did I really burn 300 calories in 65 minutes walking

2»

Replies

  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    shelby- If you weigh 130, you're not burning 120/hour in BMR, maybe half that. So if you do subtract from your 300 estimate, you could probably subtract 60-80.

    If you don't have a lot of money and have 5 lbs. to lose, I wouldn't buy more gadgets. I would figure you burn around 80-100 calories a mile and call it a day. That's a good enough estimate, in my opinion, and it sounds like it even jibes with your hrm.

    Good luck!! :smile:
  • Beautifulbridgittlee7
    Beautifulbridgittlee7 Posts: 352 Member
    I can burn 250-400 running for 3 miles or 30 minutes depending on speed, incline, terrain and can burn 400/450 an hour alternating powerwalking with jog/run intervals, and can burn probably up to 500 walking fast for 90 minutes but that's it. I think it depends.
  • xxshelbyxx0818
    xxshelbyxx0818 Posts: 91
    I burn about 400 cals walking for 45 minutes. That is walking with effort and on "not" flat ground. So it also depends on your weight and effort and how healthy you are. When I first started working out, I could burn almost 1000 cals in an hour, but my heart rate was super high and I was alot heavier...:)

    Holy crap that's a lot for an hour! I wish I could do that but Id have to be doing something crazy lol. How fast do u wall when u burn 400 in 45 minutes?
  • Verdenal
    Verdenal Posts: 625 Member
    I can't afford a fitbit but I dealt wanna know how much I'm burning, don't just wanna go by mfp data.

    Fitbit is more accurate, but it's always going to be an estimate. Rely on reducing your calories and don't eat more when you exercise unless you've had a huge workout and are hungry. Weigh yourself regularly, and monitor your body fat percentage and body dimensions.
  • xxshelbyxx0818
    xxshelbyxx0818 Posts: 91
    shelby- If you weigh 130, you're not burning 120/hour in BMR, maybe half that. So if you do subtract from your 300 estimate, you could probably subtract 60-80.

    If you don't have a lot of money and have 5 lbs. to lose, I wouldn't buy more gadgets. I would figure you burn around 80-100 calories a mile and call it a day. That's a good enough estimate, in my opinion, and it sounds like it even jibes with your hrm.

    Good luck!! :smile:

    Thank you!! :)
    But plz clarify cuz you said at my weight I'm probably NOT burning 120 an hour but then you said to keep subtracting the 80 from my numbers, which would make it 220 for 65 minutes. So you're saying I'm probably burning MORE than 120 per hour? And you're right I don't wanna keep spending money because I only have a few lbs to shed, but I guess I'm just impatient because ice never had to go through this before and it's bugging me that I only need a small amount gone and I've yet to see results despite eating only healthy foods and walking once a day and doing different work outs as often as possible. Im about to make a post asking someone yo give me the perfect workout for my 5 lbs I need home cuz everyone told me different things so I've been trying to do them all so maybe that's why it's not helping?
  • xxshelbyxx0818
    xxshelbyxx0818 Posts: 91
    I can't afford a fitbit but I dealt wanna know how much I'm burning, don't just wanna go by mfp data.

    Fitbit is more accurate, but it's always going to be an estimate. Rely on reducing your calories and don't eat more when you exercise unless you've had a huge workout and are hungry. Weigh yourself regularly, and monitor your body fat percentage and body dimensions.
    Well how come everyone so far has told me i CAN eat back what I worked out? I'm so confused. How do I measure my bmi regularly? It's already healthy..
  • Samstan101
    Samstan101 Posts: 699 Member
    Fitbit & HRM are 2 different tools for different jobs. Fitbit shows your activity level based on movement and unless you tell it different by inputting an activity into its website it assumes all movement is walking. A HRM is used to see the calories burned doing steady state cardio. I use both and input the data from the HRM into the Fitbit website (I add the type of exercise eg running, the start time, duration, distance and cal burn from my HRM) for increased accuracy.

    A HRM where you only check your heart rate at the end of an activity is worthless IMO. I know for me my heart rate is almost always highest at the end of a run so if I based my calories burn on having that heart rate for the whole run I'd massively overestimate the burn.

    Also based on your height & weight your BMR is going to be far less than 120cals per hr, close to 60 per hr is more realistic.
  • becka63
    becka63 Posts: 712 Member
    I think body fat percentage is different to BMI and body dimensions maybe measurements? have you taken measurements as they can be more telling than the scale.

    I have a polar ft4 and whilst I believe it is accurate, I don't take it as gospel. That said, when I use a running app (with my stats in) both my HRM and app calorie burn are within 20kcals of each other, which I think is pretty good.
  • terramurray
    terramurray Posts: 3 Member
    the calories burned for any gadget is going to be an estimate, because so many factors depend on it...but it sounds reasonable. I use Runkeeper to track my runs, etc., and if you know you distance, and your time, you can get a decent enough estimate of calories burned. I would just do somehting like that. Runkeeper is free and talks to MFP. You can use for walking etc.
  • Nige_Gsy
    Nige_Gsy Posts: 163 Member
    Those numbers should like they could be right.. Well, no HRM will be exact, but those sound reasonable depending on your height and weight.

    I burned 500 calories walking for two hours today... And depending on the yoga routing I can burn anywhere from 170-300 calories an hour

    Ok well why did the person before u say it's not right? I'm so confused
    . I just did yoga and it said 224 which I know is high so I subtracted calorie burned just being alive which I read somewhere is like 120 an hour and I did yoga for a half hour so that'd be minus 60 so I burned like 165 doing yoga for 30 minuted. To me that seems excessive BUT idk. I'm pissed I spend money on a hrm when everyone's saying they're bull. Why are the fitbit so good then if they do the same as a hrm watch

    A $10 fitness watch isn't going to be accurate. If you want the most accurate calorie burn, buy a heart rate monitor such as Polar FT4. A good HRM will cost you $100. http://www.polar.com/us-en/products/get_active/fitness_crosstraining/FT4

    This is sensible. In short, any HRM is going to be more accurate than the averages that MFP gives, because the HRM is based on your actual exertion. BUT, a cheap HRM costing $10 isn't likely to be as accurate as say a Garmin or Polar version. Unfortunately, this is one of those cases where you do get what you pay for!
  • sabified
    sabified Posts: 1,035 Member
    i thought the same thing about my hrm but after talking to my doc she said that its right. if you jogged in place to keep your heart rate up i see no problem with you burning 300 calroies. as far as yoga goes it really doesnt burn alot of calories

    The yoga I'm doing does cuz it's fast paced and makes me sweat. It's specifically for weight loss. So, your doc said the hrm are correct? Even ones that aren't connected to your chest the entire time? I can't afford one like that for at least a few weeks so that's why I bought the cheapy one that reads your HR at rhe end of the workout.

    If you're annoyed at having spent money on this watch which isn't giving you the 100% accurate readings that you want then return it while you can and wait the few weeks til you can get the better one. (Keep exercising in the meantime...) Doing any type of movement is better than nothing, and if you're not sure of the burns which MFP gives then err on the side of caution and eat back half your calories.

    Then, when you get the new (and better) watch, pretend it's a clean slate with all this stuff and just go by what the watch says. Or ask questions then if you're still not sure.

    Less money, hassle and irritation this way.
  • 43mmmgoody21
    43mmmgoody21 Posts: 146 Member
    it is almost impossible to out-exercise a bad diet (once you have hit your maintenance calories for the day)-- it is so easy to eat 500 calories (and takes quite a bit of exercise to burn it off).

    Of course, you can eat anything you want staying within your calorie goals and still hit your targets (whether it be weight loss, maintenance, or weight gain).
  • PapaChanoli
    PapaChanoli Posts: 178 Member
    It seems like this question could be resolve with a lot more simplicity.

    Here's what I'm hearing in the answers:

    Realize that your HRM is fairly accurate but it's not perfect, just like all the oher wrist worn HRMs.

    Realize that all of the tools you are using are nothing more than decent estimates.

    Eat accordingly to the info MFP and the other tools provide. If you eat back half of your exercise calories you will have a decent, safe margin for error.

    Realize that your weight loss does not need to be based on perfect numbers to be successful. It's the long haul that counts.

    Stress less. You only have 5 pounds to lose and the healthiest way to do that is to relax, be patient, and let the numbers be your guide, not your prison.

    At 5 pounds overweight and 23 years old you are probably already gorgeous. Let yourself enjoy the process of eating healthier. The devices and websites are tools. The scale and your measurements are the only real gauges over time.

    Repeat: Relax a little. 5 pounds is not a health crisis. You're not dying here, you're fine tuning your health.

    Stress is worse for you than eating a couple hundred calories over your limit occasionally by accident.

    To quote Capt. Barbosa, "they're really more like guidelines than actual rules."

Categories