1,000 calorie exercises
Replies
-
jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.0 -
Maybe she's like me and wants to do large burns to pay for a cheat meal. I tend to be conservative with my calculations. For me it would be an 8-9 mile run to burn 1,000 cals.0
-
c20,000m on the rower nets me about 1200 cals.0
-
atypicalsmith wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.
I think you mistook concern for judgement. OP is very young, lean to start with and is looking for ways to burn a drastic amount of calories. These are very concerning points and are the exact reason why people questioned why she is trying to burn so many calories.
I also agree, 1000 calories in 2 hours on a stationary bike is unlikely especially if you aren't increasing tension. It is also very mentally tough to do.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.
I think you mistook concern for judgement. OP is very young, lean to start with and is looking for ways to burn a drastic amount of calories. These are very concerning points and are the exact reason why people questioned why she is trying to burn so many calories.
I also agree, 1000 calories in 2 hours on a stationary bike is unlikely especially if you aren't increasing tension. It is also very mentally tough to do.
She needs to be talking to her doctor, not a bunch of people on a weight-control website. You've had quite a few posts here, so you've been around the block a few times. Do people who ask questions like this actually end up doing it? Probably not. Maybe half a day. I personally don't think judgment has a place here unless someone asks for specific advice. Otherwise, I just give answers, not advice. Most of the people who ask these questions are not serious in their weight loss venture; just looking for a quick way out. When they are given answers which show there is NOT a quick way out, they usually give up. Or at least I never see them again.0 -
A 100 NET calorie burn from walking doesn't happen unless you're over 300 pounds. It's basic math. At the OP's current weight she doesn't burn 100 NET calories running a mile ... again, basic math. Her posts indicate that she wants to lose a lot of weight (as a percentage of her current) in a rapid manner. She is at a point where healthy loss takes patience ... wanting to lose 20 lbs when already at a healthy weight. Patience, realistic goals, and a healthy self image are necessary ... not blindly giving lists of exercise that burn a lot of calories but also require sufficient fueling to an OP with rapid loss as their primary goal.
There was one person in this thread that made judgmental comments, and it wasn't any of us that asked simple clarifying questions.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »PrizePopple wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Why are you looking for exercises that burn 1000 calories?
This.
Why? If that's you in your profile picture, and your ticker is accurate then you don't need to be looking for 1000 calorie burns to lose 19 pounds. I mean if you want to start running a half marathon be my guest, but if you're doing it solely for weight loss, then you're doing it wrong.
You must be really young! Anyone over the age of 30 would know that's a picture from years before I was even born. Besides, I'm not looking for 1,000 calorie burns. I'm very happy with 5-600 a day.
*whispers*
I don't think they were referring to you.
Looking for a 1000 calorie burn in someone so small really begs the question why. It's kind of important.0 -
Just food for thought?
If I exercise aggressively, I get really hungry and risk sabotaging my diet. It makes me ravenously hungry! For all the sabotage foods!
I agree with whoever said find something you like and incorporate into your day.
I walk my dogs, push mow my 1/2 acre yard, garden, a few crunches twice a day, clean floors once a week on hands and knees.. Etc.
a quote I always remind myself of.....
"You can never out excersize a bad diet"
FYI....
I'll say it for others.. Your goal weight is just slightly low..seems like you feel urgency?
Doing anything aggressively and unhealthy leads to muscle loss and a lifetime of slower metabolism because of that muscle loss.
At your weight, and height, 5-6 weeks would be reasonable to get to 118. A much more healthy goal. I'm an RN of 30 yrs. I wish you well, be safe!0 -
I don't leave the gym until i have 1,000 calories burned0
-
jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
^This
0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
^This
This....
You don't need to slave away for two hours on anything to lose weight. Eat in moderation, exercise in moderation.
I burn about 350 calories a day, 5 days a week. It works.0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.
I think you mistook concern for judgement. OP is very young, lean to start with and is looking for ways to burn a drastic amount of calories. These are very concerning points and are the exact reason why people questioned why she is trying to burn so many calories.
I also agree, 1000 calories in 2 hours on a stationary bike is unlikely especially if you aren't increasing tension. It is also very mentally tough to do.
She needs to be talking to her doctor, not a bunch of people on a weight-control website. You've had quite a few posts here, so you've been around the block a few times. Do people who ask questions like this actually end up doing it? Probably not. Maybe half a day. I personally don't think judgment has a place here unless someone asks for specific advice. Otherwise, I just give answers, not advice. Most of the people who ask these questions are not serious in their weight loss venture; just looking for a quick way out. When they are given answers which show there is NOT a quick way out, they usually give up. Or at least I never see them again.
In your effort to avoid all judgment, it appears you have abandoned any discernment.
I'm also fascinated by your conclusions about what people seeking advice do or do not do.0 -
OP said she wants to lose weight as fast as possible, which is always a red flag.
Do it healthily and you won't gain it back after your birthday or whatever event you want to be slimmer for.0 -
To answer the original poster, I used to hit the cross trainer and just up my level and speed until the display read 1000cal/hr and just do it for an hour. I always found cross trainer the best calorie/difficulty ratio but I know some people struggle with it.0
-
I once hit 1000 calorie burn. Once, just this past summer. It was on vacation in Lake Tahoe. Huge hotel buffet breakfast. Then three hours of hiking over rocks and hills. Then an enormous lunch and dinner later that day. It was a very enjoyable day. Exhausting, but lovely. But definitely not something I'd do on a regular basis.
OP, take what others in here have said, to heart. Aiming for a 1000 calorie burn is not necessary. Eat well, exercise well. But anything in excess is going to wear you out and backfire.0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.
I think you mistook concern for judgement. OP is very young, lean to start with and is looking for ways to burn a drastic amount of calories. These are very concerning points and are the exact reason why people questioned why she is trying to burn so many calories.
I also agree, 1000 calories in 2 hours on a stationary bike is unlikely especially if you aren't increasing tension. It is also very mentally tough to do.
She needs to be talking to her doctor, not a bunch of people on a weight-control website. You've had quite a few posts here, so you've been around the block a few times. Do people who ask questions like this actually end up doing it? Probably not. Maybe half a day. I personally don't think judgment has a place here unless someone asks for specific advice. Otherwise, I just give answers, not advice. Most of the people who ask these questions are not serious in their weight loss venture; just looking for a quick way out. When they are given answers which show there is NOT a quick way out, they usually give up. Or at least I never see them again.
In your effort to avoid all judgment, it appears you have abandoned any discernment.
I'm also fascinated by your conclusions about what people seeking advice do or do not do.
Well said.0 -
Alisons_goal wrote: »I am 5'3 I want to be 110. My original goal was 118. If I like it there, I'll stop
Hi, everyone has their own idea of beauty, so if you like that very thin look then that's a good goal, but as a trainer I meet a lot of women who have the same sort if goals and end up much happier weighing in 5 pounds heavier but with added muscle. "More curves in the right places" your weigh classes will get you there and mix in cardio. There has been so many new studies showing that a mix of resistance training and no more then 30 minutes of cardio is the way to best results. Too many people think an hour plus of cardio will get the job done... It won't... As far as your 1000 cal burn... Most machines at the gym are way off. Most workouts that are really pushing you will give 300 to 400. But that's an average. One more thing to think about... Losing more then 2 pounds a week tends to leave you with extra lose skin and is not that safe. Slower is better.0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.
I am the same height as the OP and I weigh 25 pound MORE than she does. I wear a HRM and use a stationary bike 3-4 times a week and have for about 8 months. Going 9-11 MPH, I burn 350-400 calories per hour. OP is smaller than me, likely going to burn a bit less. So in addition to lacking discernment, you aren't giving her real accurate info either. Burning 1000 calories at her size is very hard to do and in all likelihood is only to spur on unhealthy motivations.
0 -
atypicalsmith wrote: »brianpperkins wrote: »Why are you looking for exercises that burn 1000 calories?
Why are you questioning her instead of simply answering? That is, if you have an answer. If not, just go to the next post of interest. It isn't mandatory that you answer a post in a derogatory manner when you don't know how to play nice.
For this poster: if you feel a tingling in your backside, it may in fact be the legs of the bug that is up your *kitten*. Carry on.
0 -
If someone asked how to commit suicide or become a junkie would you also just tell them how and move on?atypicalsmith wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »jofjltncb6 wrote: »atypicalsmith wrote: »A stationary bicycle burns a ton of calories, and you can watch television while you do it. Two hours should easily burn 1,000 calories.
There is nothing "easy" about two hours on a stationary bike.
It's also highly unlikely someone could burn 500/hr on an exercise bike for that long.
In fact, your stationary bike recommendation sounds like some pretty terrible advise...
...and given the later revelations in the thread, any suggestion of how OP could go about this would have been inappropriate.
If only you would have had the courage to ask her why she wanted to before providing your response. Fortunately, someone else here was...even you did call him out for it.
Just as walking ten miles (which burns about 100 calories a mile) is easily done. IF you have the time. My stationary bike is similar to an elliptical; your arms move along with your legs. It works whether you only use your arms or legs, or both together. Except you get to sit instead of stand, which reduces pressure on the knees. It does not, however, do anything else, such as add stress or inclines.
I didn't say it was "easy" being on a stationary bike for two hours; I said that if it was done, it would "easily burn" 1,000 calories. Walking ten miles isn't "easy" either, but it does burn about 1,000 calories depending upon what you weigh.
The OP asked a question, and I and a few other people answered it without judgment.
I think you mistook concern for judgement. OP is very young, lean to start with and is looking for ways to burn a drastic amount of calories. These are very concerning points and are the exact reason why people questioned why she is trying to burn so many calories.
I also agree, 1000 calories in 2 hours on a stationary bike is unlikely especially if you aren't increasing tension. It is also very mentally tough to do.
She needs to be talking to her doctor, not a bunch of people on a weight-control website. You've had quite a few posts here, so you've been around the block a few times. Do people who ask questions like this actually end up doing it? Probably not. Maybe half a day. I personally don't think judgment has a place here unless someone asks for specific advice. Otherwise, I just give answers, not advice. Most of the people who ask these questions are not serious in their weight loss venture; just looking for a quick way out. When they are given answers which show there is NOT a quick way out, they usually give up. Or at least I never see them again.
0 -
I burn about that running 12 miles, actually a little less.
But you can't run that distance and only eat 1200 cals a day.
And, weight isn't everything. I way about 10 pounds more than I did over the summer last year and still fit into the same size. I put on a ton of muscle running and strength training.0 -
So is there a definitive list of what calories are burnt whilst walking? I use endomondo and on a 6.1 mile walk today it says I burnt 1224 calories walking at 2.9 mph in 2.08 hours. The first two miles were flat and uphill, the rest flat and downhill. MFP put it at 811. On a previous post someone said that all estimates are well out and they use a general 100 calories per mile so that is what I have been using the last 6 months.
I'm 40 and I'm at 267 pounds. I generally walk 1.5 miles each day, 3 miles 3 times a week and a 5-7 mile walk on Sundays.
I eat my calories back so am I correct in using 100 calories per mile or should it be more/less?0 -
The whys are reasonable because
1) Lean woman seeks to lose more
a. fast
b. urgent emotion
2) Unrealistic "burn" goal
3) Emotionally charged terminology "pig out" and a desperate need to atone via exercise.
Plus, we've had a rash of very disordered "requests for advice" lately. People are right to ask questions.0 -
For me that would mean 3hrs of intense cardio or cardio/strength intervalls.... At 5'2'' / 124lb and a low heart rate my average burn per hour is between 200-400cal, 400 being a quick and hilly run.0
-
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but Fitness Blender has a few workout videos that could potentially burn around 1000 calories, depending on weight, effort, etc. I haven't tried the 1000 calorie workouts myself, but I have tried others and I found that they are easy to follow along and they have a wide variety of exercises. Here's the website, in case you wanted to check it out:
http://www.fitnessblender.com/0 -
How about if I try to lose 7 pounds by May 17th? Would that be a realistic goal? That is 56 days away/0
-
Alisons_goal wrote: »How about if I try to lose 7 pounds by May 17th? Would that be a realistic goal? That is 56 days away/
You're already at a healthy BMI for your height as it stands, so I'd say losing a max of .5 a pound per week would be appropriate. 56 days is 8 weeks, which means 4 pounds. Rushing weight loss isn't healthy.0 -
Alisons_goal wrote: »Does anyone know any good exercises that burn 1,000 calories?
Running. 200 pound person going 8 miles will burn 1000 calories.
Scale for your own weight....
0 -
I am 5'4 and I maintain a bodyweight of 115-120 (depending on a lot of factors). The only way I could burn 1,000 calories is if I lit myself on fire. 300 cals is a big burn for me. I usually get around 100 cals per 30 mins from the types of activity I do.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