do bigger people burn more calories than thinner people?

APPLETON29

Hello,

I am constantly wondering if my calorie count is right after a workout. I have a HRM which is stating big burns, for example after a 60 min cardio workout I have burnt 800 cals?

So basically as I am about 90lbs overweight I was wondering if bigger people burn higher calories than people that aren't that over weight because of there size? or have I just set my HRM up wrong? or am I actually burning that many calories?

Yanicka1

Yes!!! When I run for 40 minutes I burn about 300 calories. Also, at the same weight, the fitter you are, less calories you burn.

AbsoluteNG

Yes and it's obvious why. A 300 pound person is running with 300 pounds on his back compared to a 100 pound lady that only has 100 pounds on her back. However, this issue can be solved by adding weights to your back if you are a lighter person but weights should only be added as you lose pounds so that you don't hurt your joints.

twinmom01

Yes you will see a higher burn the bigger you are in body fat % - as you start to come down on body fat % your burn will be lower...this is why you may see some consistant losses for awhile and then have it start to peter out as far as weight loss...same exercises, same eating and not as much coming off on the scale...

Bankman1989

While it is true that you will burn more calories because you weigh more, there are also other factors. A fit person can normally exercise longer than an obese person. They are also going to cover more area (distance), move faster and have more overall stamina.

Bikini27

Yes!!! When I run for 40 minutes I burn about 300 calories. Also, at the same weight, the fitter you are, less calories you burn.

Yes, I have noticed that the healthier I am the lower my burns (using a HRM) because it takes more effort to get my heart rate to zone. It's a good thing, but slightly annoying

sethwdyer

This is a good site to double check your HRM.

http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

P.S.: I have a friend that just started on here. He weighs about 350 lbs and when he is in his HR Zone for 60 minutes he burns about 2000 calories.

eknight69

Here's my question? When I exercise the machines says a certain calorie burn. That is what I think is the true calories I'm burning. I set the machines with my weight and age and then it tells me at the end of my work out how many calories I've burned. Then here's where I get confused...I go to log in my exercise for the day on here (MFP) and it gives me a higher calorie burn than the machines. Is MFP accurate with that? How does MFP determine that that is how many calories you have burned for that amount of time and are the machines wrong then?

sebbysmommy

Here's my question? When I exercise the machines says a certain calorie burn. That is what I think is the true calories I'm burning. I set the machines with my weight and age and then it tells me at the end of my work out how many calories I've burned. Then here's where I get confused...I go to log in my exercise for the day on here (MFP) and it gives me a higher calorie burn than the machines. Is MFP accurate with that? How does MFP determine that that is how many calories you have burned for that amount of time and are the machines wrong then?

I have found that MFP always gives me about 100-200 more calories burnt than my HR monitor. The machines at the gym are not the most accurate themselves but would be a better estimate than MFP's. The best most accurate thing to go by is a HR monitor

Yanicka1

Here's my question? When I exercise the machines says a certain calorie burn. That is what I think is the true calories I'm burning. I set the machines with my weight and age and then it tells me at the end of my work out how many calories I've burned. Then here's where I get confused...I go to log in my exercise for the day on here (MFP) and it gives me a higher calorie burn than the machines. Is MFP accurate with that? How does MFP determine that that is how many calories you have burned for that amount of time and are the machines wrong then?

I have found that MFP always gives me about 100-200 more calories burnt than my HR monitor. The machines at the gym are not the most accurate themselves but would be a better estimate than MFP's. The best most accurate thing to go by is a HR monitor

The machine are not good to calculate the calories burn

Machine < MFP < HRM

Ant_M76

Yup

sebbysmommy

Here's my question? When I exercise the machines says a certain calorie burn. That is what I think is the true calories I'm burning. I set the machines with my weight and age and then it tells me at the end of my work out how many calories I've burned. Then here's where I get confused...I go to log in my exercise for the day on here (MFP) and it gives me a higher calorie burn than the machines. Is MFP accurate with that? How does MFP determine that that is how many calories you have burned for that amount of time and are the machines wrong then?

I have found that MFP always gives me about 100-200 more calories burnt than my HR monitor. The machines at the gym are not the most accurate themselves but would be a better estimate than MFP's. The best most accurate thing to go by is a HR monitor

The machine are not good to calculate the calories burn

Machine < MFP < HRM

Normally I would agree but the OP is talking about a machine that takes age, weight, and HR into account. I have found those machines to be within 10-20 calories of my HR monitor, much closer than MFP.

Captain_Tightpants

Yep.

mrseelmerfudd

yup, this is due to the fact it takes more energy for the heavier/bigger person to take part in that activity due to fact they weigh more iykwim.

yesthistime

Machine < MFP < HRM

Normally I would agree but the OP is talking about a machine that takes age, weight, and HR into account. I have found those machines to be within 10-20 calories of my HR monitor, much closer than MFP.
[/quote]

Agree. When the machine takes stats into account, I find that it gives a more accurate calorie reading than MFP. I think MFP seriously overestimates exercise calories, which is a problem if you eat all of your calories back.

APPLETON29

This is a good site to double check your HRM.

http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

P.S.: I have a friend that just started on here. He weighs about 350 lbs and when he is in his HR Zone for 60 minutes he burns about 2000 calories.

Thank you, that's really helpful x

grinch031

Yes you will generally burn more calories than thinner people while doing the same activities at a comparable intensity. However as you start to lose weight, you will start burning less calories than someone at a comparable size who was always that size.

Yanicka1

Machine < MFP < HRM

Normally I would agree but the OP is talking about a machine that takes age, weight, and HR into account. I have found those machines to be within 10-20 calories of my HR monitor, much closer than MFP.

Agree. When the machine takes stats into account, I find that it gives a more accurate calorie reading than MFP. I think MFP seriously overestimates exercise calories, which is a problem if you eat all of your calories back.
[/quote]

In my experience, even machine that use my infos are not very accurate. I guess it can be for other people

Ant_M76

However as you start to lose weight, you will start burning less calories than someone at a comparable size who was always that size.

Really?

eknight69

bump

grinch031

However as you start to lose weight, you will start burning less calories than someone at a comparable size who was always that size.

Really?

Yes, take a look at this. There are a couple more related articles that can explain the hormonal changes that occur while dieting. Leptin a key contributor.

Some research has found a similar effect in humans although the studies tend to be very mixed on this (I’ll address why in a later blog post): when you diet down a human being, often you see metabolic rate decreasing far more than you’d expect based on the loss of body weight alone. That is, based on the weight loss, say you expected metabolic rate to drop by 200 calories; but when you measure it it really drops by 300. That extra 100 calories is more than predicted and suggests that the body is ‘adapting’ to the weight loss in an attempt to not only slow further fat loss but also to get bodyweight/body fat back up when food becomes available again.

There are other adaptations, folks often decrease their activity levels (conserving energy), fat burning goes down and fat storage goes up, appetite often goes up so that people eat more when food is made available. In common parlance, this is often referred to as the ‘starvation response’ and, yes, there is something to it. Unfortunately, it’s basically the price that has to be paid for losing body fat to any significant level. People talk constantly about avoiding the starvation response and things of that nature but the only way to avoid it completely is to never lose fat.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/set-points-settling-points-and-bodyweight-regulation-part-1.html