how in the hell are these people getting 900 calorie burns

How I got there is from personal experience.

I walked 9.2 miles yesterday. My hrm gave me 1116. I walk 3 to 5 miles a day and do a work out DVD. I go by my hrm, not MFP. ETA:,I use my hrm because MFP gives me way too many calories burned. For my walk yesterday, at 4.6 miles, hrm 558, MFP close to 900.

Interesting, because for walking, MFP's calculations are usually about half of my HRM's.

They work their butt off!

My sister teaches several classes of high intensity cardio at the Y so she has been able to get that high. Several people who are long distance runners regularly burn 1000 calories (they are LONG distance runners---10+ miles I typically see on their daily runs). Others are just very heavy, which requires more energy when they do work out. Others work out for several hours to burn 900 calories.

I get it--I have never burned that much. But I don't exercise like some of these people and I am smaller.

My sister teaches classes at the Y too! Sure wish I could get a sibling-discount...grrrrrr.....

Sleep. With an hour commute each way to work, I'm gone 11 hours. Put in gym time of one and a half hours with drive time to and from home..then cooking and cleaning up every night because no one else does and my husband wants a fresh meal each night..no leftovers...it's nine when I'm done with that. Then bathing and relaxing and pet time...it's at least 11 before I get to bed. Then up at five to start over with breakfast etc....

Maybe your husband should do some cooking and cleaning and maybe he should learn to love leftovers. Making a fresh meal EVERY night? That's insane and sounds expensive.

Yes, this. I love cooking for my husband and taking care of our home, but if you're working, too -- he should be picking up some slack and share the responsibilities.

Sleep. With an hour commute each way to work, I'm gone 11 hours. Put in gym time of one and a half hours with drive time to and from home..then cooking and cleaning up every night because no one else does and my husband wants a fresh meal each night..no leftovers...it's nine when I'm done with that. Then bathing and relaxing and pet time...it's at least 11 before I get to bed. Then up at five to start over with breakfast etc....

Speaking of old fashioned...

Time to tell your man to man up and do his share of the cooking as well as cleaning up. Seriously - put your foot down on that and change your over-functioning ways ASAP. If he can read, he can cook. Food Network is on 24/7 and it's filled with guys cooking as well. And he can do the dishes and put things away just as easily as you can. And he can shop for the groceries to have his "fresh meal". And he can take care of "pet time".

If he fights you on any of it, tell him how important it is for you and your health to get some exercise time. And tell him how far behind the times he is with other men out there that are married and sharing cooking/cleaning duties.

And there are time management ways of cooking to have excellent meals. Crock pot, smoking meat on the weekends to use throughout the week, preparing most of a meal in the morning before going to work so you have time to exercise after work, etc... .

Sorry....I couldn't resist responding to your post. I do wish you all the best in getting it balanced.

Example: I smoked three smart range chickens last weekend. One we ate with a fresh spinach salad. Another went into a vat of white chicken chili I made which provided 2 evening meals for us. The third ended up on 2 smoked chicken pizzas that I made.

Running more than an hour (not recommended if you haven't run before)

anything at about 8 miles or over will get me between 900-1100 calorie burn so it's not that hard if you walk, run, or bike a significant number of miles and time. Most of us who reach that burn are not doing it in a one hour workout

Hmm. I wonder if it work (or if anyone would be crazy enough) to do a self test.

Eat exactly the same known quantity of food and water, at exactly the same times of day, with a known quantity of exercise, for a period, and monitor weight (a period long enough to level out water weight changes due to beginning exercise, etc). That should give you a baseline on the weight (using maths and science and stuff), then increase the exercise according to a HRM, and do that consistantly, still doing EXACTLY THE SAME THING food and water wise, and see if the change reflected in weight reflects the change burned in calories.

In fact, I'll bet someone has actually done a controlled study like that. I'd probably have to pay to read it though.

You don't even have to keep the food exact. Eat your normal diet and count it as accurately as you reasonably can.

Average out daily scale weights to correct for water changes.

Continuously calculate your maintenance intake, both in total TDEE and in non-exercise TDEE.

Subtract your maintenence in total TDEE from non-exercise TDEE and divide by your average daily workout minutes, and whallah, you now now how many calories you burn per minute of exercise.

Do this over the course of a few weeks to get good data. For even stronger data, only strength train for a few weeks. Only do cardio for a few weeks.

This is not very crazy you kow, many people do this, it is not particularly difficult to do.

Contrary to popular belief, MFP's calorie burns in the exercise database are quite good.

I used that method to figure out that MFP's "strength training" entry is an absolute joke, that "high effort calisthenics" or "circuit training" is far more appropriate for any sort of real strength training. MFP's strength training entry is only appropriate for old ladies lifting pink DB's, if you are actually trying is is a gross underestimation.

MFP's running #'s are pretty much dead on.

You burn about as many calories walking versus running the same distance -- mainly because walking takes a lot longer!

No you don't.

The up down motion of running, which walking lacks, adds a fair bit to the calorie burn. Running burns about 30% or so more per mile.

For everyone so concerned about my walk, it's a constant incline. At 270, my heart rate does manage to get up there. I do jog for a few minutes of it, and go up and down any stairs I come across. Takes me an hour and 34 minutes to walk 4.6 miles.

I am not arguing whether people can run at 9mph, just that walking does not burn as much as running.

I don't understand why anyone is arguing. My hrm gave me 558 for walking 2.5 mph for an hour and 34 minutes. MFP gave me something close to 900 which I don't agree with, so I used my hrm. I wasn't on a treadmill walking in place, I walked to my in laws, 4.6 miles of constant incline and went up and down stairs I'd see on the way with some random jogging. "from this light to that light" jogging to get my heart rate up before I felt like dying.

My morning and afternoon Bootcamp classes puts me in the ball park

Unless you are something close to a proffessional athlete you are not going to burn anything near that much. Period.

That's just not true.

Last weekend I did 60 mins on the erg at an average split of 2:12/500m, on a descending split over the course . Last 500m were at a 1:50 split, just for kicks and giggles. Average HR (by Polar HRM) was 166, high HR (during the last 500m) was 187. Total calories expended were 1305. That overstates it a little bit, because my BMR for an hour is 85kcal, but we're still north of 1200kcal for that workout. I'm also 6'3" and 230 lbs, so my calorie burn is going to be higher than average.

To be fair, that was a hard workout. 60 minutes of full body workout at a pretty high HR, without a rest. When I'm doing steady state on the erg, I do it low and slow at a rating of between 20-22 strokes per min, so the power per stroke is relatively high.

Most people can't or won't do that, not least because it's insanely boring.

That doesn't mean it can't be done.