how many calories are you really burning and is it enough?

Dave198lbs

Lately I have seen quite a few posters claiming they are burning a huge amount of calories in a short amount of time. Claims of 900 calories in 45 minutes are not unusual.

The hard truth is, it is very unlikely you are actually burning anywhere near that amount. This only matters if you are actually eating back ALL your exercise calories, which is a personal choice.

A harder truth is even if you are burning that many calories, it doesnt automatically translate to weight and fat loss.

Your diet is the key factor. Without the proper deficit (not too high and not too low due to over estimating calories burned and eating them back) all the exercise in the world is not going to make you lose weight.

See-

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/exercise-and-weightfat-loss-part-1.html

This website is one of the best I have found for what we are doing here.

Helloitsdan

This is the main reason I wont use MFPs search database.
Too many varying numbers.
Even the food selections need to be scrutinized.

For me, I figure 100 cals burned per 20mins lifting.
100 cals burned per 10mins sprinting.

Till I get an HRM or Fitbit that is.

Thats my story and i'm sticking too it!

PS: thanx for all your input on the forums Dave!
Even when you hand out a spanking!

sheiwat

IKR....Its insane some of the numbers posted... i'm like," how in the world....I must be doing something wrong"....I purchased a HRM and i'm not even burning as much as the machine told me i was!!!

Josteyn

Personally, I aim to eat 500 calories less than I 'need' to maintain, and exercise an average of 500 calories a day as well. I can't lose what I want to lose just by eating less, as I would be below my BMR, and that's not healthy for any length of time.


But I'm not expecting miracles, and I have set aside this year to lose 25 kilograms, which is an easy enough level of loss and allows for hiccups and holidays.

zyxst

I never believe I've burned as much as what machines (Fitbit, HRM, various calculators) tell me. Since none of these ever give me identical numbers, I don't depend on them for more eating (the dreaded eating back calories).

I didn't understand much of the article, but that's just how my brain works. :blushing:

dad106

I've always gone off my HRM.. and lost/maintain just fine.

I think a lot of those numbers have to do with the quality of the product.. For example, a Timex HRM is going to give you a way inflated calorie burn, while a Polar HRM is going to be closer to the truth but still off.

I also don't eat back all my exercise calories.. I leave a good 100-200 left over to account for errors.

darknight13

Nice statement Dave. I am using the FitBit and I have really noticed a difference on what they post and what is posted here, so I tend to lean towards the FitBit. I plan on adding the scale they offer soon as then I will have a better idea of BMI and % of bodyfat, which I am more interested in, as I work out at the gym a minimum of 3 times a week. And the BMI is really only a suggestive guide as if I went by what it said for my height I would be skin and bones by the time I hit it and with my bone structure and muscle mass it will never happen.

spikefoot

It is no wonder people support eating back workout calories.... you can have an entire days worth of food and practically whatever you want if you follow some of these numbers.....lol

I know that is not the only reason why people say that...

Enigmatica

I use a BMF to track calorie burn and adjust my intake accordingly. I'm in maintenance mode, not trying to lose weight. At the moment I'm still logging exercise on MFP so I can compare the results with BMF. Sometimes they're close and sometimes they aren't. I had been stalled out for a long time using MFPs calcs, which is why I got the BMF. Following BMF info helped me drop that last 12 pounds.

You might be able to burn 900 cals in 45 minutes if you were really heavy and doing some extreme cardio, but that does seem rather unlikely. I sometimes get the impression some folks overestimate their output and underestimate their intake. Then they complain that they're not losing weight. Well, that's what happens if you cheat yourself!

thetrishwarp

I got an HRM for this reason. Tells me I burn about 600 cals for around an hour and a half spent at the gym, which seems fairly reasonable to me.

ladykaisa

bump for later

norcal_yogi

It is no wonder people support eating back workout calories.... you can have an entire days worth of food and practically whatever you want if you follow some of these numbers.....lol

I know that is not the only reason why people say that...

yep, exactly^.

Sabine_Stroehm

I agree as well. And I also worry when folks count the calories in their daily activities (and count those high too).
And it's as silly as MFP's "in five weeks you will weight X" claims.

That said: I'm still going to lift, because it's good for me. And I'm still going to run/ride/hike/etc.. Because it's good for me.

I don't get "eating back". I fuel my body.

zombilishious

I set my macros and try to aim for those, eating above my BMR, and only add my exercise for the day in AFTER completing my food diary. I have never burned more than 500 calories in a day, and that came from serious circuit training. Most days I run and/or lift. I set myself for maintenance for a while, and it was truly just my macros with deficit plus exercise calories because MFP numbers are nuts!

chivalryder

Back in the day where I used to mountain bike on a single speed bike, I would ride for 2ish hours and would easily burn 1500-2000 kcal on each ride. I weighed around 180 then. This was measured with a HRM.

Now, if I were riding a geared bike, the numbers would be a lot lower, because I wouldn't have to push so hard. On the SS, I was regularly hitting the anaerobic heart rate zone.

Now, the HRM was going by what I put in as my max heart rate (as well as other factors, like height, weight, age, etc.), but the max number was just an estimate, so the calories burned was just a guide. I never took it too seriously. The only way to accurately measure calories burned, without using medical equipment, is with a power meter, combined with a heart rate monitor, which takes all factors into consideration (including lean mass, BF%, etc etc).

kwin91

That was a great article, thanks for sharing that! Another thing that MFP doesn't consider when calculating the numbers are the calories you would have burn just sitting. So whenever I am calculating my calories burned I minus about 50 calories from what I get so its even more accurate. A lot of people don't realize that they should do that and I've had very good luck loosing weight this way because I end up under calculating a little but seeing the weight come off at the same time.

litatura

That's precisely why I don't eat back my exercise calories. I know that MFP and/or my treadmill are overestimating the calories I'm burning, so I just ignore them. However, I still record them as they tell me and will admit that it looks impressive everytime my treadmill tells me that I burned 466 calories from my 5km (30 minute) run, even though I know it's not true. LOL!

Dave198lbs

That was a great article, thanks for sharing that! Another thing that MFP doesn't consider when calculating the numbers are the calories you would have burn just sitting. So whenever I am calculating my calories burned I minus about 50 calories from what I get so its even more accurate. A lot of people don't realize that they should do that and I've had very good luck loosing weight this way because I end up under calculating a little but seeing the weight come off at the same time.

very good point

FATBOYBGONE

I agree. I've went to several websites that have calories burned calculators and get varying numbers. So, I'm not really sure what to think. So, I'm approaching it from the position of it's not an absolute value and not using it to eat back my calories. What's the point in that anyway? I mean the objective is to burn more than you take in right?

chivalryder

That was a great article, thanks for sharing that! Another thing that MFP doesn't consider when calculating the numbers are the calories you would have burn just sitting. So whenever I am calculating my calories burned I minus about 50 calories from what I get so its even more accurate. A lot of people don't realize that they should do that and I've had very good luck loosing weight this way because I end up under calculating a little but seeing the weight come off at the same time.

Are you sure it doesn't consider that at all? Where did you get that info?

jknoell

Psychologically speaking, this would be a detriment to some individuals' plans. Sometimes the frame of mind we are in goes a long way and after reading this article, it doesn't drive me to work hard to burn such a small amount of calories. However, I have to wonder where all this "simple math" comes from...

I think this: we need to stop overanalyzing this process (unless we are taking it to a whole new level, like bodybuilding) because as long as we are eating healthy and staying active, we'll get there. I agree that it would be extremely difficult to burn 900 in 45 minutes (I like my HRM - it never gives me this type of reading), but I also don't add up my burned calories each week to ensure I've lost x amount of pounds... I just do it. I just exercise and run and take classes at the gym because it feels good and I'm staying active. I eat more veggies and not so many processed foods because I feel better and more accomplished when I do that. I like this new lifestyle, and no matter what I'm "actually" burning, I log what my HRM says because its part of my routine to give me a psychologically pleasing result at the end of the day.

kuger4119

I use the MFP site numbers for my running (which are nearly identical to what the treadmill indicates) and I have been almost dead on with losing one pound per week on average. When I lift, my heart rate monitor says that I burn about 8 calories per minute on average. MFP says that I am only burning half that. A lot of that is dependent on the individual and how they lift. Personally, I think I am blessed with above average cardio and now that I've been working out, my body responds relatively quickly. Again, my weight loss tracks at almost exactly one pound per week using the numbers I use.

I will say that 900 calories in 45 minutes is probably not accurate unless it's a very large person in relatively good shape. I would have to sprint for 45 minutes to get close to that (and I'm not physically capable of that). I can burn 700 calories in a day, but that is me running 1.3 miles at 6 am, then running another 20 minutes followed up by 40-45 minutes of lifting in the evening at the gym. The biggest problem that I see with the gym is people thinking that ellipticals burn the way that MFP indicates. You see people freewheeling away for 30 minutes and while it is a good workout, I question how much they are really accomplishing.

omearaee

That is a fantastic site, thank you for the link.

I do not add the calories back when I exercise. I view those calories more as a buffer and not as ones to be counted on.

scottb81

I use the MFP site numbers for my running (which are nearly identical to what the treadmill indicates) and I have been almost dead on with losing one pound per week on average.

I have the same experience. If anything, I lose faster than predicted when using the numbers that MFP gives for running.

B_Running

I use a BMF to track calorie burn and adjust my intake accordingly. I'm in maintenance mode, not trying to lose weight. At the moment I'm still logging exercise on MFP so I can compare the results with BMF. Sometimes they're close and sometimes they aren't. I had been stalled out for a long time using MFPs calcs, which is why I got the BMF. Following BMF info helped me drop that last 12 pounds.

You might be able to burn 900 cals in 45 minutes if you were really heavy and doing some extreme cardio, but that does seem rather unlikely. I sometimes get the impression some folks overestimate their output and underestimate their intake. Then they complain that they're not losing weight. Well, that's what happens if you cheat yourself!

I definitely agree that a lot of people overestimate their output. In the heat of the moment, so to speak, it may SEEM like you're giving 100%, 90%, 80% -- it may feel like you're about to die -- but realistically, I chalk this up to people being overly dramatic, lol. I know when I'm giving it my all mid-workout that there's a part of me that could always push just a little bit harder -- and I guess you could say that I project this idea onto everyone else, that they too can always push a little bit harder. Basically, I tend to raise an eyebrow (and kind of laugh to myself) when I read about people buring over 700 or 800 calories, lol.

SouthernSkylark

Psychologically speaking, this would be a detriment to some individuals' plans. Sometimes the frame of mind we are in goes a long way and after reading this article, it doesn't drive me to work hard to burn such a small amount of calories. However, I have to wonder where all this "simple math" comes from...

I think this: we need to stop overanalyzing this process (unless we are taking it to a whole new level, like bodybuilding) because as long as we are eating healthy and staying active, we'll get there. I agree that it would be extremely difficult to burn 900 in 45 minutes (I like my HRM - it never gives me this type of reading), but I also don't add up my burned calories each week to ensure I've lost x amount of pounds... I just do it. I just exercise and run and take classes at the gym because it feels good and I'm staying active. I eat more veggies and not so many processed foods because I feel better and more accomplished when I do that. I like this new lifestyle, and no matter what I'm "actually" burning, I log what my HRM says because its part of my routine to give me a psychologically pleasing result at the end of the day.

I totally agree!

Dave198lbs

Psychologically speaking, this would be a detriment to some individuals' plans.

yes...perhaps. And I admire your balanced approach to this way of life. I would imagine its much less stressful.

But what I think is important is for people who are accepting what they are told by the machines and the idea that massive amounts of cardio will compensate for a proper diet can have some more information for their journey.

B_Running

I will say that 900 calories in 45 minutes is probably not accurate unless it's a very large person in relatively good shape. I would have to sprint for 45 minutes to get close to that (and I'm not physically capable of that). I can burn 700 calories in a day, but that is me running 1.3 miles at 6 am, then running another 20 minutes followed up by 40-45 minutes of lifting in the evening at the gym. The biggest problem that I see with the gym is people thinking that ellipticals burn the way that MFP indicates. You see people freewheeling away for 30 minutes and while it is a good workout, I question how much they are really accomplishing.

I agree. And the "freewheelers" (I know a few of them) usually feel so accomplished that I don't want to rain on their parade by questioning their effort.

neverstray

Who cares?

Some of those people are losing weight.

Helloitsdan

Who cares?

Some of those people are losing weight.

Some are delusional as well.....

kitinboots

I use my HRM but I pause/stop it if my heart rate goes below 100.