really frustrated with low calorie burn numbers

DizzieLittleLifter
DizzieLittleLifter Posts: 1,020 Member
edited September 20 in Fitness and Exercise
I just don't get it! I am working my *kitten* off. I pool sweat my heart rate stays at 160-180, but my numbers are still low. 240 for a 40min work out. I get nill even with Jillian 30day shred, and total body burn extreme. WAH. :explode: It seems like everyone who does the same workouts gets much higher calorie burns. I have to admit I'm bummed, and disappointed. I'll even double down and make the exercises harder ( like using weights or picking up the pace). I just don't get it. :frown Anyone have any idea's why? I thought getting a HRM would help, but now I just stress about how many calories I'm really not burning.

Replies

  • durbanski
    durbanski Posts: 183 Member
    You're gonna hate me but just going from the sheer math of it... Your body is a hell of a lot more efficient at energy give and take. Most people see a bigger impact because they have more excess to burn. I might focus on some strength training mixed with cardio. The mix might make each other have a bigger impact.

    Take care,

    Dustin
  • DizzieLittleLifter
    DizzieLittleLifter Posts: 1,020 Member
    Thanks buddy, I don't hate you! :) I do mostly circuit training with weights. Is that what you mean?
  • twilight1542
    twilight1542 Posts: 403
    It would help to know where your #'s are coming from...HRM's (w/chest strap) are generally going to be most accurate b/c they take gender, age, height, & weight into account and they get a constant HR reading. Following that would be machines...but how much information they gather, and thus how accurate they are, varies from machine to machine so some are more accurate than others. The least reliable are website calculations b/c they don't use HR at all so they have to "guess" your average HR. If their "guess" is a lot lower than your actual HR then the burn estimate will be lower & if their "guess" is a lot higher than your actual HR then the burn estimate will be higher.
  • MrsTomy
    MrsTomy Posts: 504 Member
    It looks like you've already met your weight loss goal and from your picture you look pretty thin...the bad news is that thinner people burn less calories doing the same exercise at the same level of exertion than a heavier person. You have less fat and weight to carry so its "easier" for you. Just keep up the good work and you'll be fine!
  • mworld
    mworld Posts: 270
    It looks like you've already met your weight loss goal and from your picture you look pretty thin...the bad news is that thinner people burn less calories doing the same exercise at the same level of exertion than a heavier person. You have less fat and weight to carry so its "easier" for you. Just keep up the good work and you'll be fine!

    that's not really true. People that weigh less but have significantly higher lean muscle mass will burn even more calories than the fatter person.
  • kwardklinck
    kwardklinck Posts: 1,601
    Thinner people need fewer calories to maintain their weight. They also burn fewer calories when they work out. When I was 16 pounds heavier, I was given a higher calorie allowance. My workouts burned a lot more calories as well. As you get smaller, MFP makes adjustments to these. It doesn't seem fair but a smaller body doesn't require as many calories to maintain it. It also doesn't burn as many calories when you work out.
  • Dom_m
    Dom_m Posts: 336 Member
    Honestly, I think 240 cals over 40 minutes (ie: 6 cals / minute) is not going to get you sweating unless you're really unfit. If you're working as hard as you say and your profile pictures are actually of you (which I assume they are) then the most likely explanation is that the numbers are wrong. Where do you get these numbers from? Is at HRM? Possibly its programmed incorrectly or something.
  • rbc_racing
    rbc_racing Posts: 31 Member
    I just don't get it! I am working my *kitten* off. I pool sweat my heart rate stays at 160-180, but my numbers are still low. 240 for a 40min work out. I get nill even with Jillian 30day shred, and total body burn extreme. WAH. :explode: It seems like everyone who does the same workouts gets much higher calorie burns. I have to admit I'm bummed, and disappointed. I'll even double down and make the exercises harder ( like using weights or picking up the pace). I just don't get it. :frown Anyone have any idea's why? I thought getting a HRM would help, but now I just stress about how many calories I'm really not burning.

    I put your numbers into a cal per min calculator I have and using an ave HR of 170 you should have burned 500 cal in 40 min of exercise, if you are using a HRM it may be set up incorrectly. But remember if you're in a caloric deficit and your still not losing any weight your cal burned numbers could be wrong, that is a good way to double check your numbers. If you take in less than you are using your body has no choice but to lose weight. So if your not dropping any weight your calorie numbers are probably incorrect.
  • kimberly428
    kimberly428 Posts: 237
    It looks like you've already met your weight loss goal and from your picture you look pretty thin...the bad news is that thinner people burn less calories doing the same exercise at the same level of exertion than a heavier person. You have less fat and weight to carry so its "easier" for you. Just keep up the good work and you'll be fine!

    that's not really true. People that weigh less but have significantly higher lean muscle mass will burn even more calories than the fatter person.

    I have always read that people who dont need to lose much weight takes more to burn the calories.
  • DizzieLittleLifter
    DizzieLittleLifter Posts: 1,020 Member
    I just don't get it! I am working my *kitten* off. I pool sweat my heart rate stays at 160-180, but my numbers are still low. 240 for a 40min work out. I get nill even with Jillian 30day shred, and total body burn extreme. WAH. :explode: It seems like everyone who does the same workouts gets much higher calorie burns. I have to admit I'm bummed, and disappointed. I'll even double down and make the exercises harder ( like using weights or picking up the pace). I just don't get it. :frown Anyone have any idea's why? I thought getting a HRM would help, but now I just stress about how many calories I'm really not burning.

    I put your numbers into a cal per min calculator I have and using an ave HR of 170 you should have burned 500 cal in 40 min of exercise, if you are using a HRM it may be set up incorrectly. But remember if you're in a caloric deficit and your still not losing any weight your cal burned numbers could be wrong, that is a good way to double check your numbers. If you take in less than you are using your body has no choice but to lose weight. So if your not dropping any weight your calorie numbers are probably incorrect.

    That's really helpful. Thank you. I am using HRM with a chest strap. This is where I am getting the numbers. I'm not looking to lose anymore weight, infact I think it's be very unhealthy if I did. I'm working out for muscles. :)
  • DizzieLittleLifter
    DizzieLittleLifter Posts: 1,020 Member
    It looks like you've already met your weight loss goal and from your picture you look pretty thin...the bad news is that thinner people burn less calories doing the same exercise at the same level of exertion than a heavier person. You have less fat and weight to carry so its "easier" for you. Just keep up the good work and you'll be fine!

    that's not really true. People that weigh less but have significantly higher lean muscle mass will burn even more calories than the fatter person.

    This brings up a great point. I have always heard that smaller people burn less, but I would think being fit and having more muscle would burn more.
  • rbc_racing
    rbc_racing Posts: 31 Member
    It looks like you've already met your weight loss goal and from your picture you look pretty thin...the bad news is that thinner people burn less calories doing the same exercise at the same level of exertion than a heavier person. You have less fat and weight to carry so its "easier" for you. Just keep up the good work and you'll be fine!

    that's not really true. People that weigh less but have significantly higher lean muscle mass will burn even more calories than the fatter person.

    This brings up a great point. I have always heard that smaller people burn less, but I would think being fit and having more muscle would burn more.



    It can be viewed in a cpl of ways here are 2 scenarios that look at it from both exercise and resting standpoints.

    Think of it this way, Day one of your fitness program, you bench press x # lbs and struggle through 10 reps. Now say you keep up with it and make it a year and come back around and just for amusement sake bench that same starting weight again. Will the same number of reps at your original starting weight require the same amount of effort as it did the first time? Your improved fitness will make that exercise require half the effort more than likely, therefore your calorie burn will be a lot lower. It works the same with running also, that first mile absolutely kills you when you first start. But after a few weeks of running its the second mile thats tough, then the third, and finally after you can easily run 5-6 miles and not drop dead. Does running one mile at your original pace require more or less effort?

    Now for the kicker to the equation, base metabolic rate (BMR)-how many calories your body burns if you laid in bed all day long and did nothing. The correct way to calculate it is based on your true body fat percentage, there is a calculator on the site here that works fairly well but it is an estimation, a doctor can figure the correct number for you. But to break it down 1 lb of lean muscle burns 9 cal per hour at rest and 1 lb of fat burns 4, therefore the higher or lower your body fat percentage is has the higher or lower your BMR will be
  • DJH510
    DJH510 Posts: 114 Member
    Ok - firstly, burning calories is HARD!
    secondly, whoever said you burn more doing a certain amount of exercise if you have more lean tissue rather than fat is wrong - the energy required to do a certain amount of work (using work in a scientific sense) is based upon mass, distance, time etc and not effort as such. You do burn more calories AT REST if you have more muscle than fat, but in terms of exercise the amount of energy (calories) required will be dependant upon your weight only. So because you're so light, doing 40 minutes of exercise does a lot less work than a heavier individual, and so burns less calories.
    Also, don't get too concerned about heart rate. If me and someone else of my weight with much worse fitness both did a 10 minute mile, my heart rate will barely have increased whilst the other person's will be through the roof. Yet the calories burned will be pretty much the same - it takes a little bit of energy to make a heart beat faster, but not much.
    So just because your heart rate is through the roof, it doesn't mean your burning more calories. It just means that the amount of work you've performed is as much as your current level of cardiovascular fitness can handle.
  • PJilly
    PJilly Posts: 22,249 Member
    I just don't get it! I am working my *kitten* off. I pool sweat my heart rate stays at 160-180, but my numbers are still low. 240 for a 40min work out. I get nill even with Jillian 30day shred, and total body burn extreme. WAH. :explode: It seems like everyone who does the same workouts gets much higher calorie burns. I have to admit I'm bummed, and disappointed. I'll even double down and make the exercises harder ( like using weights or picking up the pace). I just don't get it. :frown Anyone have any idea's why? I thought getting a HRM would help, but now I just stress about how many calories I'm really not burning.
    I don't know the answer, but I wanted to let you know you're not alone. I got a Polar F4, and I was expecting from what lots of people had said for the burn to be significantly higher than MFP's estimates. The exact opposite was true. I have a theory, but I have NO idea if I'm right. I have pretty low blood pressure (85/55 average), and it makes me wonder if my heart rate doesn't get as high as it would for someone with a lower BP and that maybe an HRM isn't an accurate measure of calorie burn for me. If you have low BP too, I think maybe I'm onto something. I had been getting great results from the MFP estimates before, so I just went back to using those.
  • imagymrat
    imagymrat Posts: 862 Member
    It looks like you've already met your weight loss goal and from your picture you look pretty thin...the bad news is that thinner people burn less calories doing the same exercise at the same level of exertion than a heavier person. You have less fat and weight to carry so its "easier" for you. Just keep up the good work and you'll be fine!

    that's not really true. People that weigh less but have significantly higher lean muscle mass will burn even more calories than the fatter person.

    You are right, except when it comes to cardio, I burn significantly less then someone who weighs 50lbs heavier then I am. But I have a ton of muscle and i'm burning 24-7! I burn more calories ina 30 minute weight session then I do in a 30 minute cardio session, unless i'm doing sprint running. Don't fret about the numbers, if you're eating right, and working out, your "number burned" isn't really a big deal, your heart rate is up and you're sweating...all that matters.
  • DizzieLittleLifter
    DizzieLittleLifter Posts: 1,020 Member
    I just don't get it! I am working my *kitten* off. I pool sweat my heart rate stays at 160-180, but my numbers are still low. 240 for a 40min work out. I get nill even with Jillian 30day shred, and total body burn extreme. WAH. :explode: It seems like everyone who does the same workouts gets much higher calorie burns. I have to admit I'm bummed, and disappointed. I'll even double down and make the exercises harder ( like using weights or picking up the pace). I just don't get it. :frown Anyone have any idea's why? I thought getting a HRM would help, but now I just stress about how many calories I'm really not burning.
    I don't know the answer, but I wanted to let you know you're not alone. I got a Polar F4, and I was expecting from what lots of people had said for the burn to be significantly higher than MFP's estimates. The exact opposite was true. I have a theory, but I have NO idea if I'm right. I have pretty low blood pressure (85/55 average), and it makes me wonder if my heart rate doesn't get as high as it would for someone with a lower BP and that maybe an HRM isn't an accurate measure of calorie burn for me. If you have low BP too, I think maybe I'm onto something. I had been getting great results from the MFP estimates before, so I just went back to using those.

    That is quite interesting because yes, I do have low BP 90/60 usually. I wonder if you are on to something here!
  • PJilly
    PJilly Posts: 22,249 Member
    I just don't get it! I am working my *kitten* off. I pool sweat my heart rate stays at 160-180, but my numbers are still low. 240 for a 40min work out. I get nill even with Jillian 30day shred, and total body burn extreme. WAH. :explode: It seems like everyone who does the same workouts gets much higher calorie burns. I have to admit I'm bummed, and disappointed. I'll even double down and make the exercises harder ( like using weights or picking up the pace). I just don't get it. :frown Anyone have any idea's why? I thought getting a HRM would help, but now I just stress about how many calories I'm really not burning.
    I don't know the answer, but I wanted to let you know you're not alone. I got a Polar F4, and I was expecting from what lots of people had said for the burn to be significantly higher than MFP's estimates. The exact opposite was true. I have a theory, but I have NO idea if I'm right. I have pretty low blood pressure (85/55 average), and it makes me wonder if my heart rate doesn't get as high as it would for someone with a lower BP and that maybe an HRM isn't an accurate measure of calorie burn for me. If you have low BP too, I think maybe I'm onto something. I had been getting great results from the MFP estimates before, so I just went back to using those.

    That is quite interesting because yes, I do have low BP 90/60 usually. I wonder if you are on to something here!
    Hmmm, I think maybe I am!
  • jdayl
    jdayl Posts: 25 Member
    I also have low calorie burn and low blood pressure, my resting heart rate (HR) is in the high 60's to low 70's. It seems really hard to get my HR up to show a good calorie burn even though I'm working hard enough to get out of breath and sweat a lot.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories