Why is strength training not considered calorie burning.

Options
player30
player30 Posts: 65 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I know I burn some when I am strength thraining. I do 40 minutes aerobic before and 20 minutes after. But it seems to me there should be some calorie allocation for strength training. Thanks
«1

Replies

  • ladyace0007
    ladyace0007 Posts: 47
    Options
    If you search for "strength training" under cardio, it should come up. Obviously, it doesn't burn as much as, say, running five miles, but it does burn some. Unfortunately, what you burn depends heavily on the intensity of your workout so the number MFP gives you is just a rough estimate. But it's definitely better than nothing.
  • mscrystallee
    mscrystallee Posts: 62 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
  • JesterMFP
    JesterMFP Posts: 3,596 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
    HRMs aren't designed to measure calories during strength training, so shouldn't really be considered accurate for that. They're best for measuring calorie burns during steady state cardio.

    OP - strength training certainly burns calories, but it's difficult to estimate exactly how many. As ladyace0007 said, you can get a rough guide by searching the "cadio" section in the MFP database, as counter-intuitive as it seems.
  • vorgas
    vorgas Posts: 741 Member
    Options
    A quick bit of estimation is .00032 calories per pound per foot.

    Of course, that's the actual energy required to lift the weight. Your body is terribly inefficient and will burn more calories than that in order to apply the .00032 calories per foot pound.

    For example, squatting in a power rack will burn many more calories than squatting the same weight on a smith machine. And both of those will burn more calories than pressing the same weight on a leg sled.

    So multiply .00032 by whatever efficiency factor you're comfortable with. But be prepared. It's a far smaller amount than you might hope for. Lifting weights is about changing your body and improving your health, not building a calorie deficit.
  • getfitwithlynds
    getfitwithlynds Posts: 1
    Options
    Strength training burns more calories over time, and it is the best thing for your metabolism. Cardio is absolutely important, but you need more time strength training than cardio.
  • growtinymuscles
    growtinymuscles Posts: 37 Member
    Options
    Meaning why doesn't MFP calculate calories when you log strength training? It is because there are WAY to many variables when strength training to calculate caloric consumption. My advice would be to get a good HRM and let it track your caloric consumption based on you.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    My advice would be to get a good HRM and let it track your caloric consumption based on you.

    HRMs don't track calories. They track heart rate, and then guess at calories.
  • hilts1969
    hilts1969 Posts: 465 Member
    Options
    I know I burn some when I am strength thraining. I do 40 minutes aerobic before and 20 minutes after. But it seems to me there should be some calorie allocation for strength training. Thanks

    I don't get this MFP obsession with calories burnt through exercise either weights or cardio, why does anybody care? it baffles me
  • JesterMFP
    JesterMFP Posts: 3,596 Member
    Options
    I know I burn some when I am strength thraining. I do 40 minutes aerobic before and 20 minutes after. But it seems to me there should be some calorie allocation for strength training. Thanks

    I don't get this MFP obsession with calories burnt through exercise either weights or cardio, why does anybody care? it baffles me
    Because the calorie goal MFP gives you doesn't include that kind of exercise, so if you're following the MFP method, you need to have an idea of how much you're burning through exercise so that you can eat back those calories and get back to the original recommended calorie deficit.

    A lot of people use the TDEE method instead, which accounts for all activity to start with, and so don't worry so much about how many calories they burn through exercise because they eat the same amount every day regardless.
  • ChrisM8971
    ChrisM8971 Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    I do some cardio first to warm up then do a weight routine with my HRM on all the way through. My heart rate is elevated during the weight workout as well so I just note the overall burn. I then ignore the cool down on the basis that I would be burning calories even if I wasn't doing a workout
  • fozzie500
    fozzie500 Posts: 177 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
    HRMs aren't designed to measure calories during strength training, so shouldn't really be considered accurate for that. They're best for measuring calorie burns during steady state cardio.

    OP - strength training certainly burns calories, but it's difficult to estimate exactly how many. As ladyace0007 said, you can get a rough guide by searching the "cadio" section in the MFP database, as counter-intuitive as it seems.

    depends what hrm you have some hrm's are designed with strength training in mind, polars ft 80 for instance, no device can 100% accurately measure calorie burn, but i've found the calorie burns calculated by the many hrm's i've used for any exercise to be good enough to keep reasonable track. provided the information you input to them is accurate,i.e v02 max,maximum heart rate,weight,sex, age etc.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
    HRMs aren't designed to measure calories during strength training, so shouldn't really be considered accurate for that. They're best for measuring calorie burns during steady state cardio.

    OP - strength training certainly burns calories, but it's difficult to estimate exactly how many. As ladyace0007 said, you can get a rough guide by searching the "cadio" section in the MFP database, as counter-intuitive as it seems.

    depends what hrm you have some hrm's are designed with strength training in mind, polars ft 80 for instance, no device can 100% accurately measure calorie burn, but i've found the calorie burns calculated by the many hrm's i've used for any exercise to be good enough to keep reasonable track. provided the information you input to them is accurate,i.e v02 max,maximum heart rate,weight,sex, age etc.

    For some reason, people feel compelled to believe that little number on their wrist, despite all evidence to the contrary. It's an interesting example of the power of auto-suggestion. When strength training, the HRM calorie number is meaningless (even the FT80, which is not designed to track calories). The physiology of the human body dictates that it cannot be otherwise.
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    Options
    I know I burn some when I am strength thraining. I do 40 minutes aerobic before and 20 minutes after. But it seems to me there should be some calorie allocation for strength training. Thanks

    I don't get this MFP obsession with calories burnt through exercise either weights or cardio, why does anybody care? it baffles me
    MFP's entire method gives people an unreasonable faith in numbers. People think they KNOW their BMR, their TDEE, their exact intake. I saw a post the other day where someone said, "I know my BMR is 1324.96." Point nine six!
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,707 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
    HRM's don't accurately read strength training burnt calories.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • ChrisM8971
    ChrisM8971 Posts: 1,067 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
    HRM's don't accurately read strength training burnt calories.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    While I understand and accept that, surely the estimates would be low rather than high if working from your stats and heart rate?
  • Fullsterkur_woman
    Fullsterkur_woman Posts: 2,712 Member
    Options
    I know I burn some when I am strength thraining. I do 40 minutes aerobic before and 20 minutes after. But it seems to me there should be some calorie allocation for strength training. Thanks

    I don't get this MFP obsession with calories burnt through exercise either weights or cardio, why does anybody care? it baffles me
    MFP's entire method gives people an unreasonable faith in numbers. People think they KNOW their BMR, their TDEE, their exact intake. I saw a post the other day where someone said, "I know my BMR is 1324.96." Point nine six!
    Oh lord. Like you can have *a* BMR, and it doesn't fluctuate slightly on a daily basis! Just like you can say "I weigh X pounds" at any point when you're not actually standing on a scale. It would be weird if our bodies were that precise; I don't think the species could have survived that long if we required such precise homeostasis!
  • Fullsterkur_woman
    Fullsterkur_woman Posts: 2,712 Member
    Options
    It should be, wearing my HRM I burn more calories strength training than cardio... It is all cardio!
    HRM's don't accurately read strength training burnt calories.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    While I understand and accept that, surely the estimates would be low rather than high if working from your stats and heart rate?
    Why would that be the case? The calories burned displayed on a HRM are assuming a steady state cardio metabolism. When lifting, your body is using different metabolic pathways than this, and the calories burned are not reflected by the mathematical model that HRM manufacturers program into their devices.
  • _Terrapin_
    _Terrapin_ Posts: 4,301 Member
    Options
    If you search for "strength training" under cardio, it should come up. Obviously, it doesn't burn as much as, say, running five miles, but it does burn some. Unfortunately, what you burn depends heavily on the intensity of your workout so the number MFP gives you is just a rough estimate. But it's definitely better than nothing.

    OP--this^^...next caller....
  • fozzie500
    fozzie500 Posts: 177 Member
    Options
    The American College of Sports Medicine and the "British Journal of Medicine" have put Polar's heart rate monitors to the test over the years. In these studies, the measurement of calories expended has a non-significant margin of error, meaning the difference between the control and the Polar monitor is not enough to skew your results. These studies revealed that entering your actual VO2 max and maximum heart rather than having it calculated by the formula, yields only a 12 percent overestimate of calorie expenditure versus a 33 percent overestimate. On average, Polar's heart rate monitors are 75 percent accurate.


    like I said not 100% accurate,but certainly close enough for me.

Categories