How to document calories burned while weight training.
KingBrownCow
Posts: 1
Is there a way to document the calories burned while weight training?
0
Replies
-
Unless you're operating at a very high level, the burn is negligible, and most people just enter it as "1" calorie, or ignore it completely.0
-
Not really. Calorie burn is a guess. Heart rate monitors use your heart rate to guess...this isn't really applicable to strength training.
There are so many benefits.....limiting lean muscle mass loss while dieting, improving fitness, helping to make your bones strong.0 -
Theoretically, you can use the strength training option in the Cardiovascular exercise section. It gives a lot of calories, though, so I'd be really wary of using it because it may stall your weight loss. I don't know about you, but there's a lot of waiting around involved when I lift. I highly doubt I burn as many calories as MFP is telling me I'd burn in an hour-long session. Plus, it has no idea of my level of effort.0
-
change your activity level to light active and don't log anything.
Calories burned is not the reason one should be lifting for anyway. It doesn't burn a great deal but has a host of other benefits.0 -
I'd argue that plenty of calories are burned while strength training, but caloric burn usually isn't the goal with anaerobic exercise (as previously mentioned.) I tend to push myself very hard while strength training to the point where it is almost circuit training (Heart Rate rarely falls below 120 and spikes as high as 180 under heavy loads) and according to my HRM I tend to burn about 10kcal/min. This is by no means an exact count so much as a general guideline that I've developed for myself after wearing my HRM for every workout for a few months straight. If you choose not to track it you'll simply have more of a caloric deficit which will only aid you in your weight loss efforts (so long as you're still getting enough calories to properly fuel your body). The benefits of strength training are well documented and definitely well worth it even if you don't count your calories burned.0
-
Unless you're operating at a very high level, the burn is negligible, and most people just enter it as "1" calorie, or ignore it completely.
That is false. Why would you enter it as 1 calorie. You burn that much walking across the floor. I am not sure exactly how many calories I burn, but given I burn 12-13 per minute on average running, I am pretty comfortable that my answer for weight training is somewhere between 4-8 per minute depending on the intensity. Everyone is different but I'm not sure why one wouldn't put in a more realistic # than 10 -
It definitely burns calories. How much is anyone's best guess. I do my session like circuit training with minimal rest between sets and sweat tons and keeps my heart rate up. I do log it as 1 calorie, but only because I am not currently tracking calories burned. The gym that I used to go to estimated around 220 calories per 30 minutes for me. That seemed pretty accurate based on my weekly loss at the time.0
-
Polar FT80 is a HRM designed for weight training and even tells you when to start your next set based on current HR. Session yesterday burned 802 calories in an 83 minute period, peak HR was 173bpm... considerably more than 1 calorie!0
-
Unless you're operating at a very high level, the burn is negligible, and most people just enter it as "1" calorie, or ignore it completely.
That is false. Why would you enter it as 1 calorie. You burn that much walking across the floor. I am not sure exactly how many calories I burn, but given I burn 12-13 per minute on average running, I am pretty comfortable that my answer for weight training is somewhere between 4-8 per minute depending on the intensity. Everyone is different but I'm not sure why one wouldn't put in a more realistic # than 1
Maybe 4-8 cals for a minute that you are lifting, but how much time in an hours session do you actually spend lifting vs. resting. The resting cals would not be much higher than maintenance cals for that time period.
In an hour session I would probably be lifting for 1/4 of the time, so 15 mins which would be 60-120 cals based on your 4-8 cals/min.0 -
Polar FT80 is a HRM designed for weight training and even tells you when to start your next set based on current HR. Session yesterday burned 802 calories in an 83 minute period, peak HR was 173bpm... considerably more than 1 calorie!
I would not believe the cals burned from it, maybe when you are ready to lift again. There is no way for an HRM to know how many cals burned from lifting weights based on Heart rate. Heart rate does not burn the cals, there is a calculation that uses HR to estimate intensity, but the cals burned comes from the oxygen uptake and work performed. Oxygen uptake does not happen at the same rate during lifting even with a high HR, it is elevated for different physiological responses.
In other words, don't trust it, you are probably only burned 20-50% as much as it says.
FYI: "The Polar Strength Training mode, meanwhile, helps you optimize your strength training by reading your heart rate and informing you when your body is ready for the next set--an ideal way to optimize your weight training." Nothing about the Polar Strength training setting does it say it is accurate for cals burned, or that it gives you cals burned from strength training. If it spits out a cals burned it is still based on the same calculation that was used for cardio, which does not come close to being accurate for non-steady state cardio. The further your activity is from steady state cardio the more the estimate will be off, and you can't get much further from steady state cardio than strength training.0 -
Unless you're operating at a very high level, the burn is negligible, and most people just enter it as "1" calorie, or ignore it completely.
That is false. Why would you enter it as 1 calorie. You burn that much walking across the floor. I am not sure exactly how many calories I burn, but given I burn 12-13 per minute on average running, I am pretty comfortable that my answer for weight training is somewhere between 4-8 per minute depending on the intensity. Everyone is different but I'm not sure why one wouldn't put in a more realistic # than 1
Sure. In 45 minutes of working out, there will typically be maybe 10 minutes of actual lifting. Those 10 minutes may well get you your 40 calories.
If you really want to log that - go for it.
:drinker:
0 -
Polar FT80 is a HRM designed for weight training and even tells you when to start your next set based on current HR. Session yesterday burned 802 calories in an 83 minute period, peak HR was 173bpm... considerably more than 1 calorie!
There are 8 billion threads on MFP warning on the dangers of using HRM burn guesstimates for exercises like lifting.
Your number is *insanely* over-estimated.
0 -
Unless you're operating at a very high level, the burn is negligible, and most people just enter it as "1" calorie, or ignore it completely.
That is false. Why would you enter it as 1 calorie. You burn that much walking across the floor. I am not sure exactly how many calories I burn, but given I burn 12-13 per minute on average running, I am pretty comfortable that my answer for weight training is somewhere between 4-8 per minute depending on the intensity. Everyone is different but I'm not sure why one wouldn't put in a more realistic # than 1
Because most people who lift religiously on these boards follow a TDEE method where it is figured into your activity level. No need to track separately. This makes it easier since there is no way to track calories burned by lifting.
As stated, you might burn 8 calories a minute during lifting but that would only be during the hard part of the exercise, so how much time in a lifting session is spent burning 8 cals a minute? Not much. If you lift for an hour you may have been actually burning 8 cals a minute for what? 8-10 minutes at most?
0 -
Polar FT80 is a HRM designed for weight training and even tells you when to start your next set based on current HR. Session yesterday burned 802 calories in an 83 minute period, peak HR was 173bpm... considerably more than 1 calorie!
There are 8 billion threads on MFP warning on the dangers of using HRM burn guesstimates for exercises like lifting.
Your number is *insanely* over-estimated.
But not as insanely under-estimated as entering 1 calorie. Recovery period between sets is built into the algorithm and noted burn is significantly lower during those periods. VO2max is determined beforehand; perhaps expended calories may not be entirely accurate, but having used the device for 3 years I was able to lose/gain/maintain based on the figures it provided, so I'll continue to place stock into it. On the other hand, the HRM fitbits are junk for training and are unable to register any sudden changes in HR.0 -
Sorry, no. The difference between 1 calorie and 40 calories is a lot smaller than the difference between 40 calories and any 3 digit number coming out of an HRM. Heart rate simply does not correlate with burn at all under resistance training conditions - it's like trying to carve a totem pole by hocking loogies at it.
Using any HRM for weight training burns is about as broscience as it gets.
0 -
Polar FT80 is a HRM designed for weight training and even tells you when to start your next set based on current HR. Session yesterday burned 802 calories in an 83 minute period, peak HR was 173bpm... considerably more than 1 calorie!
FT80 is designed for tracking workouts, not weight lifting calories. The calorie burn algorithms are still designed for cardio workouts.
0 -
FWIW, one of the better studies done on EE during wt training came up with a figure of about 8 calories for 1 set of bench press at 90% of 1 RM, 11.2 calories for 1 set at 80% of 1 RM. The calorie number includes the aerobic component, anaerobic component and EPOC.0
-
Polar FT80 is a HRM designed for weight training and even tells you when to start your next set based on current HR. Session yesterday burned 802 calories in an 83 minute period, peak HR was 173bpm... considerably more than 1 calorie!
There are 8 billion threads on MFP warning on the dangers of using HRM burn guesstimates for exercises like lifting.
Your number is *insanely* over-estimated.
But not as insanely under-estimated as entering 1 calorie. Recovery period between sets is built into the algorithm and noted burn is significantly lower during those periods. VO2max is determined beforehand; perhaps expended calories may not be entirely accurate, but having used the device for 3 years I was able to lose/gain/maintain based on the figures it provided, so I'll continue to place stock into it. On the other hand, the HRM fitbits are junk for training and are unable to register any sudden changes in HR.
Higher HR =/= more calories burned. otherwise watching scary movies would be a huge weight loss product
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions