. If it builds muscle, great, but it's not intentional exercise.

That being said, if I take my dog for a walk, I count that as exercise. It's enough to get my heart rate up and that's what counts.

tangal88

Calorie burn numbers on exercise equipment is often inaccurate as well

Umpire57

Machine estimates, MFP estimates

Get a HRM and get the number for you and your body. The better ones allow you to program it even deeper to get the best number.

skygoddess86

MFP estimates and my machines are way off my HRM, they say way higher. I go with the HRM.

CalJur

Don't count work as exercise, your lifestyle accounts for that. I'm a hairstylist and stand on my feet 8 hours a day, usually with my arms in the air and I don't count that. If it builds muscle, great, but it's not intentional exercise.

That being said, if I take my dog for a walk, I count that as exercise. It's enough to get my heart rate up and that's what counts.

Well said. So many people count their lifestyle activities and wonder why they aren't achieving their goals. Go above and beyond.

chachita7

I always edit the amount - last night I played volleyball for way over 60 mins but placed it as 60 mins and it said 516 calories burnt - I edited that to 250. I just thought it was way too much

BeeElMarvin

It's all estimation, take it for what it's worth...

mskari77

I wear a watch style HRM, it was a cheaper one, that doesn't allow the input of your weight, and it always measures a lot higher...by like 50 calories. I go with the MFP number, and subtract 20 calories. I would rather underestimate the calories burned, than over estimate. For example, when weight lifting yesterday, my HRM said I burned 410 calories, MFP estimated it at approx 370...I logged it at 350. That's what works for me.

liroez29

I agree with the others that have said not to count regular lifestyle activities. Unless you are adding to them, for instance, I don't walk my laundry baskets to the living room, I do lunges, if I go downstairs, I go down, and back up and down again, if I am picking up the living room I do squats a couple times before I actually pick up the item, and so on, that way when I count cleaning, or heavy lifting, I feel it is more accurate. I also count cleaning my fish tank, because it entails lugging 5 gallon buckets of water from my living room to the bathroom and back 15-20 times....lol. I also agree that a HRM is the best way to monitor you calories burned, I need to get one myself! Good luck to you!

UponThisRock

5-10 calories per minute is typical for cardio. A non-exercise type activity would probably be less.

That said, I think changing your calorie intake based on an estimation of calories burned from exercise is unnecessary nitpicking for most people.

This thought really interests me.... because I have always assumed the opposite. I work out about 6 days a week, and on cardio days, my HRM monitor suggests I burn anywhere from 450 to 700- depending upon the intensity and length of the workout. Would you recomend not adjusting intake in such circumstances...I think I would be operating at a deficit quite often... while I am now at maintenance until an injury heals so I can start a bulk phase (that you suggested-- which I owe ya for)

The reason I say that I think estimating calories burned in unecessary for most people is that most people have set routines. They do a similar workout for the same numbers of times every week, work the same job 5x per week, etc.

My suggestion would be to keep weekly activity roughly consistent, and keep calories consistent daily. If progress is not where you want it, simply make a small adjustment (ex: 200 less calories per day, 30 min extra cardio per week).

The concept of "eating back" exercise calories seems to cause too much unnecessary confusion. However, if you were doing something like running 5 miles per day one week and doing nothing but strength training the next week, or if you worked in a job that varied highly in the amount of manual labor required, then estimating daily calories would probably be necessary.

Ral263

Don't count work as exercise, your lifestyle accounts for that. I'm a hairstylist and stand on my feet 8 hours a day, usually with my arms in the air and I don't count that. If it builds muscle, great, but it's not intentional exercise.

That being said, if I take my dog for a walk, I count that as exercise. It's enough to get my heart rate up and that's what counts.

Exactly my thoughts. We weren't meant to be completely sedentary all the time; I definitely wouldn't count something like that as exercise, it's just a part of your daily lifestyle. I count anything where my heart rate is in my target zone as exercise....everything else is just day-to-day activity.

Azdak

When you first join MFP, they ask if your lifestyle is sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc.
I said lightly active, although as a stay-at-home mom, my activity levels always vary throughout the day.
The other day I was teaching a dog-training class for 2 hours, which is entirely on your feet and a fair amount of walking, but never at more than a moderate-slow pace, with lots of stops and breaks. I tried to balance this out by adding "exercise-- walking the dog-- moderate pace-- 45 minutes" (instead of the 2 hours I was teaching) and it said that would be 246 calories.

That just seems like an awful lot of calories burned, when I can work hard on the elliptical machine for 30 minutes and according to the heart rate monitor on the machine, only burn 200 calories. Thoughts?

Issues such as estimating activity calories and "eating back" exercise calories can seem confusing. I think we can overcomplicate things.

Especially for someone starting out, losing weight is really just a matter of calories in vs calories out. Making good food choices will help make that process more comfortable, is better for your health, and will better support your workout efforts, but maintaining a calorie deficit is the single most important part of the process.

It is also true that beginners can sustain higher calorie deficits without adverse effects. The whole idea of tracking calorie input and estimating calorie output is to make sure you maintain a deficit -- it is too easy to overestimate if you are not measuring or tracking.

Unless you are in a maintenance phase, however, and as long as you are eating a sufficient number of calories (I usually recommend at least 1400/day for anyone over 180 pounds), then "eating back" exercise or activity calories is not as important. If someone is burning 500+ calories per workout, then, yes, they need to "refuel", but you do not have to keep a precise count. Some people feel that if they don't "eat back" every calorie, they will go into "starvation mode". That is highly unlikely unless someone follows a sustained very low calorie diet.

There is also wide variability in our "casual activity". You may set your base level to "level X" but that represents an average. Some people might be more sedentary one day compared to the next. Often people who do more vigorous activity for an hour or two at one time of day, are more sedentary than usual the rest of the day. As human beings, we can be selective in our memories --everyone remembers the 45 min they spent shoveling snow, not the 4 hours they spent sitting on the couch.

Follow a system that works for you -- there is no absolute right or wrong strategy -- but I would recommend keeping things simple at first.

If you want to read more on the subject, click on the links below.


http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/estimating-calories-activity-databases-198041

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/activities-to-log-or-not-to-log-57883

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/why-i-don-t-count-exercise-calories-114873

rml_16

When you first join MFP, they ask if your lifestyle is sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc.
I said lightly active, although as a stay-at-home mom, my activity levels always vary throughout the day.
The other day I was teaching a dog-training class for 2 hours, which is entirely on your feet and a fair amount of walking, but never at more than a moderate-slow pace, with lots of stops and breaks. I tried to balance this out by adding "exercise-- walking the dog-- moderate pace-- 45 minutes" (instead of the 2 hours I was teaching) and it said that would be 246 calories.

That just seems like an awful lot of calories burned, when I can work hard on the elliptical machine for 30 minutes and according to the heart rate monitor on the machine, only burn 200 calories. Thoughts?

If you're wearing an accurate HRM and only burning 200 calories in 30 minutes on the elliptical, I'd venture to say you aren't working as hard as you think.

Walking fast up hills for me can burn 245 in 30 minutes, easy.

frosty73

If you're wearing an accurate HRM and only burning 200 calories in 30 minutes on the elliptical, I'd venture to say you aren't working as hard as you think.

Walking fast up hills for me can burn 245 in 30 minutes, easy.

Very true, when I say "working hard" it is interval training, hard for a minute, then easier for a minute, then hard again. Usually my HR stays between 130-165.

MaximalLife

When you first join MFP, they ask if your lifestyle is sedentary, lightly active, moderately active, etc.
I said lightly active, although as a stay-at-home mom, my activity levels always vary throughout the day.
The other day I was teaching a dog-training class for 2 hours, which is entirely on your feet and a fair amount of walking, but never at more than a moderate-slow pace, with lots of stops and breaks. I tried to balance this out by adding "exercise-- walking the dog-- moderate pace-- 45 minutes" (instead of the 2 hours I was teaching) and it said that would be 246 calories.

That just seems like an awful lot of calories burned, when I can work hard on the elliptical machine for 30 minutes and according to the heart rate monitor on the machine, only burn 200 calories. Thoughts?

I needed to tweak the calories burned to find my zone. I created my own set of exercises with a number I use that works. It's totally based on trial and error.

Even with a heart monitor it's guess work though an educated guess.
Just track weight and body fat, log in your calories and see if it bares fruit.
If not, do as I did and down regulate.

loseweightjames

That just seems like an awful lot of calories burned, when I can work hard on the elliptical machine for 30 minutes and according to the heart rate monitor on the machine, only burn 200 calories. Thoughts?

here's a list of calories burnt doing various activities at various body weights
http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist.htm

tonilizzy88

Calorie burn numbers on exercise equipment is often inaccurate as well

i agree with this, i wouldnt have before i got my HRM but i put it to the test. i wear my HRM all the time now when exersizing and my spinn bike in class says i burn 200 cals for a 45 min class and my HRM says near the 500 mark its the same with my cross trainer thats out by around 100 cals.

i will not count things that i do on a daily basis

loseweightjames

If you're wearing an accurate HRM and only burning 200 calories in 30 minutes on the elliptical, I'd venture to say you aren't working as hard as you think.

Walking fast up hills for me can burn 245 in 30 minutes, easy.

Very true, when I say "working hard" it is interval training, hard for a minute, then easier for a minute, then hard again. Usually my HR stays between 130-165.

Are less than 130 lbs? 200 calories in 30 minutes is 400 an hour, you'd either have to be rather slim to burn so little or not working your body very hard. After 30 minutes have you broken a sweat?

frosty73

Are less than 130 lbs? 200 calories in 30 minutes is 400 an hour, you'd either have to be rather slim to burn so little or not working your body very hard. After 30 minutes have you broken a sweat?

Not even close, I'm a slender (haha) 220 lbs. A couple weeks ago I would sweat a little, but not too much now. Geesh, it sounds like I need to pick up the pace. :grumble: Actually I feel pretty good to accomplish 30 minutes because afterwards I'm pretty wobbly-legged.

savage22hp

If the elliptical takes into account your weight , age ,height, sex , etc , I would tend to go with that . If not , don't be too quick to discount the MFP numbers . I , like you was suspicious of the MFP numbers for walking and adopted an arbitrary number of calories to represent my burn doing walking . I was burning 350 calories monitored on a recumbent stationary bike riding for 45 minutes maintaining a HR of 123 average . I thought , there is no way I am burning more calories ( MFP said approx . 650 for 1 hour walking at moderate pace ) in 1 hour walking than I am doing 45 minutes on the bike . I started logging 350 calories for walking for 1 Hour and adjusted it accordingly to the amount of time I walked . I then got a HRM that computes calories burned , taking into account my age , weight , heart rate , etc and low and behold MFP was much closer than I thought possible . As I have lost weight , the calories burned has dropped because I have gotten into better shape and the load I am carrying has decreased . MFP , at least I think , averages what may be happening to a wide variety of body types and health conditions . It is only a guide and may not be exact to you . If you have any way to check the numbers against a HRM then you would be more confident in them .