Lifting- How many calories burned?

theblackice3000

I use Endomondo App. It work with Myfinesspal .

cbrrabbit25

I don't know how intense everyone's weight lifting sessions are, or how heavy they're lifting...but the general consensus seems to be that you don't burn many calories weight lifting. In my personal experience, my heart rate gets as high if not higher during a lifting session than a cardio session...and I typically have a sopping wet shirt to prove it. I don't use an HRM or even log weight lifting in MFP but I feel like lifting can potentially burn a lot more calories than people think, depending on the intensity of the lifting session.

I burn much more lifting weights also, or maybe its just the fact that i have more muscle and that helps me burn more throughout the day. Not sure, but i can do no cardio as long as im lifting and i continue to lose weight.

jasonp_ritzert

My heart rate goes to about 170 during a single high effort deadlift pull. It stays there for about 20 seconds, then drops to about 150 for another 20 seconds, and eventually gets down to resting in a few minutes.

When I run hard, my heart rate is around 160-165.

So, you're saying that the 40 seconds where I'm kneeling, perfectly still, recovering from my deadlift max rep attempt burns the same number of calories as 40 seconds of running very fast?
[/quote]

Your comparisons are not fair. If you are running hard for 30 minutes, try doing 30 minutes of fast paced weight training. If you are waiting a few minutes between sets of weight training, then yes, you are obviously not going to get the same caloric burn. But, what about someone like me that rests 45-60 seconds between sets? My heart rates is still pretty high between sets with very little rest, much like interval cardio training.

cbrrabbit25

My heart rate goes to about 170 during a single high effort deadlift pull. It stays there for about 20 seconds, then drops to about 150 for another 20 seconds, and eventually gets down to resting in a few minutes.

When I run hard, my heart rate is around 160-165.

So, you're saying that the 40 seconds where I'm kneeling, perfectly still, recovering from my deadlift max rep attempt burns the same number of calories as 40 seconds of running very fast?

"Your comparisons are not fair. If you are running hard for 30 minutes, try doing 30 minutes of fast paced weight training. If you are waiting a few minutes between sets of weight training, then yes, you are obviously not going to get the same caloric burn. But, what about someone like me that rests 45-60 seconds between sets? My heart rates is still pretty high between sets with very little rest, much like interval cardio training.
[/quote]"



yep...this!

professorRAT

http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75

"SparkPeople's Fitness Tracker doesn't estimate calorie burn for strength training because so many variables are involved (how hard you're working, resting in between sets, the amount of weight you lift, etc.) that any estimate would not be very accurate. A heart rate monitor (HRM) is capable of estimating calorie burn pretty accurately—but only for aerobic (cardio) exercise, not for strength training. Here's why:

A HRM won't give you an accurate idea of how many calories you burn during strength training, because the relationship between heart rate and calorie expenditure is not the same during strength training as during cardio exercise, which is what the HRM's estimate is based on. Unless your weight training is very vigorous circuit training, the heart rate monitor will be overestimating your calorie burn by a fair amount.

The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.

Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.

So while a series of strength training exercises may elevate your heart rate like aerobic exercise does, you're not actually using as much oxygen and burning as many calories as you would be if you were steadily using several large muscles all at once, as when walking, running, swimming, or doing aerobics for example.

The heart rate monitor doesn’t know whether your increase in heart rate is due to several large muscle groups working (cardio), an isolated muscle group lifting a weight (strength training), or even if adrenaline or excitement is increasing your heart rate. It just knows your heart rate, and the formulas it uses to estimate calories are based on studies of aerobic exercise, not other activities. So, it's going to overestimate your calorie expenditure when the rise in heart rate is stimulated by using isolated muscles at maximum intensity, which is what occurs during strength training."

Written by Dean Anderson, Certified Personal Trainer

Farburnfred

The question remains however, if you are using MFP as intended and eating back exercise calories how many do you eat back after a lifting session?

I go with the MFP guesstimate which is far lower than my HRM.

Once I hit my goal weight and am fit enough to be training regularly I am going to go with the calorie guidelines in NRLFW. which is RMR x 1.6 on non-workout days and 1.8 on workout days..

jofjltncb6

I'm in...

...because I believe drmerc is speaking truth here and I find general misunderstanding about what a HRM can/can not do interesting...(regardless of whether or not I believe he is generally a d-bag most other times or not).

FullOfWin

Wear an HRM for your complete workout. Name it...Moving the Gym forcefully over the trolls.

HRMs are modeled after a constant cardio style activity and are not accurate to weight lifting

See my EDIT

Still incorrect

Negative Ghost Rider. If you're HR is increased, you burn. This is fact. When you combine BOTH Cardio and Weights, whether one right after the other at a sustained increase of HR, you burn more than Lifting or Cardio, alone. If you take breaks longer than 15 secs between your sets, and are not pushing your limits. Additionally, you must maintain an elevated HR. It is best done by mixing your lifting routines - for example - Curls, Lat pull-downs, Military Press, Bench Press 10 reps = 1 set with <10s interchange.

You are incorrect, the number of calories burned by your heart is very small, increasing your heart rate does not increase calorie burn

Really? Increasing your hear rate does not increase calorie burn? When your hear works harder, it's to remove toxic carbon dioxide from your muscles, so it's doing the same procedure for cardio as it is for weight training. I think you need to do some research because weight training done in the right way can burn just as many, if not more, calories as traditional cardiovascular activity. Sure, someone that waits 5 minutes between sets is not going to burn as many calories as somone on a treadmill but I can get my heartrate into the fat burning zone with weight training and keep it there pretty easily weight training.

"The right way"

Lol.


Anyway


Who cares


Shut up and squat.

jcr85

The amount of miss info on this board is pretty funny.

Everything drmerc has said is right.

Comparing steady state cardio to lifting weights is like comparing apples and oranges. Lifting burns more calories over a 24 hour period than the same amount of steady state cardio. There is no truly accurate way to measure this other than trial and error with your caloric intake.

SlimPossible8

Bahahahahahaha! Amazing!

If someone startles you, your heart rate goes up too, even though you don't move. It might go as high as when you are sprinting.
Therefore, being startled burns the same calories as sprinting.

I'm going to go watch two scary movies at once and burn a thousand calories.

You can increase your heart rate simply by breathing faster sitting at a desk too... what drmerc is saying is that HR ALONE is not enough to indicate how many calories you are burning. *not trying to put words in your mouth. Even with a HR monitor you are still estimating how many calories you are burning by entering your numbers in an equation that is an estimate based on your age hight and CW. Its not 100%.

EatClean_WashUrNuts

My heart rate goes to about 170 during a single high effort deadlift pull. It stays there for about 20 seconds, then drops to about 150 for another 20 seconds, and eventually gets down to resting in a few minutes.

When I run hard, my heart rate is around 160-165.

So, you're saying that the 40 seconds where I'm kneeling, perfectly still, recovering from my deadlift max rep attempt burns the same number of calories as 40 seconds of running very fast?

^^ this

People, its not heart rate that burns calories, its activity
[/quote]

1. Seriously....40s.... /facepalm. Essentially, the answer is yes. But know that your 40s is futility in action when doing any form of a study. My question to you....what is your avg HR for your ENTIRE Workout?

2. on "This" ....where is your proof? Where is your study? Where is anything showing that INCREASED HR does not equate to burning calories?

professorRAT

Really? Increasing your hear rate does not increase calorie burn? When your hear works harder, it's to remove toxic carbon dioxide from your muscles, so it's doing the same procedure for cardio as it is for weight training. I think you need to do some research because weight training done in the right way can burn just as many, if not more, calories as traditional cardiovascular activity. Sure, someone that waits 5 minutes between sets is not going to burn as many calories as somone on a treadmill but I can get my heartrate into the fat burning zone with weight training and keep it there pretty easily weight training.

Yes really
Calories are burned is determine by the number of muscle cells that are activated to preform your activity
THAT is what uses the energy and uses the oxygen

When weight training you are usually activating a small number of groups, such as your bicep when doing your brocurls

That causes a increase in heart rate to delivery oxygen to those cells, even though the rest of your body did not consume the energy, only a small amount of that oxygen would be consumed

Doing a series of strength training will cause your heart rate to bump up over and over but only consume a small amount of oxygen (which is what we are trying to measure to determine calorie burn)

YES REALLY

"The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.

Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.
"

EatClean_WashUrNuts

Bahahahahahaha! Amazing!

If someone startles you, your heart rate goes up too, even though you don't move. It might go as high as when you are sprinting.
Therefore, being startled burns the same calories as sprinting.

I'm going to go watch two scary movies at once and burn a thousand calories.

You can increase your heart rate simply by breathing faster sitting at a desk too... what drmerc is saying is that HR ALONE is not enough to indicate how many calories you are burning. *not trying to put words in your mouth. Even with a HR monitor you are still estimating how many calories you are burning by entering your numbers in an equation that is an estimate based on your age hight and CW. Its not 100%.

"Not trying to put words into your mouth"...if he meant it, he should state it rather than assume as most do.
And going back to the ORIGINAL Question....Combining Cardio WITH weights burns more than either Cardio OR Weights Alone.

Way to lose topic people.

EatClean_WashUrNuts

YES REALLY

"The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.

Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.
"

Actually, BURNING is calculated by INCREASING your body temperature. Please, relate back to my earlier post and read the link.

Thank you for playing.

mike_littlerock

I approach this from a different angle.. you asked how many calories burned while lifting weights.. To me, "lifting weights" is WAY too vague, its HOW you are Lifting. for example, lets look at four people "lifting weights":
subject A) 3 exercises, 3 sets each and using isolated exercises (e.g. bicep curls, tricep extensions) and you lift for perhaps 20-30 seconds followed by a 2-3 minute break (probably with something less than working to failure anyway).
Subject compound exercises(e.g. squat, deadlift, bench press), heavy weights. each set is also fairly short in duration and longer breaks.
Subject C) circuit training.. person goes through 10 or so machines, with some cardio thing between.. most people I watch at a box gym basically phone it in.. not really pushing themselves in terms of exertion, and also the machines are isolated to body parts versus compound moves.
Subject D) HIT (High intensity Interval Training). Compound lifts.. often Olympic style compound lifting (snatch, clean, squat, etc), timed break between movements.. High intensity level during the lift, combined with minimal break.

the four workouts above are vastly different in how the engage the cardiovascular system. i see load of people doing workouts A and C that probably never break a sweat at many box gyms. I have seen people doing subject B style workouts with long rest periods that also come out pretty dry. If you do a HIT style workout I would love for you to tell me that you do not feel that you have a significant cardio impact and think that you have a negligible calorie burn. Feel free to come with me to my gym if anyone reading this is ever in Little Rock Arkansas, try the workouts we do and make your own judgement if you feel a calorie burn versus the ancient body building style muscle isolation workouts still done at 90% of the box gyms out there. Also, HIT is shown to be FAR MORE effective at burning fat than steady state cardio..

saying that you can lump the burn for all styles and intensity levels of "weight lifting" is like saying "how many calories do I burn while running".. are you plodding along in a 20 minute mile or doing a 5 minute mile? slight difference.. not to mention the burn of a sprinter.. Keep in mind that the 20 minute mile person is really not "running" if we want to be picky. the definition of running is a gate where at times in the stride both feet are not in contact with the ground. I guess people don't want to be called "joggers" anymore. Not meant as an insult to runners, but just trying to drive home the point is that its not the movement you are doing or think you are doing, its the relative intensity.

EatClean_WashUrNuts

Please, post where you know this knowledge. Mine comes from being trained by the US Army as Medic, of which, part of my duties were to oversee the BOLO's

Ask for a refund?

Seriously? You just lost all my respect. Normally, you are good with information. Insulting because you back your point, tasteless. I hope you never in need of military support....

Yukongil

you can get a rough estimate with the cross training selection under cardio. But you have to be honest with yourself there. I don't have a lot of equipment or very heavy weights, so I try for intensity and continuation in my strength training workouts, meaning I take a break between workouts in the time it takes me to change position or to get a swig of water. Curls to squats, squats to crunches, crunches to pushup, pushups to tricep dips, etc, etc...with a 10-15 second time between exercises, if that. At the end, I feel wasted, every muscle hurts, I'm chugging air like its crack and I'm on a bender and their is a nice sweat angel on the floor when I (finally) get up. Walking, elipitical or jogging has never kicked my butt so hard.

To be safe though, I try to only eat back about half of my workout calories though. So if you just strength train as normal, I probably wouldn't even record it.

RatherBeFishing

Here are a couple links for you to read over. Weight lifting is better for you over all. Calorie loss for cardio stops almost as soon as you stop running. Plus let not forget something called fat oxidation, the reason why HIIT works so well. If you can't get enough O2 while running then you are just burning glucose stores. That is why they have a fat burning zone or you have the rest/slowdown time doing HIIT. Weight lifting works the same as HIIT you push really hard for 45-60 seconds then rest for 1 min then do it again. I would suggest doing both weight lifting and cardio but if you have to pick one or the other do a heavy weight lifting session and never skip leg days.

Also ask yourself if you would rather look like a long distance runner or a fitness model/body builder. I personally like the look of people that carry more muscle then long distant runners do. A sprinter is a different story. Your body is the canvas you decide how you want to paint it.


http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/fat_loss_training_wars.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/livestrongcom/the-truth-about-weight-training-vs-cardio_b_894936.html

http://www.shape.com/fitness/workouts/8-reasons-why-you-should-lift-heavier-weights

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-242-304-311-8402-0,00.html

DanaDark

If increased heart rate meant burned calories... then why is it not recommended to watch horror and suspense films all day long to lose weight? =/

Cardio is meant for sustained caloric expenditure while weight training is meant to preserve/grow muscle mass and tone the body.

SlimPossible8

Bahahahahahaha! Amazing!

If someone startles you, your heart rate goes up too, even though you don't move. It might go as high as when you are sprinting.
Therefore, being startled burns the same calories as sprinting.

I'm going to go watch two scary movies at once and burn a thousand calories.

You can increase your heart rate simply by breathing faster sitting at a desk too... what drmerc is saying is that HR ALONE is not enough to indicate how many calories you are burning. *not trying to put words in your mouth. Even with a HR monitor you are still estimating how many calories you are burning by entering your numbers in an equation that is an estimate based on your age hight and CW. Its not 100%.

"Not trying to put words into your mouth"...if he meant it, he should state it rather than assume as most do.
And going back to the ORIGINAL Question....Combining Cardio WITH weights burns more than either Cardio OR Weights Alone.

Way to lose topic people.

Um....actually that was not the original question either....so way to lose topic yourself. the original question was how to calculate calories WHILE lifting. not what burns more lifting or cardio. Being an "Army Medic" hasnt helped with attention to detail i see.

EatClean_WashUrNuts

Um....actually that was not the origal question either....so way to lose topic yourself. the original question was how to calculate calories WHILE lifting. not what burns more lifting or cardio. Being an "Army Medic" hasnt helped with attention to detail i see.

Apparently, you didnt read all posts. But hey, whatever.

waldo56

Strength training burns a lot of calories, more than jogging. If it doesn't do that for you, you are doing it wrong.

HRM's are pretty much as accurate at telling you your calorie burn as a dartboard.

Never mind that your heartrate isn't constant....the chemical reaction (anaerobic metabolism) that converts calories into mechancial force is far less efficient (18x less) at using calories than the chemical reaction that creates force for cardio (aerobic metabolsim). Look it up, this is basic biology. Due to there being no easily measured interaction that can measure calorie burn (as heartrate can for aerobic metabolism), it is near impossible to get a good estimate of calorie burn, you'd have to sample muscle tissue while the exercise is being performed. Needless to say this isn't done, even in labs (hence why there is virtually no research on this and noone really has any idea of how many calories strength training burns, everyone just copies everyone else, at the core of all this copying is a guess).

Using an automobile analogy.....HRM's measure gas useage by how far you go, and they assume you are driving a Prius down the interstate (doing steady state aerobic exercise). But when you strength train you are drag racing with a Hummer (doing high effort start-stop anaerobic exercise). Measuring gas useage by distance traveled, when you assume you are driving a Prius down the interstate, is ridiculosly inaccurate. That is essentially what you are doing when you use a HRM to measure calorie burn during strength training.

And this is ignoring the significant calorie cost of recovery. When you strength train you damage your muscles, a lot (especially if you work low hard reps). Recovering from this isn't free in calorie terms. Quite the opposite.

........

Needless to say, if you are doing high effort compounds (basically any real strength program), chances are there is no entry in the MFP database that captures your calorie burn. Everything is low. The high effort calisthenics and circuit training entries are at least in the ballpark, they even they are more of a safe estimate than an aggressive estimate.

There is a reason that people that try bulking almost always undershoot their calorie needs the first time, often by a laughable margin. People that are bulking don't eat 4000+ calories to watch the fat fly on, they eat that much because any less and they won't gain a thing. That right there is the calorie burn of strength training, that is generally grossly underestimated, that they have to overcome to gain.

SlimPossible8

Um....actually that was not the origal question either....so way to lose topic yourself. the original question was how to calculate calories WHILE lifting. not what burns more lifting or cardio. Being an "Army Medic" hasnt helped with attention to detail i see.

Apparently, you didnt read all posts. But hey, whatever.

You said ORIGINAL question...Original meaning belonging or pertaining to the origin or beginning of something. so the original post was "Is there any surefire way to count the calories that you burn while lifting?"

waldo56

Really? Increasing your hear rate does not increase calorie burn? When your hear works harder, it's to remove toxic carbon dioxide from your muscles, so it's doing the same procedure for cardio as it is for weight training. I think you need to do some research because weight training done in the right way can burn just as many, if not more, calories as traditional cardiovascular activity. Sure, someone that waits 5 minutes between sets is not going to burn as many calories as somone on a treadmill but I can get my heartrate into the fat burning zone with weight training and keep it there pretty easily weight training.

Yes really
Calories are burned is determine by the number of muscle cells that are activated to preform your activity
THAT is what uses the energy and uses the oxygen

When weight training you are usually activating a small number of groups, such as your bicep when doing your brocurls

That causes a increase in heart rate to delivery oxygen to those cells, even though the rest of your body did not consume the energy, only a small amount of that oxygen would be consumed

Doing a series of strength training will cause your heart rate to bump up over and over but only consume a small amount of oxygen (which is what we are trying to measure to determine calorie burn)

YES REALLY

"The problem is a technical one. Calorie burning isn't determined by heart rate, it's determined by the number of muscle cells that are activated to perform a given activity. It's the working cells that actually use the energy (calories) and consume oxygen. When working muscle cells need more energy and oxygen, your heart rate goes up to deliver these things to the cells via the blood stream.

Any muscle that performs a high intensity or maximum effort (strength training) will trigger an increase in heart rate and blood flow. But if only a single muscle group is on the receiving end to utilize that extra oxygen (doing a strength exercise that isolates your biceps, for example), only a relatively small amount of oxygen (and calories) will actually be consumed.
"

Being that strength training primarily uses anaerobic metabolism, how much oxygen is used is irrelevant.

The chemical reactions that creates "the burn" for anaerobic-glycogen work, or the super high strength for low rep work, creatine-phosphate do not use oxygen as part of the reaction.

And those reactions are FAR less efficient at creating work from calories. They are gas guzzlers.

Yogi_Carl

A couple of things I would like to throw into the pot:

1) when you perform a plank or side plank posture with your abs engaged and your butt tucked in, not just hanging there, your heart rate and breathing increases. No activity to speak of.

2) demand for calories drops off after cardio ends but with weight lifting, there is repair, there is muscle energy replacement, all the activity involved in muscle repair and growth and the fact that an increase in muscle mass demands more calories in itself - all of which inrease ongoing calorie demand overall.

I used to be suspicious about those who posted here saying weight lifting won over cardio when looking at reducing fat weight and burning calories, but I have stepped over the line it seems.

jofjltncb6

Bahahahahahaha! Amazing!

If someone startles you, your heart rate goes up too, even though you don't move. It might go as high as when you are sprinting.
Therefore, being startled burns the same calories as sprinting.

I'm going to go watch two scary movies at once and burn a thousand calories.

You can increase your heart rate simply by breathing faster sitting at a desk too... what drmerc is saying is that HR ALONE is not enough to indicate how many calories you are burning. *not trying to put words in your mouth. Even with a HR monitor you are still estimating how many calories you are burning by entering your numbers in an equation that is an estimate based on your age hight and CW. Its not 100%.

"Not trying to put words into your mouth"...if he meant it, he should state it rather than assume as most do.
And going back to the ORIGINAL Question....Combining Cardio WITH weights burns more than either Cardio OR Weights Alone.

Way to lose topic people.

This little diversion almost made me forget you were wrong earlier.


Almost.

RatherBeFishing

Here is an answer for the OP: WomensHealthMag.com saying you can burn eight to 10 calories a minute by lifting weights. Anaerobic exercises can also bolster your metabolic rate and help you shed an extra 25 percent of the calories that have already burnt. "If you burned 200 calories lifting weights, it's really closer to 250 overall," said Westcott. This occurs because your body continues to work after completing a weightlifting session in an attempt to repair the muscle fibers that were damaged during training.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/418902-calories-burned-muscle-mass-gained-during-weight-lifting-exercises/#ixzz2Azw9jWg7

iplayoutside19

.

cbrrabbit25

Please, post where you know this knowledge. Mine comes from being trained by the US Army as Medic, of which, part of my duties were to oversee the BOLO's

Ask for a refund?

Seriously? You just lost all my respect. Normally, you are good with information. Insulting because you back your point, tasteless. I hope you never in need of military support....

i agree! he doesnt deserve respect based on the attitude ive seen just in this one forum. there is a nicer way to give you opinion.

petiteLady89

There is a strength training option under the cardiovascular exercises. I use that. Although, I feel the burn is less than I actually burn. I always do compound, high rep, low weight 8-10lbs when I strength train.