Recording calories burned for lifting - what's your method and reasoning?

Deena_Bean
Deena_Bean Posts: 906 Member
edited November 14 in Fitness and Exercise
On my lift days I warm up with some cardio (a 5-8 minute cardio burst on an app - I'm sweating by the end of it). My HRM says I burn about 55-75 calories in those 5-8 minutes. Then I move on to squat warmups, then squats, then the rest of it. By the end (about 50-60 minutes) my HRM says anywhere from 275-350 calories burned. I've been recording 80% of that, but I read that the calorie burn for lifting isn't really that high. I don't want to over-record my calories and then end up overeating because of it. What's your method? I've not lost any weight - in fact I've gained, so I really want to pay close attention to my calorie goals for the next couple of weeks and see if I can start losing a little, too.

Replies

  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    I count strength training as 1 and work it in to my overall activity level since there is no real way to track strength training. You should disregard the numbers from your HRM as they are not designed to track calories burned doing such exercises.
  • sgthaggard
    sgthaggard Posts: 581 Member
    edited March 2015
    I just use my HRM and eat back maybe a quarter of the calories it says I burn. I'm losing so that means I'm still eating at a deficit.

    The reason I record the full calorie burn is psychological - I feel I've worked my butt off and recording the calories my HRM says I've burned is my pat on the back. ;)
  • Deena_Bean
    Deena_Bean Posts: 906 Member
    I do like to know what I've burned, but I would like more to see some fat loss. I have made progress, but started lifting about 6 weeks ago. Since then I've gained weight, but lost some inches and in my comparison photos I can see differences. I mentally put much less emphasis on pounds than inches, and that's an enormous relief - but I do know there is fat to lose yet, and CICO is relevant. So, thanks for your info - I'll just assign a really low number (between 1-100 calories) and stick with that on lifting days. Doing the math, I burn roughly 70-90 calories per hour being alive. Another method I tried was subtracting that number from my calories burned, but even that is sketchy to me now since the HRM isn't designed for lift workouts. Again, thanks for your input!
  • kandeye
    kandeye Posts: 216 Member
    I don't record weightlifting calories. It's honestly too difficult to figure out and I'd rather not undermine my weightloss. I agree it feels like a cheat to myself that I worked so hard with no extra calories to account for! I see a lot of people use the tdee method if they are consistent with their workouts. That might work for you?
  • SonyaCele
    SonyaCele Posts: 2,841 Member
    i dont record weight lifting, i figure its the same as if i was just doing whatever else i was doing for that period of time.
  • Holly_Roman_Empire
    Holly_Roman_Empire Posts: 4,440 Member
    Your HRM is not accurate for calorie burns for weight lifting. HRMs are meant to monitor your heart rate, and they can give an estimated calorie burn for steady state cardio like running or cycling. For virtually every other exercise, it's pretty worthless.
  • itsclobberintime
    itsclobberintime Posts: 164 Member
    hollydubs85 wrote: »
    Your HRM is not accurate for calorie burns for weight lifting. HRMs are meant to monitor your heart rate, and they can give an estimated calorie burn for steady state cardio like running or cycling. For virtually every other exercise, it's pretty worthless.

    This. I prefer to just increase my activity level when I am lifting consistently and only log calories burned for activities outside of the norm.
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    edited March 2015
    Hmm, tricky question. My main activities are walking and resistance training, so what worked best for me was to log the resistance training the same as I would my walking, ie if I worked out for 60 mins, I would use the same calorie burn as if I had walked moderately for that 60 mins.

    Its really just an estimate, but one which I figure will be a middle of the road one, and enough to work with to figure out my TDEE from which to base my intake on.
  • CyberTone
    CyberTone Posts: 7,337 Member
    iloseityes wrote: »
    Hmm, tricky question. My main activities are walking and resistance training, so what worked best for me was to log the resistance training the same as I would my walking, ie if I worked out for 60 mins, I would use the same calorie burn as if I had walked moderately for that 60 mins.

    Its really just an estimate, but one which I figure will be a middle of the road one, and enough to work with to figure out my TDEE from which to base my intake on.

    It seems that your estimating is similar to what MFP would estimate.

    Note that the MFP METs (metabolic equivalent for tasks) multiplication factor for estimating Calories burned for strength training under Cardiovascular is the same as for walking at 2.5 mph, leisurely pace.

    Here is an abbreviated list of METs factors for Cardiovascular activities in MFP. The higher the METs value, the higher the estimated Calories burned per minute per body weight.

    METs - Activity
    2.5 - Walking, 2.0 mph, slow pace
    3.0 - Walking, 2.5 mph, leisurely pace
    3.0 - Strength training (weight lifting, weight training)
    3.3 - Walking, 3.0 mph, mod. pace
    3.8 - Walking, 3.5 mph, brisk pace
    5.0 - Walking, 4.0 mph, very brisk pace
  • ashleycde
    ashleycde Posts: 622 Member
    I use the TDEE -20% method and so my calories burned through working out are already factored in to my daily calorie allowance.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    It's incredibly difficult to estimate which is why I switched to the TDEE method when I started spending more time in the weight room. When I was doing MFP I pretty much chalked it up to 150 calories or so for 60 minutes which is what my protein shake was.
  • ashleycde
    ashleycde Posts: 622 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    It's incredibly difficult to estimate which is why I switched to the TDEE method when I started spending more time in the weight room. When I was doing MFP I pretty much chalked it up to 150 calories or so for 60 minutes which is what my protein shake was.

    That's why I switched as well. I don't have a HRM either, so I was even estimating my burn during cardio activity (or MFP was, anyway) and found it difficult to figure out how many calories I should be eating back. I was also starving on days I didn't workout, where I hadn't "earned" extra calories. Using the TDEE method and averaging things out was weird at first, but it's been a lot easier. It also takes guessing out of the equation, to some degree. Just make sure if you initially pick that you say, do 3-5 hours per week of moderate exercise, that you actually stick to getting 3-5 hours per week of moderate exercise. I add my workouts as 1 calorie burned, just so that I can track my activity throughout the week.
  • jpaulie
    jpaulie Posts: 917 Member
    I use a chest strap HRM for weight training and it works well for me(along with MMF). My heart rate gets over 150 during many lifts. It estimates anywhere from 550-700 per workout (70-90 mins), including a 5min elliptical warmup. MFP calculated somewhere in the range of 250-325.
    I eat them back and seem to maintain or gain proportionately depending on what I am trying to achieve. (so far)

  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    edited March 2015
    I log it as calisthenics for half the time I did it. I'm not relying on strength training for a burn, but I like to log something so I can be happy about ticking it off.
  • icrushit
    icrushit Posts: 773 Member
    CyberTone wrote: »
    It seems that your estimating is similar to what MFP would estimate.

    Note that the MFP METs (metabolic equivalent for tasks) multiplication factor for estimating Calories burned for strength training under Cardiovascular is the same as for walking at 2.5 mph, leisurely pace.

    Here is an abbreviated list of METs factors for Cardiovascular activities in MFP. The higher the METs value, the higher the estimated Calories burned per minute per body weight.

    METs - Activity
    2.5 - Walking, 2.0 mph, slow pace
    3.0 - Walking, 2.5 mph, leisurely pace
    3.0 - Strength training (weight lifting, weight training)
    3.3 - Walking, 3.0 mph, mod. pace
    3.8 - Walking, 3.5 mph, brisk pace
    5.0 - Walking, 4.0 mph, very brisk pace

    Haha, that is a curious, and unintentional coincidence, lol. I always figured weight training was good for a decent calorie burn when the 24- 48 hours after the session was included, and figured I was underestimating most likely by taking the calorie burns from a low intensity form of exercise like walking :smile:
  • lngrunert
    lngrunert Posts: 204 Member
    I also switched to the TDEE method now that I'm lifting twice a week, and have a very structured workout routine for a total of five days a week. I'm also not looking to lose much weight since I'm happy with my progress in inches and don't really care about the number on the scale at this point.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories