Walking slow and burning calories

Options
Uhfgood
Uhfgood Posts: 128 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Today I walked around Disney World for about 3 hours. Now I used the exercise database and added that, it claims I burned 769 calories, doesn't seem right, because me and my Dad were doing that when we moved down here at least 3 times a week for a couple of months, and we didn't see any weight loss. Now either I'm grossly exaggerating how much I walked, or I'm eating grossly more food than I think. Only problem is, I don't eat tons and tons, I'm eating the same I did in Montana, where I was for 8 months, and not doing any exercise whatsoever.

So something is odd here. In fact I was eating more candy in Montana than I am here as well. Going to the movies less, which means less concessions. So in reality I should be losing, but I'm not.

I understand I don't move enough and I don't eat little enough not to lose weight, but I think the exercise here in the database is way too high. I could see me burning about 450 for today, not 769
«1

Replies

  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    Today I walked around Disney World for about 3 hours. Now I used the exercise database and added that, it claims I burned 769 calories, doesn't seem right, because me and my Dad were doing that when we moved down here at least 3 times a week for a couple of months, and we didn't see any weight loss. Now either I'm grossly exaggerating how much I walked, or I'm eating grossly more food than I think. Only problem is, I don't eat tons and tons, I'm eating the same I did in Montana, where I was for 8 months, and not doing any exercise whatsoever.

    So something is odd here. In fact I was eating more candy in Montana than I am here as well. Going to the movies less, which means less concessions. So in reality I should be losing, but I'm not.

    I understand I don't move enough and I don't eat little enough not to lose weight, but I think the exercise here in the database is way too high. I could see me burning about 450 for today, not 769


    http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single

    For the most part, calories burned is mass x distance with different multiplication factors for different activities based upon the required actions. For walking, 3/10ths of a calorie per pound per mile walked is a starting point for net calories burned. You might be a little higher or lower but not significantly.
  • Uhfgood
    Uhfgood Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    Thanks, although, I don't know the distance I walked since we sort of went all over the park.
  • Cathalain
    Cathalain Posts: 424 Member
    Options
    Try downloading an app called RunKeeper. Turn it on when you walk and it'll measure distance, pace, speed, etc. It will measure calories burned, and I go by that, but you may want to do it differently.

    I love my RunKeeper app - would never go without it.
  • AmyWhims
    AmyWhims Posts: 8 Member
    Options
    I just got back from Disneyland - I wore my FitBit all week long. We never walked LESS than 10 miles a day. Sometimes up to 13! My FitBit had me burning close to 3000 calories per day, whereas my normal burn is somewhere around 1800. :)
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    Thanks, although, I don't know the distance I walked since we sort of went all over the park.

    Most people walk about 3 mph. Be honest with yourself ... did you walk continuously for three hours or was it walk, see something, stop, then walk again?
  • jeremywm1977
    jeremywm1977 Posts: 657 Member
    Options
    I've actually had this discussion with another MFP'er in another forum post, although many people didn't like my response. Nonetheless, here it goes:

    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice.

    Even set at "sedentary", your MFP macros are set at abourt 110 - 125% of your Resting Metabolic Rate. In other words, MFP will already calculate your body in motion, and if all you are doing is walking, and doing nothing to increase the resistance or your heartrate, then your body doesn't even know you were exercising.

    For example, as a 37 year old man, my approximate maximum heart rate is about 183 bpm (give or take). If I am not exerting myself to get my heart rate to between either 95 to 119 (fat burning) or between 119 and 156 (aerobic) beats per minute, then my body doesn't know that I'm putting forth any effort worthy of burning fat for energy.

    Another factor may be muscle loss. If all you are doing is walking and not building muscle through strength training, your body, in an effort to get better at your chosen activity (walking) will begin burning away the muscles that you are no longer using. As you begin losing muscle, your body will start burning fat at a lower and lower level of efficiency. Muscle burns fat..........lose muscles, lose your fat burners. (Simple formula - 1 pound of added muscle will burn approximately as many calories in a day at rest as a 30 minute session on a elliptical.)

    Bear in mind, I don't know your whole situation, but I figured I would throw out some stuff to mull over.
  • _Zardoz_
    _Zardoz_ Posts: 3,987 Member
    Options
    Another factor may be muscle loss. If all you are doing is walking and not building muscle through strength training, your body, in an effort to get better at your chosen activity (walking) will begin burning away the muscles that you are no longer using.
    I'm sorry that's just rubbish. For starters you wont build muscle eating at a calorie deficit. and you don't burn away muscle either. Yes when you are on a diet of any sort no matter what you do you will lose some muscle mass that's just a fact. Yes you can minimise some of this by weight training and proper nutrition. In reality a lot of people just want to lose some weight and get a little healthier all this scaremongering that if you don't weight train all your muscle will burn away is just that scaremongering. As long as you get adequate nutrition and exercise a little that will be fine for a lot of people. All there muscle is not going to suddenly burn off as a lot of posters like yourself keep implying.

    There seems to be a lack of context and perspective in a lot of peoples replies to these sort of posts. I suggest people read the posters original posts as it helps a lot. Not everyone wants to weight train or needs to If it fits in with your goals that's fine but not doing it does not mean that your muscles will spontaneously combust.
  • NYfirefighter
    NYfirefighter Posts: 31
    Options
    I've actually had this discussion with another MFP'er in another forum post, although many people didn't like my response. Nonetheless, here it goes:

    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice

    Never took a stroll for 15+miles obviously
    Even at a 3 to 3.5 mph you burn quite a few calories
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    Options
    It's widely agreed upon that MFP overestimates calorie burns. If you have no other of recording calories, then I recommend you only record about 2/3 of the exercise that you actually did.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    I've actually had this discussion with another MFP'er in another forum post, although many people didn't like my response. Nonetheless, here it goes:

    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice

    Never took a stroll for 15+miles obviously
    Even at a 3 to 3.5 mph you burn quite a few calories

    3mph isnt really strolling.

    OP, i would log maybe 1/3 to half the time at a slow pace if ordinarily you would have been sedentary at that time.
  • NYfirefighter
    NYfirefighter Posts: 31
    Options
    I've actually had this discussion with another MFP'er in another forum post, although many people didn't like my response. Nonetheless, here it goes:

    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice

    Never took a stroll for 15+miles obviously
    Even at a 3 to 3.5 mph you burn quite a few calories

    3mph isnt really strolling.

    OP, i would log maybe 1/3 to half the time at a slow pace if ordinarily you would have been sedentary at that time.
    Depents on who you ask
    3mph is really slow in my book, I can use my phone, read a newspaper etc
    My normal pace is 4 to 5mph

    But you should get what I meant
  • pinkiezoom
    pinkiezoom Posts: 409 Member
    Options
    I did 1 hour on a treadmill, with my heart rate monitor on, it was on a level 10 incline at 5 miles per hour, and i only burnt 230 cals, although the machine suggested it was 600!! and the mfp was waaaayyyy over too!
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice.
    Being active is incredibly important for health, if you are moving you are supporting your weight and burning calories. Three hours of walking is significant. No reason not to log it, it's not included in your activity setting.
    Even set at "sedentary", your MFP macros are set at abourt 110 - 125% of your Resting Metabolic Rate. In other words, MFP will already calculate your body in motion, and if all you are doing is walking, and doing nothing to increase the resistance or your heartrate, then your body doesn't even know you were exercising.
    Activity level reflect their activity level it doesn't assume they are adding three hours of walking on top of their normal routine.
    BTW - your body doesn't "know" anything! If you are walking you are exercising.
    For example, as a 37 year old man, my approximate maximum heart rate is about 183 bpm (give or take). If I am not exerting myself to get my heart rate to between either 95 to 119 (fat burning) or between 119 and 156 (aerobic) beats per minute, then my body doesn't know that I'm putting forth any effort worthy of burning fat for energy.
    Low intensity exercise burns calories and most will be coming from fat.
    Another factor may be muscle loss. If all you are doing is walking and not building muscle through strength training, your body, in an effort to get better at your chosen activity (walking) will begin burning away the muscles that you are no longer using. As you begin losing muscle, your body will start burning fat at a lower and lower level of efficiency. Muscle burns fat..........lose muscles, lose your fat burners. (Simple formula - 1 pound of added muscle will burn approximately as many calories in a day at rest as a 30 minute session on a elliptical.)
    Almost completely wrong! Agree with adding resistance training but walking does not burn muscles. Muscles are a fuel of last resort.
    One pound of added muscle will burn approximately 6 calories a day.
    Thirty minutes on an elliptical will probably burn around 300!
  • hookilau
    hookilau Posts: 3,134 Member
    Options
    Thanks, although, I don't know the distance I walked since we sort of went all over the park.

    Most people walk about 3 mph. Be honest with yourself ... did you walk continuously for three hours or was it walk, see something, stop, then walk again?

    I walk for a living (I'm a local dog walker) and at 3 mph (on a treadmill) I'm walking pretty fast, not slow enough to take in the sights, looking around, etc. As in, walking somewhere with a purpose, such as to meet a bus or something. As in, if I were walking a dog & she wanted to stop, I would have to stop short in order to do so.

    Walking at 2.0 mph (again, on a treadmill) It's a slow, sauntering walk. It's basically the pace I use when walking with dogs, so when walking, if she wants to stop & investigate something, I can easily continue 1 or 2 steps while slowing down to accommodate.

    I expect walking at Disney is like walking at 2.0 mph since you're taking in the sights & deciding on what's interesting to visit, while moving.

    This counts toward your NEAT, but I wouldn't classify it as 'exercise' & unless I was losing weight when I didn't want to. If I were looking to lose weight, I wouldn't count it towards calories to 'eat back'.

    A quick internet search pulled up this:

    "...N.E.A.T. stands for Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis. Dr. James Levine is credited for his research and findings on NEAT. According to Dr. Levine, "You can expend calories in one two ways. One is to go to the gym and the other is through all the activities of daily living called NEAT (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)."

    Get a fitbit =) As a dog walker, I personally liked the fit bit zip and found it incredibly useful.
    It will help you figure out what your actual daily activity is and interacts with MFP to deduct or add calories in accordance with your activity or lack thereof.

    It's also worth mentioning that I've heard that both fitbit & MFP over-estimate the amount of calories burned.

    It should be noted that I've never used it or MFP or fitbit to calculate calories burned, just to use the points of data that were created in relation to my daily activity. :drinker:
  • hookilau
    hookilau Posts: 3,134 Member
    Options
    I've actually had this discussion with another MFP'er in another forum post, although many people didn't like my response. Nonetheless, here it goes:

    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice

    Never took a stroll for 15+miles obviously
    Even at a 3 to 3.5 mph you burn quite a few calories

    3mph isnt really strolling.

    OP, i would log maybe 1/3 to half the time at a slow pace if ordinarily you would have been sedentary at that time.

    I agree, but now that I think of it, maybe it's because I have a short stride?
    I'm 5' tall, so 3 mph is a pretty quick clip for me and 3.5 is just short of 'jogging' while 4.0-4.5 is a full on jog.
    Forget 5.0....T Rex would have to be after me for that to happen :tongue:

    Doing as many dog walks as I do per day, with dogs of different preferred activity levels, I'm able to compare a great deal. Probably too much judging from how much I have to say on the subject. :laugh:

    ETA: 3.0 to 3.5 is the pace you'd be walking on a NYC sidewalk while dodging tourists trying not to spill your coffee.
  • Uhfgood
    Uhfgood Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    Thanks, although, I don't know the distance I walked since we sort of went all over the park.

    Most people walk about 3 mph. Be honest with yourself ... did you walk continuously for three hours or was it walk, see something, stop, then walk again?

    I think we were walking at most 2 mph. It was mostly continuously walking. We did stop in for an attraction, that had us sitting for about 15 minutes at the most. Then walked an additional 40 minutes at costco.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    I've actually had this discussion with another MFP'er in another forum post, although many people didn't like my response. Nonetheless, here it goes:

    If all you did was walk from A to B, no matter what the distance between A and B is, and you did not increase speed, vary your incline, or add any weight resistance, don't add it to your MFP log..........you will be doing yourself a disservice.

    Even set at "sedentary", your MFP macros are set at abourt 110 - 125% of your Resting Metabolic Rate. In other words, MFP will already calculate your body in motion, and if all you are doing is walking, and doing nothing to increase the resistance or your heartrate, then your body doesn't even know you were exercising.

    For example, as a 37 year old man, my approximate maximum heart rate is about 183 bpm (give or take). If I am not exerting myself to get my heart rate to between either 95 to 119 (fat burning) or between 119 and 156 (aerobic) beats per minute, then my body doesn't know that I'm putting forth any effort worthy of burning fat for energy.

    Another factor may be muscle loss. If all you are doing is walking and not building muscle through strength training, your body, in an effort to get better at your chosen activity (walking) will begin burning away the muscles that you are no longer using. As you begin losing muscle, your body will start burning fat at a lower and lower level of efficiency. Muscle burns fat..........lose muscles, lose your fat burners. (Simple formula - 1 pound of added muscle will burn approximately as many calories in a day at rest as a 30 minute session on a elliptical.)

    Bear in mind, I don't know your whole situation, but I figured I would throw out some stuff to mull over.

    It has nothing to do with liking or disliking your answer ... it's that your answer is wrong in every single paragraph.
  • Uhfgood
    Uhfgood Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    It's widely agreed upon that MFP overestimates calorie burns. If you have no other of recording calories, then I recommend you only record about 2/3 of the exercise that you actually did.

    Hmm yeah I might even counter with 1/3 -- sounds like a good idea. At least until I start adding something a little more intense.
  • Uhfgood
    Uhfgood Posts: 128 Member
    Options
    Thanks, although, I don't know the distance I walked since we sort of went all over the park.

    Most people walk about 3 mph. Be honest with yourself ... did you walk continuously for three hours or was it walk, see something, stop, then walk again?

    I walk for a living (I'm a local dog walker) and at 3 mph (on a treadmill) I'm walking pretty fast, not slow enough to take in the sights, looking around, etc. As in, walking somewhere with a purpose, such as to meet a bus or something. As in, if I were walking a dog & she wanted to stop, I would have to stop short in order to do so.

    Walking at 2.0 mph (again, on a treadmill) It's a slow, sauntering walk. It's basically the pace I use when walking with dogs, so when walking, if she wants to stop & investigate something, I can easily continue 1 or 2 steps while slowing down to accommodate.

    I expect walking at Disney is like walking at 2.0 mph since you're taking in the sights & deciding on what's interesting to visit, while moving.

    This counts toward your NEAT, but I wouldn't classify it as 'exercise' & unless I was losing weight when I didn't want to. If I were looking to lose weight, I wouldn't count it towards calories to 'eat back'.

    A quick internet search pulled up this:

    "...N.E.A.T. stands for Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis. Dr. James Levine is credited for his research and findings on NEAT. According to Dr. Levine, "You can expend calories in one two ways. One is to go to the gym and the other is through all the activities of daily living called NEAT (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)."

    Get a fitbit =) As a dog walker, I personally liked the fit bit zip and found it incredibly useful.
    It will help you figure out what your actual daily activity is and interacts with MFP to deduct or add calories in accordance with your activity or lack thereof.

    It's also worth mentioning that I've heard that both fitbit & MFP over-estimate the amount of calories burned.

    It should be noted that I've never used it or MFP or fitbit to calculate calories burned, just to use the points of data that were created in relation to my daily activity. :drinker:

    Thanks for the info. I'll have to see if I can scrape up the money to get a fitbit (I'm unemployed)
  • hookilau
    hookilau Posts: 3,134 Member
    Options
    Thanks, although, I don't know the distance I walked since we sort of went all over the park.

    Most people walk about 3 mph. Be honest with yourself ... did you walk continuously for three hours or was it walk, see something, stop, then walk again?

    I walk for a living (I'm a local dog walker) and at 3 mph (on a treadmill) I'm walking pretty fast, not slow enough to take in the sights, looking around, etc. As in, walking somewhere with a purpose, such as to meet a bus or something. As in, if I were walking a dog & she wanted to stop, I would have to stop short in order to do so.

    Walking at 2.0 mph (again, on a treadmill) It's a slow, sauntering walk. It's basically the pace I use when walking with dogs, so when walking, if she wants to stop & investigate something, I can easily continue 1 or 2 steps while slowing down to accommodate.

    I expect walking at Disney is like walking at 2.0 mph since you're taking in the sights & deciding on what's interesting to visit, while moving.

    This counts toward your NEAT, but I wouldn't classify it as 'exercise' & unless I was losing weight when I didn't want to. If I were looking to lose weight, I wouldn't count it towards calories to 'eat back'.

    A quick internet search pulled up this:

    "...N.E.A.T. stands for Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis. Dr. James Levine is credited for his research and findings on NEAT. According to Dr. Levine, "You can expend calories in one two ways. One is to go to the gym and the other is through all the activities of daily living called NEAT (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)."

    Get a fitbit =) As a dog walker, I personally liked the fit bit zip and found it incredibly useful.
    It will help you figure out what your actual daily activity is and interacts with MFP to deduct or add calories in accordance with your activity or lack thereof.

    It's also worth mentioning that I've heard that both fitbit & MFP over-estimate the amount of calories burned.

    It should be noted that I've never used it or MFP or fitbit to calculate calories burned, just to use the points of data that were created in relation to my daily activity. :drinker:

    Thanks for the info. I'll have to see if I can scrape up the money to get a fitbit (I'm unemployed)

    No prob =)
    Just to be clear, it counts, but not enough to warrant the amount of calories either fitbit or MFP wants to give you. I've struggled with this in the past, that's why I have so much to say about it :laugh:

    Be on the look out for sales this up-coming holiday season. Target and Walmart often have them on sale. The bonus is the additional data you get to analyze to help figure out where you stand.
    Good luck :drinker:

Categories