Question about Logging Calories Burned....

staclo

This might be a dumb question, not sure. I know that I burn calories from strength training. I don't have a hrm yet (getting one next week, yay!). My question is: how do I figure out approximately how much I'm burning right now from strength training, and how do I log those calories burned? Right now, I'm just logging the exercise, sets, reps, etc. but I'm not accounting for any of those calories. When I workout at home, I do 30 minutes of cardio on the Wii Fitness Coach, and then 30 minutes of strength training with free weights, yoga ball, bands, etc. Could someone please help me? Thanks!

azwildcatfan94

when you log the cardio, there are choices that will give you an "average" or "estimate." Once you get your HRM, you will be able to add your specific information.

staclo

when you log the cardio, there are choices that will give you an "average" or "estimate." Once you get your HRM, you will be able to add your specific information.

Thanks. It's weird that there's no place to log calories in the strength section!

healthiesthappiestme

you can put "strength training" into the cardio section. It will give you a number.

Azdak

Personally, I would not log the strength training calories. The metabolic cost of weight lifting is relatively low, compared to aerobic exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting, you are only working for a brief amount of time per set--maybe 40 seconds or so, and you are not really stressing the cardiovascular system (regardless of heart rate). You are also using only a small amount of muscle mass for any given exercise.

Heart rate response (and thus calories burned on an HRM) cannot be used as a reliable measurement of intensity with strength training. During strength training, HR increases due to a pressure load on the heart, whereas during aerobic exercise it is a volume load--i.e. HR reflects oxygen uptake and cardiac volume. So the HR increase during strength training is NOT the same as the HR increase with cardio exercise.

The real benefit for strength training for weight loss is what happens in between training sessions, not necessarily during the training session itself. Most people assume that strength training helps because it increases muscle mass and thus increases resting metabolism. However, research has also shown that including 3 strength training sessions per week (along w/cardio) results in greater fat loss even when there is NO increase in fat free mass (FFM).

The only real way to know, would be to wear a portable VO2 analyzer during a particular workout and measure actual calories consumed. You'd need a VERY good friend at a university lab to help make that happen ;-)

Now there are many different kinds of "strength training", especially in classes where aerobic type movements are combined with strength type movements. Those are extremely difficult to study because the variables cannot be controlled as well. In that case, the HRM numbers are as good as any, but even those are as much guessing as they are science.

smhlaw

What about the "Body Bugg" that is/was purportedly used by contestants on The Biggest Loser (a show which I have yet to watch).

Ahmee2034

I love this website -
http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/calories_burned.asp

I haven't found an exercise yet that isn't listed. For instance, when I do Pilates, I can adjust the amount of time and it will calculate the calories burned. Then, I go to MFP and enter the excerise manually. I love it. Sparkpeople is a free resource but you may have to create a user ID, etc. I did that and just put that "Calories Burned for" page as one of my homepages so it is easily accessible without having to alway log in.

Anyway, I hope y'all try it.

staclo

Personally, I would not log the strength training calories. The metabolic cost of weight lifting is relatively low, compared to aerobic exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting, you are only working for a brief amount of time per set--maybe 40 seconds or so, and you are not really stressing the cardiovascular system (regardless of heart rate). You are also using only a small amount of muscle mass for any given exercise.

Heart rate response (and thus calories burned on an HRM) cannot be used as a reliable measurement of intensity with strength training. During strength training, HR increases due to a pressure load on the heart, whereas during aerobic exercise it is a volume load--i.e. HR reflects oxygen uptake and cardiac volume. So the HR increase during strength training is NOT the same as the HR increase with cardio exercise.

The real benefit for strength training for weight loss is what happens in between training sessions, not necessarily during the training session itself. Most people assume that strength training helps because it increases muscle mass and thus increases resting metabolism. However, research has also shown that including 3 strength training sessions per week (along w/cardio) results in greater fat loss even when there is NO increase in fat free mass (FFM).

The only real way to know, would be to wear a portable VO2 analyzer during a particular workout and measure actual calories consumed. You'd need a VERY good friend at a university lab to help make that happen ;-)

Now there are many different kinds of "strength training", especially in classes where aerobic type movements are combined with strength type movements. Those are extremely difficult to study because the variables cannot be controlled as well. In that case, the HRM numbers are as good as any, but even those are as much guessing as they are science.

I'm doing the strength training immediately after cardio (usually), and I do 3 sets of 5-6 different workouts and about 12-15 reps each. I use 10 lbs weights most of the time. Some of the workouts that I add are definitley aerobic, such as jump squats. Do you think that I could accurately use my HRM w/ those activities?

molsongirl

Personally, I would not log the strength training calories. The metabolic cost of weight lifting is relatively low, compared to aerobic exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting, you are only working for a brief amount of time per set--maybe 40 seconds or so, and you are not really stressing the cardiovascular system (regardless of heart rate). You are also using only a small amount of muscle mass for any given exercise.

Heart rate response (and thus calories burned on an HRM) cannot be used as a reliable measurement of intensity with strength training. During strength training, HR increases due to a pressure load on the heart, whereas during aerobic exercise it is a volume load--i.e. HR reflects oxygen uptake and cardiac volume. So the HR increase during strength training is NOT the same as the HR increase with cardio exercise.

The real benefit for strength training for weight loss is what happens in between training sessions, not necessarily during the training session itself. Most people assume that strength training helps because it increases muscle mass and thus increases resting metabolism. However, research has also shown that including 3 strength training sessions per week (along w/cardio) results in greater fat loss even when there is NO increase in fat free mass (FFM).

The only real way to know, would be to wear a portable VO2 analyzer during a particular workout and measure actual calories consumed. You'd need a VERY good friend at a university lab to help make that happen ;-)

Now there are many different kinds of "strength training", especially in classes where aerobic type movements are combined with strength type movements. Those are extremely difficult to study because the variables cannot be controlled as well. In that case, the HRM numbers are as good as any, but even those are as much guessing as they are science.

I'm doing the strength training immediately after cardio (usually), and I do 3 sets of 5-6 different workouts and about 12-15 reps each. I use 10 lbs weights most of the time. Some of the workouts that I add are definitley aerobic, such as jump squats. Do you think that I could accurately use my HRM w/ those activities?

I agree that you don't need to log the calories from weight training, and 10 pound weight isn't very much, I'm lifting, 30-50 pounds for my biceps/triceps...i'm sweatin like crazy, but still don't burn enough to worry about logging it, I consider them little bonuses....You're toning your body, strengthening it up, getting stonger and leaner, I wouldn't worry about the caloric effect, but rather the physical changes you'll see....wayyy better than a few calories, many people in my studio get very discouraged when they see how little they burn through weight lifting, so I don't let them concentrate on that but rather on the outcome of their hard work. However, jump squats with weights and full lunges with weights, that's definitely cardio, but if you're not doing very many, then again it's really up to you whether you wan't to log it, and you def gotta have a hrm for that, guessing is just to general for that kind of activity, provding you're spending at least 10 minutes on the squats/or any plyo movements, then log it.

staclo

Personally, I would not log the strength training calories. The metabolic cost of weight lifting is relatively low, compared to aerobic exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting, you are only working for a brief amount of time per set--maybe 40 seconds or so, and you are not really stressing the cardiovascular system (regardless of heart rate). You are also using only a small amount of muscle mass for any given exercise.

Heart rate response (and thus calories burned on an HRM) cannot be used as a reliable measurement of intensity with strength training. During strength training, HR increases due to a pressure load on the heart, whereas during aerobic exercise it is a volume load--i.e. HR reflects oxygen uptake and cardiac volume. So the HR increase during strength training is NOT the same as the HR increase with cardio exercise.

The real benefit for strength training for weight loss is what happens in between training sessions, not necessarily during the training session itself. Most people assume that strength training helps because it increases muscle mass and thus increases resting metabolism. However, research has also shown that including 3 strength training sessions per week (along w/cardio) results in greater fat loss even when there is NO increase in fat free mass (FFM).

The only real way to know, would be to wear a portable VO2 analyzer during a particular workout and measure actual calories consumed. You'd need a VERY good friend at a university lab to help make that happen ;-)

Now there are many different kinds of "strength training", especially in classes where aerobic type movements are combined with strength type movements. Those are extremely difficult to study because the variables cannot be controlled as well. In that case, the HRM numbers are as good as any, but even those are as much guessing as they are science.

I'm doing the strength training immediately after cardio (usually), and I do 3 sets of 5-6 different workouts and about 12-15 reps each. I use 10 lbs weights most of the time. Some of the workouts that I add are definitley aerobic, such as jump squats. Do you think that I could accurately use my HRM w/ those activities?

I agree that you don't need to log the calories from weight training, and 10 pound weight isn't very much, I'm lifting, 30-50 pounds for my biceps/triceps...i'm sweatin like crazy, but still don't burn enough to worry about logging it, I consider them little bonuses....You're toning your body, strengthening it up, getting stonger and leaner, I wouldn't worry about the caloric effect, but rather the physical changes you'll see....wayyy better than a few calories, many people in my studio get very discouraged when they see how little they burn through weight lifting, so I don't let them concentrate on that but rather on the outcome of their hard work. However, jump squats with weights and full lunges with weights, that's definitely cardio, but if you're not doing very many, then again it's really up to you whether you wan't to log it, and you def gotta have a hrm for that, guessing is just to general for that kind of activity, provding you're spending at least 10 minutes on the squats/or any plyo movements, then log it.

I know that the weight isn't that much, but I'm generally doing more than just lifting (like alternating lunges w/ bicep curl...). The main reason that I was asking about the calories from it is because I'm trying to get a very good idea about how many calories that I burn so that I stay at around 1200 net calories and don't go too far under. Right now, my only variable with exercising is knowing accurately how much I'm burning. So you don't think that I should bother with trying to figure it out, and I should just not count those calories? By the way, I care much less about how many calories I'm burning than how good I feel after working out. I just like figuring things out.

Azdak

Personally, I would not log the strength training calories. The metabolic cost of weight lifting is relatively low, compared to aerobic exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting, you are only working for a brief amount of time per set--maybe 40 seconds or so, and you are not really stressing the cardiovascular system (regardless of heart rate). You are also using only a small amount of muscle mass for any given exercise.

Heart rate response (and thus calories burned on an HRM) cannot be used as a reliable measurement of intensity with strength training. During strength training, HR increases due to a pressure load on the heart, whereas during aerobic exercise it is a volume load--i.e. HR reflects oxygen uptake and cardiac volume. So the HR increase during strength training is NOT the same as the HR increase with cardio exercise.

The real benefit for strength training for weight loss is what happens in between training sessions, not necessarily during the training session itself. Most people assume that strength training helps because it increases muscle mass and thus increases resting metabolism. However, research has also shown that including 3 strength training sessions per week (along w/cardio) results in greater fat loss even when there is NO increase in fat free mass (FFM).

The only real way to know, would be to wear a portable VO2 analyzer during a particular workout and measure actual calories consumed. You'd need a VERY good friend at a university lab to help make that happen ;-)

Now there are many different kinds of "strength training", especially in classes where aerobic type movements are combined with strength type movements. Those are extremely difficult to study because the variables cannot be controlled as well. In that case, the HRM numbers are as good as any, but even those are as much guessing as they are science.

I'm doing the strength training immediately after cardio (usually), and I do 3 sets of 5-6 different workouts and about 12-15 reps each. I use 10 lbs weights most of the time. Some of the workouts that I add are definitley aerobic, such as jump squats. Do you think that I could accurately use my HRM w/ those activities?

Doing the workout immediately after cardio probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. When you start doing a variety of different movements, it's hard to draw any clear answers. It's not like the body shuts off one system and turns on another.

Basic rule of thumb would be: the more resistance and the quicker you reach a point of momentary fatigue, the less cardio work is involved, and vice-versa.

Think about it: if you are lifting a weight and you reach a point of "failure" in 8-10 reps, that is different than a movement that you can do for 20-25 reps, OR during which you do not reach that point of "failure". Something like a "jumb squat" is a plyometric type of exercise and those belong in a different category (and, yes, there probably is more of a cardio component).

You'll have to figure out what method of "documentation" works for you. I just wanted to make sure that people weren't inflating their exercise calories by listing 300-500 calories for a strength workout.

staclo

Personally, I would not log the strength training calories. The metabolic cost of weight lifting is relatively low, compared to aerobic exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting, you are only working for a brief amount of time per set--maybe 40 seconds or so, and you are not really stressing the cardiovascular system (regardless of heart rate). You are also using only a small amount of muscle mass for any given exercise.

Heart rate response (and thus calories burned on an HRM) cannot be used as a reliable measurement of intensity with strength training. During strength training, HR increases due to a pressure load on the heart, whereas during aerobic exercise it is a volume load--i.e. HR reflects oxygen uptake and cardiac volume. So the HR increase during strength training is NOT the same as the HR increase with cardio exercise.

The real benefit for strength training for weight loss is what happens in between training sessions, not necessarily during the training session itself. Most people assume that strength training helps because it increases muscle mass and thus increases resting metabolism. However, research has also shown that including 3 strength training sessions per week (along w/cardio) results in greater fat loss even when there is NO increase in fat free mass (FFM).

The only real way to know, would be to wear a portable VO2 analyzer during a particular workout and measure actual calories consumed. You'd need a VERY good friend at a university lab to help make that happen ;-)

Now there are many different kinds of "strength training", especially in classes where aerobic type movements are combined with strength type movements. Those are extremely difficult to study because the variables cannot be controlled as well. In that case, the HRM numbers are as good as any, but even those are as much guessing as they are science.

I'm doing the strength training immediately after cardio (usually), and I do 3 sets of 5-6 different workouts and about 12-15 reps each. I use 10 lbs weights most of the time. Some of the workouts that I add are definitley aerobic, such as jump squats. Do you think that I could accurately use my HRM w/ those activities?

Doing the workout immediately after cardio probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. When you start doing a variety of different movements, it's hard to draw any clear answers. It's not like the body shuts off one system and turns on another.

Basic rule of thumb would be: the more resistance and the quicker you reach a point of momentary fatigue, the less cardio work is involved, and vice-versa.

Think about it: if you are lifting a weight and you reach a point of "failure" in 8-10 reps, that is different than a movement that you can do for 20-25 reps, OR during which you do not reach that point of "failure". Something like a "jumb squat" is a plyometric type of exercise and those belong in a different category (and, yes, there probably is more of a cardio component).

You'll have to figure out what method of "documentation" works for you. I just wanted to make sure that people weren't inflating their exercise calories by listing 300-500 calories for a strength workout.

Thanks for the response. For now, I'm not going to count any calories burned for that aspect of my work out. I'll talk to my trainer, get my hrm, and figure it out as I go!

mollykate810

I just tried adding pilates to my exercises, but I don't see it in the list.... are you entering something else?

Ahmee2034

I just tried adding pilates to my exercises, but I don't see it in the list.... are you entering something else?

Are you going to http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/calories_burned.asp? It is listed there. You enter your present weight and then how long you spent doing Pilates. There is a drop down bar below and you can scroll until you find Pilates. Hit the calculate button and it gives you the amount of cals burned. Then, I go to MFP and enter it there under add new exercise. It really is easy once you figure it out. Let me know if I can help you.

mollykate810

That worked very easily. Thanks!

Ahmee2034

That worked very easily. Thanks!

:happy: Glad I could help! That site has some great resources.