You burnt how many calories?!

keenster

If cleaning for an hour burned half my daily calories, I'd be invisible by now.

Love this line!

Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools

Delicate

I dont estimate i used my HRM

Its possible for body attack for me to get into 100-120 per 10mins, most classes are 60mins, however someone bigger than me, taller or holding more weight would gain alot more calore burnage.

Calorie burnage is always a guess either way.

cbarila

I'm just transitioning to this site from another site. Exercise is such a tricky thing. I agree, most people overestimate their calories burned. I usually count 2/3 of the amount a calorie-burn calculator gives me. I don't wear a heart rate monitor, since I have a high resting heart rate anyway. When I tried one, it was telling me I was burning ridiculous amounts of calories just sitting around the house. Obviously that's not true, or I wouldn't have regained 30 pounds last year. (lost 50# with WW a couple of years ago).

In my experience, one reason why people don't understand why they aren't losing weight, or aren't losing it fast enough, is that they are underestimating calories in, and overestimating calories out. I also try to stay away from "eating" my exercise calories as much as possible.

Brittany39down

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.

My Zumba instructor wears a HRM w/ chest strap. At the end of class she usually gives us the amount of calories she burned. Mostly between 800-950 calories for a 60 minute class. I only log 500 since I know I do not move as quickly or energeticaly (sp?) as her. She is also about 40 lbs lighter than me. I'm not sure if that makes much of a difference.

lissypriss

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.

Same here! I don't trust many counters, and I know I over-estimate my cals, but better safe than sorry!

d2footballJRC

75 minutes is 1100 calories burnt for me on an elliptical on the 7 setting at 20% incline. This is using a Polar HRM.

Aperture_Science

It's total BS.
Those numbers are way out of line, and it won't be long before the ones recording such numbers come back crying the blues about how they're doing everything they're supposed to do but can't get results.:sad:

I agree completely. IMHO the best way to get a feel for how many cals you can/need to eat is keep your diet and exercise reasonably stable for three weeks and monitor your progress with scales and a tape measure. If you are progressing the way you want to stick with it. If you are not tweak and repeat.

Why three weeks? Anything much less than this and you will be making dietary changes based on insufficient data... you simply will not have enough readings to understand your weekly fluctuations.

amuhlou

I definitely think there's a point where you can really 'nickel and dime' your calories and agree that it sets you up for disappointment.

I trust my HRM because it seems way more reasonable. I've never burned anywhere near even 900 calories doing an hour of high impact cardio, If I can burn an average of 10kcal/min I'm happy.

Logging 'cooking' as an activity is one that boggles my mind. I consider stuff like that extra padding just in case my BMR is a little lower than what MFP thinks it should be.

QueenJayJay

I used to have a person on my friends list that would log walking, carrying her kid, housework, etc....EVERYTHING as exercise. She ended up logging about 6.5 hours of cardio activity every day. You can't tell her that those are daily activities because she says she "doesn't do the same thing every day."

d2footballJRC

I definitely think there's a point where you can really 'nickel and dime' your calories and agree that it sets you up for disappointment.

I trust my HRM because it seems way more reasonable. I've never burned anywhere near even 900 calories doing an hour of high impact cardio, If I can burn an average of 10kcal/min I'm happy.

Logging 'cooking' as an activity is one that boggles my mind. I consider stuff like that extra padding just in case my BMR is a little lower than what MFP thinks it should be.

This, I can't stand when people put cooking and cleaning in as calories, guys just let that be padding. You don't need it logged!

carolann_22

I use my BodyBugg to get more acurate calorie counts - In 90 minutes on the treadmill - 6.87 miles - I burned 910 calories.

Me too - and it's supposed to be 90% accurate, so if I eat my exercise calories back, I don't eat 20% of them back just in case. Like if I burn 600 calories for my daily exercise, I'll only eat back 480 or so, just to be on the safe side. Don't want to overestimate my burn.

silhouettes

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?

I ONLY burn up to about 600 calories an hour, if I run SOMETIMES it's 650.... I heard your supposed to be able to jog and talk, which is still difficult for me, but I can't imagine being able to run and talk and burn 900, my heart rate is already up to around 155 and my max is I think around 190.... My HRM says my range should be something like 135-150.... so I can't imagine ever burning that much at once.. but then again it is according to each individual and perhaps running does burn more if I could keep my HR up to 170... but anyways, just my experience.

(Yes I read your post about you meaning running not jogging, I'm just putting in my personal view on jogging calories, I can't actually "run" for an hour straight when it takes so much out of me to jog that long, teehee)

I burn 100 every 10 minutes while having my HR up that high and typicially HALF that if I have it around 100-110 and anything lower isn't really exercise.

silhouettes

I definitely think there's a point where you can really 'nickel and dime' your calories and agree that it sets you up for disappointment.

I trust my HRM because it seems way more reasonable. I've never burned anywhere near even 900 calories doing an hour of high impact cardio, If I can burn an average of 10kcal/min I'm happy.

Logging 'cooking' as an activity is one that boggles my mind. I consider stuff like that extra padding just in case my BMR is a little lower than what MFP thinks it should be.

I admit I put in cooking sometimes, but I try not to use the calories.

Reason I do it... simple, my husband does all the cooking in the house.

My rule of thumb is to write down anything I don't typically do.. I do less than once every few weeks.

Raclex

don't over think things. this is weight loss, not rocket surgery. no need to be so precise.
[/quote]

^^This.

myofibril

And this is why I never bother worrying about calorie burn during exercise or net calories...It just gives people one more thing to obsess over, get wrong or confuse themselves with.

There's a lot to be said for simplicity. And no, that doesn't mean I am simple

lwoods34

In my experience in depends on the person. I dont go by the numbers on MFP. I use a heart rate monitor. I usually workout at anywhere btwn 75-85% of my max heart rate but it depends on the workout that Im doing. I have never burned 2000 calories in 90 minutes but I have burned over 1,000 calories in 90 minutes. I have also burned 1600 calories for doing 2 1/2 hrs of cardio ( I am a personal trainer and fitness instructor).

I guess what Im trying to say is it all depends on the person, how much they weigh and the intensity of their exercising!

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?

SLaw4215

Calories burned is actually a complicated formula and there is not really a 1 size fits most approach. The data in MFP is as accurate as the person who did the data entry. Heres a link for Exercise Caloried Burned Calculator:
http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/Calories.html

After about the 8th week of using the MFP data base last year I started to not see results. I suspect my body was responding to the new healthier eating habits and adding exercise where I had been sedentary before that. The "failure" to see results made me fee frustrated and I nearly quit trying. I did get really unmotivated for several months because I felt like "what's the use"?!!

I did, however, find this great link that has lists and lists of different exercises and approximate calories burned.

http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/calories_burned_list.asp


Personally - I decided to invest in myself and bought the BodyMedia Fit LINK (this model has bluetooth to link to a Smartphone) because estimating and guessing wasn't working well for me. With my new weight loss and health tool I lost 4.5 pound the first week.

Mandykinz2008

I have found that when it comes to food MFP is RIGHT ON..but in exercise it overestimates most of the time. Just my findings, though.

KimmieBrie

I have a hard time believing that people burn 800 calories doing 30 minutes of walking their dog. Keyword, WALKING lol

I wish. If a woman is *actually burning that much than I assume she is much larger than myself and has a lot to lose....

I get my heart rate up above 150 on the elliptical or running it's usaully 160s 170s - I never usually burn more than 300 calories in 30 minutes. Walking it would be a lot less. Unlike the OPs numbers - I would NEVER burn 900 cals running for an hour - that's me though and I'm a girl in ok shape, he's a guy. Everyone is different. But some of the burns I see are quite high... exceptionally high.

grinch031

And this is why I never bother worrying about calorie burn during exercise or net calories...It just gives people one more thing to obsess over, get wrong or confuse themselves with.

There's a lot to be said for simplicity. And no, that doesn't mean I am simple

Yes simple is best. Every decision I make regarding fitness or diet is based on the answer to the question, "Can I do this for the rest of my life?". But that is because I have already figured out how my body works. Knowing the small details can be helpful in learning about yourself.

RBRoy

I use a heart rate monitor that calculates my calories burned. It's a great investment... only cost about $50/$60 from ****s Sporting Goods. The watch is a brand called Sportline. Well worth it! It motivates me to work harder when I see the calories burned while I'm working out... LOVE IT!

Good luck!

NakedLunchTime

It's total BS.
Those numbers are way out of line, and it won't be long before the ones recording such numbers come back crying the blues about how they're doing everything they're supposed to do but can't get results.:sad:

I recall somebody wanting to argue that point once, and instead of admitting they were wrong, they just deactivated their account.
I WISH I could burn that much in 90 minutes.
I workout 2 hours a day, and for 2 whole hours, I burn about 1000 calories.

What is total BS? And someone deactived their account over this? I am sure it had to do with people who thought they were right being complete a**h*les to them. Thats how alot of people are. I feel bad that they would deactivate their account over a disscusion, and I an sure it had to do with more than them being wrong.

fimary

bump

RBRoy

I'm not sure why it * out the store name... it wasn't a word used improperly. However, you can also buy the watch online. Google Sportline watches.

snookumss

One time my boyfriend who is 270lbs was on the elliptical with me. He went the same speed and incline for the same amount of time and seriously burned double I do.

I average almost 100 calories in 10 minutes... he had 200. That would equate to 1200 calories in an hour. Totally not fair, but fact.

QueenJayJay

It's total BS.
Those numbers are way out of line, and it won't be long before the ones recording such numbers come back crying the blues about how they're doing everything they're supposed to do but can't get results.:sad:

I recall somebody wanting to argue that point once, and instead of admitting they were wrong, they just deactivated their account.
I WISH I could burn that much in 90 minutes.
I workout 2 hours a day, and for 2 whole hours, I burn about 1000 calories.

What is total BS? And someone deactived their account over this? I am sure it had to do with people who thought they were right being complete a**h*les to them. Thats how alot of people are. I feel bad that they would deactivate their account over a disscusion, and I an sure it had to do with more than them being wrong.

:drinker:

QueenJayJay

I'm not sure why it * out the store name... it wasn't a word used improperly. However, you can also buy the watch online. Google Sportline watches.

It censors it out no matter how you use it, even hickory ****ory dock. use a ! instead of an i.

Angelhurt

i only log 'cleaning' becuase we literally spend 3-4hours properly cleaning every corner of the house...but i only record it as 'light cleaning' even though i vacum and scrub and am up and down step ladders..so it is an estimate

it is hard because nothing can be exact..although hrm are the best...but i can't afford one yet..so till then!

also i do kettlebells for 60 and thats burns just over 1000cals..and i didn't find that in mfp so no excuse for that...as the same for zumba...i used outside registered sites for that and it must be right because i lose 1/2lb in 2/3 days after 7hours of cleaning and 60mins kettlbell...but i stick to my goal and don't 'eat back my calories'...thats rubbish..its just making excuses to eat more (although i won't shoot myself for going over a little bit if im burning it all offf)

i agree with not logging each little thing though...i think you'd end up not enjoying anything!!

montiy

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?

I heartily agree! You need to subtract your regular calories burnt from your exercise calories when you use a HRM.

phatsoslim

I wear my HRM for all my workouts. So my calorie burn is pretty accurate. Sometimes when I log them into MFP, they are only off by 1 -10 calories for some workouts.

I recommend to spend the money on a heart rate monitor if you are serious about losing weight. It might seem like a lot of money in the beginning, but your body will thank you in the end.

My HRM is a Suunto M4. Check out www.suunto.com for the right one for you.