Burning twice what MFP predicted

courtneydeewalk
courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
in Fitness and Exercise
I was disgruntled that when I entered "45 min of strength/weight training" MFP would put me at burning roughly 250 calories an hour. I am 5 foot 7, 147 lbs, female. What frustrated me about this, is I knew I had to be burning more calories, I lift heavier weights.... I had thought about getting a heart rate monitor for a few months, and finally went on Amazon and got one!

My first workout with my new HRM was a back and bi day! A normal MFP day of this I would burn between 215-230 calories... I am happy to say that my workout actually burned 560 calories!!

Today was my shoulders and core day... normally MFP would put me about 250... I actually burned 668 today!

So the point of this post is really to encourage people who are on the fence about it, to go ahead and get your HRM... and is certainly encouraging to see accurate numbers!!

I got the Polar FT4, love it so far. Has the chest strap which isn't nearly as uncomfortable as I had thought it would be! I got it off Amazon for $65.35 when it is normally around $100.

Replies

  • surromom2010
    surromom2010 Posts: 457 Member
    same here, my estimates for what I was burning doing insanity were literally twice what I was estimating on here, no wonder my weightloss was at a standstill, definitely not eating enough for burning 500 more calories than what I thought I was..
  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member
    heart rate monitor is not accurate for strength training. The calculation is based on heart rate against steady state cardio.

    at best, it overestimates it significantly.
  • courtneydeewalk
    courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
    heart rate monitor is not accurate for strength training. The calculation is based on heart rate against steady state cardio.

    at best, it overestimates it significantly.

    Even if the workout is circuit training or the such??
  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member
    heart rate monitor is not accurate for strength training. The calculation is based on heart rate against steady state cardio.

    at best, it overestimates it significantly.

    Even if the workout is circuit training or the such??

    Constantly moving on a circuit without stopping, it's probably closer to reality than say... Benching a weight 10 times, resting a minute, then doing it again.
  • hastinbe
    hastinbe Posts: 130 Member
    I never use MFPs calories burned values for any exercise. Way too many variables come into play for it to be even remotely accurate.
  • courtneydeewalk
    courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
    heart rate monitor is not accurate for strength training. The calculation is based on heart rate against steady state cardio.

    at best, it overestimates it significantly.

    Even if the workout is circuit training or the such??

    Constantly moving on a circuit without stopping, it's probably closer to reality than say... Benching a weight 10 times, resting a minute, then doing it again.

    That makes sense. My work outs are rarely doing a set then waiting around! Thank you for the input! I will certainly keep it in mind. :o)
  • McCluskey1128
    McCluskey1128 Posts: 88 Member
    I've been thinking about this, so I'm glad I read this post, for more reasons than to hear someone is happy.

    Even if you're benching weight 10 times (it elevates your heart rate), you rest a minute (with your heart rate still up), and then bench again, you're still burning calories because of your heart rate being elevated, even if you're not moving.

    Doesn't that make sense or am I missing a key piece of information?
  • courtneydeewalk
    courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
    I've been thinking about this, so I'm glad I read this post, for more reasons than to hear someone is happy.

    Even if you're benching weight 10 times (it elevates your heart rate), you rest a minute (with your heart rate still up), and then bench again, you're still burning calories because off your heart rate being elevated, even if you're not moving.

    Doesn't that make sense or am I missing a key piece of information?

    My understanding is that aerobics uses multiple muscles instead of just an isolated muscle like lifting weights. And the calories burned is based of multiple muscle groups burning oxygen, not just one.

    But I see what you're saying, your heart rate is up, you should still be burning.
  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member

    Even if you're benching weight 10 times (it elevates your heart rate), you rest a minute (with your heart rate still up), and then bench again, you're still burning calories because of your heart rate being elevated, even if you're not moving.

    No. Only the calories required to pump your heart. slightly faster.



    I'mma throw some numbers out. They aren't perfectly accurate or anything, but should help clarify:

    If your heart rate is 150 and you are running, you are burning a lot of calories. 8 cal / minute
    if your heart rate is 150 and you are resting between sets, you are burning few calories. 1.75-2 cals / minute
    If your heart rate is 70 and you are resting, you are burning very few calories 1.5 cals / minute

    Basically, heart rate isn't an indication of work.
    Your heart rate can be high, but you may not be doing a lot of work.
    Heart rate increases during work, and the HRM 'guesses' based on that. If it reads a high heart rate, it thinks you are doing work - such as running or cycling.

    There's the whole 'afterburn' thing but... I wouldn't count on it.
  • courtneydeewalk
    courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
    Thank you Wellbert for actually taking the time to explain this. Sometimes some people on these forums can make a person feel stupid for not knowing something. I appreciate the time you took to explain and not be rude or condescending about it! :o)
  • mtoverbey
    mtoverbey Posts: 11
    I am new here and my healthy journey began on Jan 28th :) I'm going to try the advice of eating back my calories that I have burned off thru exercise to see if it helps increase my weightloss (which has been crazy slow for eating clean and exercising)....Looking for advice on what method works best to know approximately how many calories were burned thru exercise? HRM...what cardio machine says...MFP?

    I do strength/weight training with a personal trainer at my gym 3x's a week which is followed by 30-45 min of interval cardio that I do myself afterwards and I also take spinning/step aerobics class 2-3x's a week. I haven't logged my exercise on MFP (because my step instructor advised against it) and been staying close to 1200 cal and been struggling with losing. Soooooo I thought it might help to change things up a bit and intake some of those calories I burn off on exercise days and see if it makes a difference.

    I would like to thank you ALL in advance for posting and responding to the MANY MANY great topics I have read on here that is helping me out so much! :flowerforyou:
  • courtneydeewalk
    courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
    I am new here and my healthy journey began on Jan 28th :) I'm going to try the advice of eating back my calories that I have burned off thru exercise to see if it helps increase my weightloss (which has been crazy slow for eating clean and exercising)....Looking for advice on what method works best to know approximately how many calories were burned thru exercise? HRM...what cardio machine says...MFP?

    I do strength/weight training with a personal trainer at my gym 3x's a week which is followed by 30-45 min of interval cardio that I do myself afterwards and I also take spinning/step aerobics class 2-3x's a week. I haven't logged my exercise on MFP (because my step instructor advised against it) and been staying close to 1200 cal and been struggling with losing. Soooooo I thought it might help to change things up a bit and intake some of those calories I burn off on exercise days and see if it makes a difference.

    I would like to thank you ALL in advance for posting and responding to the MANY MANY great topics I have read on here that is helping me out so much! :flowerforyou:

    My personal opinion (but I am no expert) Look into something called TDEE... it doesn't necessarily involve "eating back" calories.. but you put in your basics (height, weight, gender), then add how much and how aggressively you work out per week, it will give you what you burn in a day... subtract either 20% or 500 cal (1 lb a week) and that will give you your caloric intake for the day, regardless of working out. Mine TDEE is 1800... I never feel hungry, some days I go over, but not by much. I have read that if you go strictly by your BMR... you are putting yourself into starvation mode... ie, not going to lose weight!

    Look into it, and do some research, see if it will be right for you.
  • mtoverbey
    mtoverbey Posts: 11
    Thanks so much! I will look it up tonite :)
  • carrieous
    carrieous Posts: 1,024 Member
    meh i wouldnt rely on a gadget. I think you'll see a few weeks you've "plateaued" and "arent losing anything!" because youre relying on a gadget thats overestimating what you are burning.
  • carrieous
    carrieous Posts: 1,024 Member

    Even if you're benching weight 10 times (it elevates your heart rate), you rest a minute (with your heart rate still up), and then bench again, you're still burning calories because of your heart rate being elevated, even if you're not moving.

    No. Only the calories required to pump your heart. slightly faster.



    I'mma throw some numbers out. They aren't perfectly accurate or anything, but should help clarify:

    If your heart rate is 150 and you are running, you are burning a lot of calories. 8 cal / minute
    if your heart rate is 150 and you are resting between sets, you are burning few calories. 1.75-2 cals / minute
    If your heart rate is 70 and you are resting, you are burning very few calories 1.5 cals / minute

    Basically, heart rate isn't an indication of work.
    Your heart rate can be high, but you may not be doing a lot of work.
    Heart rate increases during work, and the HRM 'guesses' based on that. If it reads a high heart rate, it thinks you are doing work - such as running or cycling.

    There's the whole 'afterburn' thing but... I wouldn't count on it.

    Thank you! if heart rate was an idication of calorie burn every person who suffered from panic attacks- or even a good scare- would be skinny. Also i'd be super skinny since i use an asthma inhaler which speeds up my heart rate.
  • courtneydeewalk
    courtneydeewalk Posts: 61
    meh i wouldnt rely on a gadget. I think you'll see a few weeks you've "plateaued" and "arent losing anything!" because youre relying on a gadget thats overestimating what you are burning.


    Personally... Im not too terribly concerned with the scale. To be honest.... I watched the UFC (which I love) fight with Rousey and Carmouche.... Both females right at my height (one 5'6.5" the other 5'7").. my goal weight WAS 135.... well both females weighed between 132 and 135....

    Now, they are both in AMAZING shape... but also had probably ZILCH fat. My goal is to be a healthy weight for carrying a kid... I realized then that my goal to be 5'7" and 135 WITH muscle was probably a bit unrealistic.

    So.. I lift weights and eat healthy (90% of the time). I do splurge occasionally and have a burger or something.

    I watch the mirror,I see my arms being more defined, and my back having "ridges"... Im happy with that.

    I understand no gadget will be 100% ...but MFP isn't either. So, maybe I will split the difference? :o)
  • jlb1964
    jlb1964 Posts: 1
    Heart rate monitors, in my opinion, are. Life changing !!! Love my Polar HRM also. If you don't have one, get one. Well worth it. :drinker:

Categories