Are strength work outs good for calorie burning?

Lifting is more effective than cardio. I lost 90lbs while really only lifting and eating correctly. I did end up integrating cardio towards the end but really mostly just through lifting and diet.

If you have a choice between cardio and lifting, lifting will always be recommended as a better option.

try kettlebells there are plenty of workouts around they give you cardio and strength in one, body weight training is good as well.

You can log your strength training in the cardio section - just search "weight lifting" or "strength training." It can count towards calisthenics also (depending on what you're doing).

No, strength training doesn't burn as many calories during the workout itself, but they build the muscles that end up burning more calories all day long, more efficiently. So that's definitely a huge plus for losing/maintaining weight.

Some say strength training is the more important of the two, but I would much rather do both.

If you really mean strength workouts (progressive overload / "lifting heavy"), they don't count for a huge amount of burn simply because there's a crap-ton of recovery time in between lifts. Plenty of other benefits, but they're just not going to burn the calories per hour that an intense cardio session is going to.

Now, if you're referring to cardio with resistance training (kettlebells, etc), that's at least as effective for burning calories on a per minute basis as pure bodyweight cardio.

999tigger wrote: »

GoingSlightlyMad wrote: »

Lifting helps build muscle and prevents muscle loss in periods of energy deficit, along with a proper intake of protein. More muscle equals higher basal metabolic rate, which equals burning more calories while resting, which aids weight loss.

So yeah, go lift heavy.

I thought it was hard to build muscle whilts on a deficit?
How much extra does muscle burn?

It's hard, not impossible. I see from her profile that she has quite a bit of weight to lose, so it is possible for her to be on a deficit while still gaining muscle if she eats properly and lifts heavy (link).

I don't know the math, but fat requires less energy than muscle to be maintained, hence a higher percentage of lean mass leads to a higher amount of burned calories while resting.

Various cardiovascular exercises have been studied extensively to derive formulas to relatively accurately determine calorie goals...you weigh XXX Lbs and are traveling Y distance and such and such a speed, you are going to burn Z calories. Much more difficult to do with strength training and other anaerobic training given the shear number of variables involved. You can select to log it under cardio work, but I would hardly trust those numbers. This is one of the big reasons why people who spend a fair amount of time in the weight room ultimately go with the TDEE method. Using the MFP method I would just chalk it up to 200 - 300 calories for a 60 minute session.

It burns calories, yes...but it doesn't burn as much as cardiovascular work does for the same amount of time. You do however expend a bit of extra energy in repair after the fact and more muscle mass in general is going to burn more calories at rest than you otherwise would...but again, I think it difficult to accurately measure these things.

As a matter of general fitness I highly recommend some combination of the two. If anything, do a fair bit of walking for your cardiovascular health. You don't have to jump around like some kind of *kitten* to get in a decent cardiovascular workout.

sofaking6 wrote: »

hill8570 wrote: »

If you really mean strength workouts (progressive overload / "lifting heavy"), they don't count for a huge amount of burn simply because there's a crap-ton of recovery time in between lifts. Plenty of other benefits, but they're just not going to burn the calories per hour that an intense cardio session is going to.

Now, if you're referring to cardio with resistance training (kettlebells, etc), that's at least as effective for burning calories on a per minute basis as pure bodyweight cardio.

How does it compare to heavy lifting as far as effectiveness at muscle conditioning?

Talking out of my *ss here, but I'd guess resistance training is going to as effective as lifting heavy for conditioning and muscle sparing as lifting heavy would be, assuming the person doing the resistance training isn't trying to maintain weightlifter muscles. You're not going to pack on much muscle, 'tho.

Hoping one of the more informed members here has a link or two to some studies in that area.