How are people burning such high calories

1356

Replies

  • Rehobobound
    Rehobobound Posts: 143 Member
    I was wondering the same thing and beginning to think my HRM was just stingy and/or I'm just a slacker. It gives me less that the gym equipment but a little more that MFP. Thanks for posting the topic!
  • bluefox9er
    bluefox9er Posts: 2,917 Member
    they are probably using endomondo. that gives you 500 calories for just swiping on the app.
  • jzammetti
    jzammetti Posts: 1,956 Member
    I just got a heart rate monitor a couple of weeks ago.

    the charts say my 80% should be 140, and my target range 140-156, max (100%) 175.

    when I run I have been having to do intervals to keep it below 165, and still in 35 min I only burn 350 calories. swimming is much the same.

    So my question is how are people burning 1,000 calories in an hour, without going over heart rate recommendations, an I missing something?

    The most logial answer is the bbigger you are, the more caloreis you burn with exercise. My frind, who weighs 280ish will burn twice the amount of calories walking as i do running. it is so annoying. :wink:
  • lizjohnson2169
    lizjohnson2169 Posts: 25
    They're not staying within heart rate recommendations if they are actually burning that. Hell, my heart rate generally sits around 190+ when I am going hard.



    Mine is always way out of recommendations too. And I can burn 400 calories is 30 minutes.
  • scottb81
    scottb81 Posts: 2,538 Member
    So my question is how are people burning 1,000 calories in an hour, without going over heart rate recommendations, an I missing something?
    If you train aerobically your aerobic capacity will improve and you will be able to run faster at a lower heartrate. By running faster you will go further in an hour and burn more calories.

    I am 53 and 173 lbs. I have been running a lot for two years. Today I ran 7 miles in an hour at an average HR of 136. Depending on which method is used to calculate calories that is close to 1000.
  • stackhsc
    stackhsc Posts: 439 Member
    http://www.runnersworld.com/tools/calories-burned-calculator

    gives me the same general info my tread mill gives me and at 1 hour at 6mph given my weight would be 1000 calories or better,
  • Lifting_Knitter
    Lifting_Knitter Posts: 1,025
    My hrm is constantly beeping at me because my heart rate is too high. Well, i'm not going to stop running....so it needs to deal. Do whatever you are comfortable with. Honestly, I hated burning like 600 calories because I worked out at night and I tried to eat all my exercise calories back. I think 300 is a good amount. Rememeber, you want to do things that will be sustainable.
  • HartJames
    HartJames Posts: 789 Member
    I used to have a Timex cheapo HRM that said I burned about 1,000cals in 45 min. I read how important it was to have one not only made for a woman but also set with VO2Max among other things and so I got a Polar (7 I believe?) and it shows HALF the burn of my old HRM. HALF!
  • tappae
    tappae Posts: 568 Member
    So my question is how are people burning 1,000 calories in an hour, without going over heart rate recommendations, an I missing something?
    If you train aerobically your aerobic capacity will improve and you will be able to run faster at a lower heartrate. By running faster you will go further in an hour and burn more calories.

    I am 53 and 173 lbs. I have been running a lot for two years. Today I ran 7 miles in an hour at an average HR of 136. Depending on which method is used to calculate calories that is close to 1000.

    Yeah, it's not just size and intensity. Fitness is a huge factor. I use the RunningAhead estimates (very similar to the MFP database) because they're lower than what my HRM says. With the HRM I would routinely get over 1000 in an hour. Based on the database, I would have to run 8 miles in an hour to do that, which would be an intense run for me (like a race). I can run 7 miles in an hour with my heart rate around 140 for an estimate of just under 900 calories for the hour.
  • april_mesk
    april_mesk Posts: 694 Member
    Dont go on calculators and stuff because those are rubbish, get a hrm that is ecg accurate. Mfp says my weekly goal is 1940cals and i am currently at 4691 :) and got 1 day left. I do 2 workouts every day, in the morning i do 30 day shred and in the evening Les Mills Combat :glasses:

    Love both these workouts. Did the Shred once before when I was in a lot better shape and completed. Also used to do Combat 3x week at my gym. Love both of these workouts and cannot wait to get in better shape to handle both of them. Right now, I am just not there. Sticking with TurboJam (I know old school)...building up my endurance. Love the music on Combat...well the older stuff. Some of the new tracks are so-so...haven't been in awhile, though, they could be much better now. So wish I could by the ones we did in the gym. I think can't remember now, it was 54 I liked among others. Not sure if the new Beachbody Combat would be something I would like. I am going to reward myself with this or possibly Turbo Fire if I can drop more by my birthday and feel good enough for it.
  • dsjr2006
    dsjr2006 Posts: 7
    Many of my workouts burn 850-1200 cals in 45-60mins, but my avg hr today for example was 184 for a 45 min workout and I stayed near max 40:29 according to the Polar app that works with my HRM which gave my 987 cals burned. It takes a full hour to burn the same amount at a 153 avg hr according to my history. The most important thing I've found is keeping my intensity up and switching things up.

    Using the MFP app doesn't take into account your intensity level across the session so it cannot be as accurate.

    I am also 6'2" 265 so that creates higher calorie burn too.
  • elis_mama
    elis_mama Posts: 308 Member
    irrelevant. who cares?

    questions you should be asking yourself are things like "what sort of exercise regimen can I commit to doing regularly?", "how should i structure my diet in a way that will keep me satiated?", "what are my fitness goals?"

    agree
  • MartinaNYC
    MartinaNYC Posts: 190 Member
    I just got a heart rate monitor a couple of weeks ago.

    the charts say my 80% should be 140, and my target range 140-156, max (100%) 175.

    when I run I have been having to do intervals to keep it below 165, and still in 35 min I only burn 350 calories. swimming is much the same.

    So my question is how are people burning 1,000 calories in an hour, without going over heart rate recommendations, an I missing something?

    Hey, that's not bad! I usually burn 600cal when I run for one hour at normal speed (little more if I do a tempo run). I'm 5.2 and my weight is 128lbs.
  • missmegan831
    missmegan831 Posts: 824 Member
    I think its the MFP app over estimating bcuz i hve friends here that do Zumba and claim they burn 900 calories an hour and I weigh 50 pounds more than them and use my HRM and burn at most 730 for 70 mins of Zumba so trust your HRM and keep up the great work :)
  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,834 Member
    I just got a heart rate monitor a couple of weeks ago.

    the charts say my 80% should be 140, and my target range 140-156, max (100%) 175.

    when I run I have been having to do intervals to keep it below 165, and still in 35 min I only burn 350 calories. swimming is much the same.

    So my question is how are people burning 1,000 calories in an hour, without going over heart rate recommendations, an I missing something?

    My guess they may be using some false readiings or over-estimating. That said, if someone is overweight it takes them more energy (work) to move themselves and in turn burns more calories. Their bodies (heart and lungs) are less efficient in supplying oxygen and pumping blood and muscles at converting energy for contraction.

    I'm 43, around 204lbs, with a BF% around 25 and on an average I burn 100 to 130 calories per mile I run, dependnng on exersion.
  • Bakkasan
    Bakkasan Posts: 1,027 Member
    When you say "they are overestimating", it's "MFP is overestimating based on the common formula for a given weight doing a given exercise". This sounds like you are placing the blame on the person, and not where is may really belong.

    My HRM puts me about 30% below MFP's estimates rather consistently.
  • SoDamnHungry
    SoDamnHungry Posts: 6,998 Member
    Yours sounds about right. They're probably estimating incorrectly. Or they weigh a LOT more, or they're running a LOT faster.
  • BigDougie1211
    BigDougie1211 Posts: 3,531 Member
    It's a combination of ALL the reasons suggested.
    To be fair though, I haven't noticed a huge difference in my results using a HRM or MFP estimates.
    But I am about 16st 8 and working hard until I'm read to drop.
    I do a lot of short intense burst type work - Insanity, 4 a side soccer, Pad Work etc with very short rest intervals and my heart rate tends to stay consistently high over the course of the hour or so.
    So it can be done.
    I tend to manualy enter my cal burns on the site and still reduce my burns by about 100 or so as a " safety net " but it's definitely doable.
  • theparnellssean
    theparnellssean Posts: 637 Member
    I question the ability to burn 1000 calories per hour. A 1 hour kickboxing class according to my bodymedia armband is good for about 600-700 calories (high intensity).
  • Timshel_
    Timshel_ Posts: 22,834 Member
    When you say "they are overestimating", it's "MFP is overestimating based on the common formula for a given weight doing a given exercise". This sounds like you are placing the blame on the person, and not where is may really belong.

    My HRM puts me about 30% below MFP's estimates rather consistently.

    True, good point. Many fitness machines are well-known to over esitmate as well.
  • BeLightYear
    BeLightYear Posts: 1,450 Member
    Trust me they are not. Use your HRM or body media device and adjust your calls according to that. That is a flaw with the MFP app. If they were truly burning that much on a daily basis they would be very thin which in most cases is not the case.

    I have learned from experience on this. I bought a Timex HRM with chest strap and was thrilled when it read over 1,000 calories for 60 minutes of TurboFire. Boy was I shocked when I got my BodyMedia armband, that I was actually burning around 500 per hour. Still a good burn, but I like knowing for sure. :smile:
  • 714rah714
    714rah714 Posts: 759 Member
    I'm 210 lbs and when I run for an hour outdoors thats 900 calories rounded down. That number comes from my Nike SportsWatch, MFP and other web-sites, so thats what I put down.
  • Sweet_Potato
    Sweet_Potato Posts: 1,119 Member
    Everyone says that MFP overestimates, but even the toughest cardio exercises that I log (like spinning) only have a burn estimate of about 300 calories/hour. Is this really that much more than what a HRM would say?
  • astral303
    astral303 Posts: 2 Member
    If you are running on a treadmill and it says you are burning 1000 calories per hour, just see how long you can sustain that. I bet not very long. It takes a lot of work to be able to sustain that kind of calorie burn for an hour.

    Forget the HR recommendations!

    *The only reason to keep your heart rate down is such that you can actually spend more time on the machine.* If your heart rate goes too high, you will run out of breath, which might limit the total calories you burn for the day. That is all.

    For example, my max HR is 205. I can complete 1.5 hrs at an average of 160bpm and be pretty damn tired at the end. But I can do it. However, at 190bpm, I can only complete 10-15 minutes before I am pooped. An average of 186bpm for 25 minutes is a 5K race for me.

    Furthermore, maxing out your HR now and again helps you become more cardio-fit. Interval training. Once you're more fit, you can go for longer and harder, burning more.

    Remember that the fat burning vs carb burning zone doesn't matter for weight loss, as your body rebalances your carb and fat stores after. You're trying to burn calories to lose weight. You're not trying to fine-tune training for running or other such pursuits.

    I found that HRM calorie estimates are ALL OVER the place. I find that most accurate calorie estimates are running and any machine that can measure your actual power output, such as a stationary bike (elliptical might also be OK).
  • Mr_Excitement
    Mr_Excitement Posts: 833 Member
    I think a lot of people overestimate their calorie expenditure, honestly-- and heart rate monitors aren't nearly precise measuring calories spent.

    My personal feeling, after counting the number of calories my body always *wants* me to eat after working out regularly vs. what it wants when I don't is that an hour of fairly hard cardio work comes in at something like 400 calories for me. Something like HIIT (which just destroys me and all my dreams in 30 minutes) might be almost the same in half the time. But there's no way in hell I could do it for an hour.

    I could certainly be wrong-- I mean I'm not being scientific here at all, but that's literally my gut feeling.
  • MikeyD1280
    MikeyD1280 Posts: 5,257
    I tried the insanity workout on Monday, It was a 45 min video. In that time my HRM says I burned 771 calories, with my highest HR at 183(93%) I checked it constantly so it would read right (during each water break I checked). If I did an hour, I would have burned 1028 calories.

    I push hard, I am an extremist. That is how I can do it...
  • carrieous
    carrieous Posts: 1,024 Member
    1 mile = approx 100 calories regardless if you walk or run. Of course if you have more muscles you will burn more and supposedly if you weigh more you will burn more but not really much more to make a difference.

    i do think many people overestimate how many calories they are burning and underestimate how many calories they are consuming.
  • carrieous
    carrieous Posts: 1,024 Member
    I think a lot of people overestimate their calorie expenditure, honestly-- and heart rate monitors aren't nearly precise measuring calories spent.

    My personal feeling, after counting the number of calories my body always *wants* me to eat after working out regularly vs. what it wants when I don't is that an hour of fairly hard cardio work comes in at something like 400 calories for me. Something like HIIT (which just destroys me and all my dreams in 30 minutes) might be almost the same in half the time. But there's no way in hell I could do it for an hour.

    I could certainly be wrong-- I mean I'm not being scientific here at all, but that's literally my gut feeling.

    Totally agree with everything you said. I ran 5 miles last weekend AND did weights. I was in the gym for over an hour and that was only about 600 calories- pushing myself as hard as I could
  • MikeyD1280
    MikeyD1280 Posts: 5,257
    1 mile = approx 100 calories regardless if you walk or run. Of course if you have more muscles you will burn more and supposedly if you weigh more you will burn more but not really much more to make a difference.

    i do think many people overestimate how many calories they are burning and underestimate how many calories they are consuming.

    I strongly believe if you run 1 mile in under 6 minutes you will be burning more calories than if you walked that mile in 20 min.
  • Gracerrr
    Gracerrr Posts: 141
    Basically you are saying you burn 600 calories a minute doing what you just described. I'm not shocked that someone who weighs 100lbs more than you could burn much more than that taking similar activities into consideration.

Categories