You burnt how many calories?!

Options
24567…11

Replies

  • laddyboy
    laddyboy Posts: 1,565 Member
    Options
    One of my last runs was 72 minutes long and I ran 9 miles. That's 8 min miles and I only burned 1100 calories and I was moving.
    I'm with you.

    That's with a Polar HR Monitor
  • sjtreely
    sjtreely Posts: 1,014 Member
    Options
    My HRM always comes in lower that MFP and my treadmill. Always. The range is larger the longer I exercise.

    This is my thought .....

    Most people under estimate the number of calories they eat and over estimate the number of calories they burn.

    Heck, I do it and I weigh/measure almost everything and wear a HRM. Key word being "almost." At least the HRM keeps me a little more honest.
  • 15in8
    15in8 Posts: 141 Member
    Options
    I have often wondered that. I run Hike in the woods lots of steep hills and stuff plus I do squats and whatnot... I go from 4-6 miles a day walk run squat major hills how many calories do you that burns?

    I see you put 760 for 120 minutes of this, I am not a expert on it, but that seems to be a reasonable amount, possibly even a little underestimation. Depends on the intensity.

    I am thinking the HRM may be a good idea, doing a quick look at the research suggests it is pretty accurate and correlates well with oxygen consumption.
  • ElPumaMex
    ElPumaMex Posts: 367 Member
    Options
    Excellent topic !

    I have a related question:

    Do you agree that since many here routinely "eat" their exercise calories, they should only "eat" the excess calories they burn, not the total calories burned?

    For example: If I burn 100 calories per hour, just by sitting down, then if I exercise for an hour and the HRM registers 300 calories burned, that means I only burned 200 calories more than regular.
    So I should only be allowed to "eat " 200 more calories, not the 300

    Opinions?
  • Elizabeth_C34
    Elizabeth_C34 Posts: 6,376 Member
    Options
    . I see where some folks report 700 cals burned for 60 min of cleaning.

    I need to get those people to clean at my house!

    I burn about that much when I scrub my floors. It's some serious hard work to get down on your hands and knees and scrub 2400 sq ft of tile.
  • MizzDoc
    MizzDoc Posts: 493 Member
    Options
    *side note-- I use a HRM (chest strap) which I have found to be pretty accurate for me*

    Just today I went for a 60 min run. When I came back to enter in my workout-- MFP was off by only one calorie versus what my HRM recorded. I general, I have found MFP "calories burned" to be somewhat accurate for me. However, I'm usually very realistic about the type of exercises I do and the length of time I do them.

    But now that I use my HRM, I feel much more confident about my caloric burn. And like of most of the posters, I do not eat back all of my exercise calories (even though I really want to, lol).

    Oh yeah forgot to state my caloric burn was 678.
  • AmandaCaswell1982
    AmandaCaswell1982 Posts: 170 Member
    Options
    I think some people use the machine's estimates- like on a treadmill or elliptical.
  • Ashlea82
    Ashlea82 Posts: 191
    Options
    I use a HRM with a chest strap, i walk a 7km trail pushing a 15 kg toddler in a stroller in 90 mins and burn 1280
    also swim 30 laps of an olympic pool in 75 mins (breaststroke) and burn around 1400
    i wont if my MFP friends think im lying lol
    i dont eat back my cals anyway
  • frugalmomsrock
    frugalmomsrock Posts: 1,123
    Options
    I acknowledge that people differ in the amount of energy they will exert during exercise, I generally like to be conservative in my estimates. Is it really possible to burn 2000 calories in 90 minutes? Here is a generic calculator I came across, and it seems to be more in the ball park of what I think is correct.

    http://mydr.com.au/tools/calories-burned-calculator

    I keep seeing numbers like 1400 in 45minutes and the like. I think some people may be setting themselves up for disappointment when the numbers they get on MFP don't translate to weight loss.

    My basic understanding is you burn around 900 calories running for 1 hour, note that is running, not jogging. Using this as a base you can estimate roughly other activities. But of course we are all different and we all have different bodies that will burn calories at different rates. The calculations are based on the study you can read here http://juststand.org/Portals/3/literature/compendium-of-physical-activities.pdf

    What are peoples thoughts on this?

    That isn't all that accurate. I walked 122 minutes (7.5 miles) pushing my double stroller with my HRM today, and it says I burned 737 calories; the calculator there just said I burned 460. Pretty big difference... MFP typically overestimates everything for me... I love my HRM.
  • noexcuses84
    noexcuses84 Posts: 100 Member
    Options
    okay okay, u guys have convinced me i am no longer logging any housework. I usually only log the stuff i don't do very often but i will stop! I am also going to buy a HRM, i've been thinkin bout gettin one for a while now and it was intesting, and slightly disapponiting, to read all these comments about the difference in cals burned :(
    having said that, i am consistantly losing weight so i'm doing something right!
  • jickalina
    jickalina Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    This is why I don't eat back all the cals it says I burned. I don't fully trust the estimate from here. One day I will get a HRM but until then it is just a "guess." I log stuff on here to keep track of what I am doing more then anything.

    Me too. MFP exercises seem to be exaggerated. Not as much as some other sites I've been to (sparkpeople calculated that my 45 min Zumba class burned 535 cals; so i went about 100 under to be safe) but still if you're trying to eat to the right calorie count it can be confusing. I also wish MFP would expand their exercise list to include more activities. Zumba wasn't on there for example, and I felt the "dance" category just wasn't' quite the right fit.
  • cattracy0829
    cattracy0829 Posts: 177 Member
    Options
    I use my BodyBugg to get more acurate calorie counts - In 90 minutes on the treadmill - 6.87 miles - I burned 910 calories.
  • amandaepope
    amandaepope Posts: 15
    Options
    Lol @ invisible from cleaning.. ME TOO :)
  • lrbarrett
    lrbarrett Posts: 8
    Options
    What is everyone's thoughts on the best monitor to wear? And do you wear it all day or just during times of exercise? Just wondering. I just joined this site 2 weeks ago, so I am still kind of new to all the gadgets you can get. Thanks!
  • FoodFamilyFitness
    FoodFamilyFitness Posts: 17 Member
    Options
    I don't think anything is ever 100% accurate, but I bought a Polar HRM and it's my best friend!!! I love watching that calorie burn get higher and higher :)
  • machinegunkate
    machinegunkate Posts: 74 Member
    Options
    Yeah, this is a concern of mine. I just started on this site about a week ago, and have never counted calorie input/output in my life. I think I'm doing ok with calorie input as I'm measuring and checking everything, but as far what I'm burning I'm really not sure, and atm just going off of what MFP estimates. I want an as accurate as possible reading so I'm really anxious to get a heart rate monitor asap.
  • engineman312
    engineman312 Posts: 3,450 Member
    Options
    Excellent topic !

    I have a related question:

    Do you agree that since many here routinely "eat" their exercise calories, they should only "eat" the excess calories they burn, not the total calories burned?

    For example: If I burn 100 calories per hour, just by sitting down, then if I exercise for an hour and the HRM registers 300 calories burned, that means I only burned 200 calories more than regular.
    So I should only be allowed to "eat " 200 more calories, not the 300

    Opinions?

    don't over think things. this is weight loss, not rocket surgery. no need to be so precise.
  • Gwen7121
    Gwen7121 Posts: 126 Member
    Options
    interesting!
    I will check out that calculator and article.
    I had also read somewhere a while ago that the number of calories you burn on a elliptical, you should divide it by 2 and that will give you the exact amount of calories you burnt during the work out compared to a treadmill that burns just about the amount it tells you on the machine.

    I just got home from the gym. Just used my new HRM. i did 50 minutes on the elliptical. Machine said i did 560, the HRM says 332.... maybe this divide by two is true for the elliptical. :)

    I always use my HRM when I try a new machine. Our machines here at work have been pretty spot on, but the ones in a gym I belonged to were always high. And MFP is usually twice as high.
  • FoodFamilyFitness
    FoodFamilyFitness Posts: 17 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar FT7, I don't wear it all day, just while I'm working out. But I wear it during any type, not just cardio. I wore it for yoga tonight and even wear it when lifting weights.
  • sjtreely
    sjtreely Posts: 1,014 Member
    Options
    Excellent topic !

    I have a related question:

    Do you agree that since many here routinely "eat" their exercise calories, they should only "eat" the excess calories they burn, not the total calories burned?

    For example: If I burn 100 calories per hour, just by sitting down, then if I exercise for an hour and the HRM registers 300 calories burned, that means I only burned 200 calories more than regular.
    So I should only be allowed to "eat " 200 more calories, not the 300

    Opinions?

    Gosh, that's a great question. Hummm... here's what I think - I think you should eat if you're hungry.

    However, if you're using MFP guidelines, the calories you would normally burn have already been factored into the equation, so if your rule of thumb is to eat all your exercise calories back, then enjoy the 300.

Categories