Have you tried GLP1 medications and found it didn't work for you? We'd like to hear about your experiences, what you tried, why it didn't work and how you're doing now. Click here to tell us your story

This can't be right....right?

oorenfoo
oorenfoo Posts: 25
in Fitness and Exercise
So, I work as a youth worker and a typical night for me involves walking the streets of a town meeting young people on their own ground and etc etc...

Anyways, I usually spend about 90-120 minutes walking at an average pace. As a total newbie to this fitness lark, I thought I'd see if that burnt any kind of calories at all. The only calculator I could find only had 3 options for speed 2mph, 3mph or 4mph. I guessed that as we tend to be traveling at an average pace, I'd go with the slowest option, just to be safe. The calculator asked for my weight, speed, length of time etc...and then..told me I'd be burning 374 calories in 90 minutes!

That can't be right, right? I mean...It's not a strenuous exercise...It's just walking!

Can anyone give me a more accurate guess? And is it even worthwhile counting as exercise? Just curious.

Replies

  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member
    general rule, 100 calories per mile!

    374 in 90 minuts of non stop walking does not sound unpossible!
  • wibutterflymagic
    wibutterflymagic Posts: 788 Member
    You probably walk faster then you think. What I think is a normal walk comes up as 3mph.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    Sounds reasonable...I burn just over 200 in 30 minutes walking around 3.5 mph
  • oorenfoo
    oorenfoo Posts: 25
    Wow! Okay, that's cool. Pretty surprised by that. I'm sure we probably walk quicker than 2mph, but I'd rather undercut and be safe, than think I'm burning more than I am...

    Tanks for the input, guys! Appreciated.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    general rule, 100 calories per mile!

    374 in 90 minuts of non stop walking does not sound unpossible!

    My understanding always was the100 calories per mile is for running. Males will average a little over, women a little under.

    Keep in mind you can't compare your burns to other people. Calories burned depend on weight and intensity. If you and someone else walk the same speed for the same distance/time, a heavier person will burn more.

    Here is an article on walking vs running and the last page has a calculator. It's hard to guess how much you may have burned without knowing your weight.
    http://m.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning-0?page=2

    Running
    .75 x your weight (in lbs.)
    .63 x your weight (net)
    Walking
    .53 x your weight
    .30 x your weight (net)

    Adapted from "Energy Expenditure of Walking and Running," Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise, Cameron et al, Dec. 2004.
  • oorenfoo
    oorenfoo Posts: 25
    general rule, 100 calories per mile!

    374 in 90 minuts of non stop walking does not sound unpossible!

    My understanding always was the100 calories per mile is for running. Males will average a little over, women a little under.

    Keep in mind you can't compare your burns to other people. Calories burned depend on weight and intensity. If you and someone else walk the same speed for the same distance/time, a heavier person will burn more.

    Here is an article on walking vs running and the last page has a calculator. It's hard to guess how much you may have burned without knowing your weight.
    http://m.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning-0?page=2

    Running
    .75 x your weight (in lbs.)
    .63 x your weight (net)
    Walking
    .53 x your weight
    .30 x your weight (net)

    Adapted from "Energy Expenditure of Walking and Running," Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise, Cameron et al, Dec. 2004.


    I weigh in at around 90.5kg. Thanks for the information.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,289 Member
    In two hours you would have used around 200 caloires anyway, just sitting around, doing normal stuff.


    Don't use your regular daily routine as exercise on this site.....it is misleading. The exercise calories in the database would be for Aerobic/Cardio type sustained exercise, not meant to be used for your daily activity.

    You account for your daily activity in the "Activity" part when you set up your Goals. Just use Exercise for .....exercise. Planned, additional stuff. That's stuff you've been doing anyway, don't use it as part of your weight loss plan.

    And Happy Birthday. :flowerforyou:
  • oorenfoo
    oorenfoo Posts: 25
    In two hours you would have used around 200 caloires anyway, just sitting around, doing normal stuff.


    Don't use your regular daily routine as exercise on this site.....it is misleading. The exercise calories in the database would be for Aerobic/Cardio type sustained exercise, not meant to be used for your daily activity.

    You account for your daily activity in the "Activity" part when you set up your Goals. Just use Exercise for .....exercise. Planned, additional stuff. That's stuff you've been doing anyway, don't use it as part of your weight loss plan.

    And Happy Birthday. :flowerforyou:

    Thanks! :)

    I put my activity down as sedentary. I do about 90-120 minutes walking, 2 nights per week, at work. The rest of my work is pretty in-doorsy. I didn't know if the walking would count as exercise, really. Was just curious about if it burnt many calories. Also, not planning on eating them back, so it's good to know they'll be spare 2 days a week.
  • Lexi507
    Lexi507 Posts: 79 Member
    If you can afford it, you might want to pick up a Fitbit. It syncs with MFP and if it thinks you moved more than expected, it adds those calories to your Exercise tab.
  • oorenfoo
    oorenfoo Posts: 25
    If you can afford it, you might want to pick up a Fitbit. It syncs with MFP and if it thinks you moved more than expected, it adds those calories to your Exercise tab.

    Thanks for the info! I'll look in to it. :)

Categories