how in the hell are these people getting 900 calorie burns

I think this is very rare....and a lot of people over estimate. I only came close to burning 1000 calories ONCE while doing turbojam, when I first started to lose weight. Every other time, i was usually around 700. More often now, I tend to burn 500.

ETA - for individuals who feel like they need to challenge how I get the number for my calorie burn, I use a Bodymedia Armband.

LOL@need to challenge.

I've been on MFP long enough to see a recurring theme between unrealistic burns and unexpected plateaus/failure to progress. It's fascinating really, the certainty with which people are convinced their numbers are accurate even when their results don't support their confidence in the numbers.

Oh, sure, there are a lot of variables at play here...I mean, who's to say that my own calculation of non-exercise burn isn't estimated too high, which means my exercise burns are too low and the inaccuracies are buried when netted...

...but I'm sticking with my position that *most* people who think they are burning >900 calories in a single session most likely are not.

Sorry but I agree. I'm sure it's possible! But it aint possible for me lol. And I think a lot of it is overestimating. But i will be the first to admit there are many things I do not know and I have been known to be wrong (RARE OCCASIONS lol).

Join me on a 19-mile trail run one of these days and I'll show you how to burn 900 calories and not even be halfway done

love it

It's at about 170. My heart rate for insanity goes up to over 180 and in 45 mins of that, I burn about 400 cals. And I work muchhhhhh harder

you sustain at 180? how old are you?

I don't think i've seen anything above 179 on my HRM, and that was a spike, when i was completely out of shape.

the more conditioned i am the harder it seems to reach those high BPMs. Like i'm doing probably twice the volume of work then i was when i first started insanity but my HR is definetly lower on average.

whats your guys thoughts on that? I'll often see people post these high BPMs for long periods of time. not sure if that means i'm doing good or bad. thoughts?

when I first started jogging, I couldn't go longer than 20 minutes. It was because my heart rate was sky high (almost to 200). I had to learn that how i was breathing was encouraging a dangerously high heart rate. I had to learn to control my breath and not pant while I ran. Then my heart rate stayed lower and I could run longer. I don't think it burns more calories just because you have your heart rate higher because you are panting, though. I think it only counts if your heart rate is high because you are actually working out at a high intensity.

According to my hrm, yoga and strength training are worthless for a calorie burn. Burning only 104 calories in a yoga class...can I have my hour back

there are other benefits to yoga than getting a calorie burn - but if that's what you are looking for, stuff like running, skating, spinning swimming burn loads. But make sure to accurately judge your intensity level - these things are hard to to intensively for a longer period of time. Hence the high burn.

Join me on a 19-mile trail run one of these days and I'll show you how to burn 900 calories and not even be halfway done

WORD!

My last long run was 13 miles on a trail (ok a relatively flat trail, but still out in a national forest!).... so much fun! And also, I'm not built to do that regularly LOL!

Join me on a 19-mile trail run one of these days and I'll show you how to burn 900 calories and not even be halfway done

WORD!

My last long run was 13 miles on a trail (ok a relatively flat trail, but still out in a national forest!).... so much fun! And also, I'm not built to do that regularly LOL!

lol

I think this is very rare....and a lot of people over estimate. I only came close to burning 1000 calories ONCE while doing turbojam, when I first started to lose weight. Every other time, i was usually around 700. More often now, I tend to burn 500.

ETA - for individuals who feel like they need to challenge how I get the number for my calorie burn, I use a Bodymedia Armband.

LOL@need to challenge.

I've been on MFP long enough to see a recurring theme between unrealistic burns and unexpected plateaus/failure to progress. It's fascinating really, the certainty with which people are convinced their numbers are accurate even when their results don't support their confidence in the numbers.

Oh, sure, there are a lot of variables at play here...I mean, who's to say that my own calculation of non-exercise burn isn't estimated too high, which means my exercise burns are too low and the inaccuracies are buried when netted...

...but I'm sticking with my position that *most* people who think they are burning >900 calories in a single session most likely are not.

In the interest of Science(TM), I compared my workout from last Thursday as measured by my BodyMedia Fit and Polar F11. Holy systematic error, Batman!

I took a 1 hour class with approximately 40 minutes of step and 20 minutes of abs/stretch/cooldown, then did about 40 minutes of mobility work on a foam roller (I've got lots of issues :laugh: ).

Polar F11: Max HR: 183, Avg HR: 135 (reasonable because an hour of that workout was reclining/pretty relaxed). Calories reported: 962! :noway:

BodyMedia Fit: Moderate activity: 39 minutes, Vigorous activity: 18 minutes: total activity: 57 minutes (again, makes sense, given how much time was spent on my back). Average METS: 3.7. Calories reported: 501.

Went back and looked at the data from that Zumba class I remember the HRM said I burned over 1000 calories on. 499 calories burned. :mad: I distinctly remember getting a protein brownie afterwards. I remember reading the calories thinking "not bad" until I had already eaten it and noticed that there were two servings per package, and had all but wiped out all the calories I just burned.:explode:

You see? THIS is why the really knowledgeable experts tell you that you exercise for fitness and eat a deficit of calories to lose weight! You can't out-exercise a bad diet.

I am 5'5 and currently weigh 158. I have lost 19 pounds and I wear the chest strap and watch to see what I am burning. If I do an hour on the elliptical I burn 500-600 calories an hour. Then I will do weights for another hour and I can burn 800-1000 calories in a session. I push myself and when I am in the elliptical it's at a high incline and a high resistance level.

<-- burns 1000 calories jumping on trampolines at SkyZone for one hour...

Yes that is the ticket !!

I don't think it burns more calories just because you have your heart rate higher because you are panting, though. I think it only counts if your heart rate is high because you are actually working out at a high intensity.

i think your probably right but i dont know for sure

you would pant due to your heart rate going up, not the opposite, for anything over a few seconds.

Your respiration increases to compensate for your circulation increase.

I can get my HR up into the high 120s (my "fatburning zone" is 136) without even moving. just stand in one spot, and tense all the major and as many minor muscle groups as you can.

It doesn't get up into the 130s until I start moving around (still tensed) however.

I get about the same heart rate walking at 3.5 mph on a relatively level surface.

If you are moving the same amount of oxygen and fuel to your muscles, you are moving the same amount of oxygen and fuel.

Granted: breath control is something you learn over time..most people breathe wrong when they first start out, but if you are breathing right (belly breathing), then HR is an indicator of aerobic calorie burn.

(Now, is your burn at X HR the same as mine at the same? Probably not.)

Everyone who is so certain of their calories burns...

...on what are you basing this certainty?



(HRM isn't an acceptable answer as these are approximations at best.)

I base mine on results. In the past 30 weeks of using my bodymedia armband, my average weight loss almost spot on to what it "should be" based on my daily calorie deficit. I print out my statistical averages every 28 days, so I'm able to see what deficit I've averaged for the the previous 4 weeks. Over time (30 weeks) my weight loss is right about where it should be according to my average calorie deficit, average calorie deficit for the past 30 weeks is roughly 1000 calories per day, average weight loss for the past 30 weeks is about 2 pounds per week.

I get this...because I do the same thing with my records (because nerd)...but how do you differentiate between non-exercise and exercise burn?

I don't really worry about that too much, but I can tell if I want to. I can look at the graph that shows my calorie burn for the day, and isolate individual time frames, by moving little sliders to bracket off the time I spent jogging, I can tell how many calories I was burning per minute throughout the day or during any time bracket of the day. I know that for me, if I'm sitting down not doing much I burn about 1.4 calories per minute. If I'm exercising vigorously I will burn between 11 and 15 calories per minute.

My bodymedia display also has a trip setting, if I don't want to go to the website and use the graph and sliders I can just reset the trip at the start of the activity and look at it at the end of the activity. Since I know I'd have burned about 1.4 calories per minute doing nothing, if I really wanted to know just my exercise calorie burn I could subtract that from whatever the "trip" says I burned.

However, I don't concern myself too much with that, what I concern myself with most is total calories in vs. total calories out, being sure to have deficit at the end of the day. Preferably a deficit of around 1000 calories for now, once I get under 200 pounds I'll be satisfied with a lower deficit.

I think this is very rare....and a lot of people over estimate. I only came close to burning 1000 calories ONCE while doing turbojam, when I first started to lose weight. Every other time, i was usually around 700. More often now, I tend to burn 500.

ETA - for individuals who feel like they need to challenge how I get the number for my calorie burn, I use a Bodymedia Armband.

LOL@need to challenge.

I've been on MFP long enough to see a recurring theme between unrealistic burns and unexpected plateaus/failure to progress. It's fascinating really, the certainty with which people are convinced their numbers are accurate even when their results don't support their confidence in the numbers.

Oh, sure, there are a lot of variables at play here...I mean, who's to say that my own calculation of non-exercise burn isn't estimated too high, which means my exercise burns are too low and the inaccuracies are buried when netted...

...but I'm sticking with my position that *most* people who think they are burning >900 calories in a single session most likely are not.

In the interest of Science(TM), I compared my workout from last Thursday as measured by my BodyMedia Fit and Polar F11. Holy systematic error, Batman!

I took a 1 hour class with approximately 40 minutes of step and 20 minutes of abs/stretch/cooldown, then did about 40 minutes of mobility work on a foam roller (I've got lots of issues :laugh: ).

Polar F11: Max HR: 183, Avg HR: 135 (reasonable because an hour of that workout was reclining/pretty relaxed). Calories reported: 962! :noway:

BodyMedia Fit: Moderate activity: 39 minutes, Vigorous activity: 18 minutes: total activity: 57 minutes (again, makes sense, given how much time was spent on my back). Average METS: 3.7. Calories reported: 501.

Went back and looked at the data from that Zumba class I remember the HRM said I burned over 1000 calories on. 499 calories burned. :mad: I distinctly remember getting a protein brownie afterwards. I remember reading the calories thinking "not bad" until I had already eaten it and noticed that there were two servings per package, and had all but wiped out all the calories I just burned.:explode:

You see? THIS is why the really knowledgeable experts tell you that you exercise for fitness and eat a deficit of calories to lose weight! You can't out-exercise a bad diet.

I have a polar ft4 and it never tells me anything that high!! Maybe your batteries are wonky or something. That's why i never eat back my exercise calories unless I have work out a LOT, and i mean a lot. Even then, i'll eat back half.

I just don't trust the things

According to my hrm, yoga and strength training are worthless for a calorie burn. Burning only 104 calories in a yoga class...can I have my hour back

Burning calories isn't the purpose of yoga. Do you say the same thing about the hours and hours you spend just sleeping every single day? It seems like such a waste.

I just wanted to bump, to get in.... but, Nooooooooo, never say sleeping is a waste. I LOVE sleeping !

I think this is very rare....and a lot of people over estimate. I only came close to burning 1000 calories ONCE while doing turbojam, when I first started to lose weight. Every other time, i was usually around 700. More often now, I tend to burn 500.

ETA - for individuals who feel like they need to challenge how I get the number for my calorie burn, I use a Bodymedia Armband.

LOL@need to challenge.

I've been on MFP long enough to see a recurring theme between unrealistic burns and unexpected plateaus/failure to progress. It's fascinating really, the certainty with which people are convinced their numbers are accurate even when their results don't support their confidence in the numbers.

Oh, sure, there are a lot of variables at play here...I mean, who's to say that my own calculation of non-exercise burn isn't estimated too high, which means my exercise burns are too low and the inaccuracies are buried when netted...

...but I'm sticking with my position that *most* people who think they are burning >900 calories in a single session most likely are not.

In the interest of Science(TM), I compared my workout from last Thursday as measured by my BodyMedia Fit and Polar F11. Holy systematic error, Batman!

I took a 1 hour class with approximately 40 minutes of step and 20 minutes of abs/stretch/cooldown, then did about 40 minutes of mobility work on a foam roller (I've got lots of issues :laugh: ).

Polar F11: Max HR: 183, Avg HR: 135 (reasonable because an hour of that workout was reclining/pretty relaxed). Calories reported: 962! :noway:

BodyMedia Fit: Moderate activity: 39 minutes, Vigorous activity: 18 minutes: total activity: 57 minutes (again, makes sense, given how much time was spent on my back). Average METS: 3.7. Calories reported: 501.

Went back and looked at the data from that Zumba class I remember the HRM said I burned over 1000 calories on. 499 calories burned. :mad: I distinctly remember getting a protein brownie afterwards. I remember reading the calories thinking "not bad" until I had already eaten it and noticed that there were two servings per package, and had all but wiped out all the calories I just burned.:explode:

You see? THIS is why the really knowledgeable experts tell you that you exercise for fitness and eat a deficit of calories to lose weight! You can't out-exercise a bad diet.

I have a polar ft4 and it never tells me anything that high!! Maybe your batteries are wonky or something. That's why i never eat back my exercise calories unless I have work out a LOT, and i mean a lot. Even then, i'll eat back half.

I just don't trust the things

Don't think so. I've had it for probably 10 years and the results are consistent throughout the years and multiple battery changes and even multiple chest transmitter straps.