HRM/ Calorie burn HELP please!
dianne_mama_3
Posts: 9
I have been on this site since Jan and have been working steadily since then. I have lost 19 lbs. of my original 20 lb. loss goal, but I can't seem to hit that last pound!!! I walk/jog 3 miles in about 38 minutes about 3 times per week and do some sort of cardio at home about 2 more times in the week, with usually 2 days of no active exercise, but I have a toddler at home, so I'm never completely sedentary.
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time, so I feel like I'm working hard. My HRM says I burn about 800 calories, but it seems too high, so I usually only record 450-500 of the calorie burn. I have my daily calorie goal at 1200, and replace what I exercise. I started zigzagging calories a couple weeks ago, thinking that might help. I eat way healthier than I ever used to, but I know I could do better.
Anyway, I need some advice from those with more exercise knowledge or experience. Does my HRM sound right or do you think it's running too high? Should I eat ALL that it says I burn, am I not eating enough? Or maybe too much? It just doesn't seem right. Or does it just take longer to lose when you are close to your goal?
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time, so I feel like I'm working hard. My HRM says I burn about 800 calories, but it seems too high, so I usually only record 450-500 of the calorie burn. I have my daily calorie goal at 1200, and replace what I exercise. I started zigzagging calories a couple weeks ago, thinking that might help. I eat way healthier than I ever used to, but I know I could do better.
Anyway, I need some advice from those with more exercise knowledge or experience. Does my HRM sound right or do you think it's running too high? Should I eat ALL that it says I burn, am I not eating enough? Or maybe too much? It just doesn't seem right. Or does it just take longer to lose when you are close to your goal?
0
Replies
-
Sounds like to me that you need to tweak your HRM. Do you have a local gym to go to? Most Physical Trainers know how to set them properly.0
-
It does take longer when you are closer to your goal and you really should aim for about a 500 calorie deficit to get there rather than a higher one. As far as HRM accuracy, it varies from brand to brand and HOW they are calculating the burn. Looking up the review data for accuracy could help for that particular brand. But the bigger thing is to make sure your body is being fueled properly. It may be that your HRM is more accurate than you are giving it credit for and therefore are not fueling your body properly, so it is holding on to that last pound to make sure it is happy.0
-
I have been on this site since Jan and have been working steadily since then. I have lost 19 lbs. of my original 20 lb. loss goal, but I can't seem to hit that last pound!!! I walk/jog 3 miles in about 38 minutes about 3 times per week and do some sort of cardio at home about 2 more times in the week, with usually 2 days of no active exercise, but I have a toddler at home, so I'm never completely sedentary.
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time, so I feel like I'm working hard. My HRM says I burn about 800 calories, but it seems too high, so I usually only record 450-500 of the calorie burn. I have my daily calorie goal at 1200, and replace what I exercise. I started zigzagging calories a couple weeks ago, thinking that might help. I eat way healthier than I ever used to, but I know I could do better.
Anyway, I need some advice from those with more exercise knowledge or experience. Does my HRM sound right or do you think it's running too high? Should I eat ALL that it says I burn, am I not eating enough? Or maybe too much? It just doesn't seem right. Or does it just take longer to lose when you are close to your goal?
The HRM is probably right, but you have to back out your maintenance calories as the HRM tells you total calories burned but MFP already accounts for your maintenance amount. So you would have to back out 1.2-1.5 calories for every minute you workout. May not sound like a lot but in 90 minutes of working out you would have to back out around 135 (90*1.5) from the total0 -
BTW... when I put in walking that speed for that length of time, the manual calorie burn states 313... maybe I'm over-eating my calories!0
-
We can't tell if your HRM sounds right unless you tell us what exercises you are doing and for how long. Also, What type of HRM is it? 800 cals could be a reasonable number depending on what you are doing.0
-
I dont think that you are eating enough. At 1200 calories and your activity level, your body is getting to a point where it is holding onto fat in fear of starvation. It will eat through your muscles and hold fat stores for energy. Add 400-700 calories onto your diet. Thats step 1. (I'm assuming that you have a clean, healthy 1200 calorie diet currently!)
Step two is adding resistance training. If you can get to a gym, that would be best, if not, pick up some free weight dumbells to use at home, and maybe a resistance band. Find a 2-3 day beginner weight training program and through yourself into it. Resistance training builds muscle, muscles are calorie burning furnaces that really ramp up your metabolism, which is what we want!
I know this is advice is pretty radical compared to what you have been doing, but you have given yourself a great start. Take the leap into resistance training and you will push yourself into a whole new world. It will make all the difference.0 -
We can't tell if your HRM sounds right unless you tell us what exercises you are doing and for how long. Also, What type of HRM is it? 800 cals could be a reasonable number depending on what you are doing.
When I reach the 800 cals burn, I walk/jog 3 miles in about 38 minutes.0 -
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time
I'd try setting my HR monitor to beep at 180-minus by age, and not go over that number.
Below is a link to an article about burning Fat as fuel.
You can also google
Low Heart Rate training
Phil Maffetone -The Big Book of Endurance Training
Stu Mittleman -- Slow Burn
Link ---->
http://www.markallenonline.com/maoArticles.aspx?AID=20 -
The HRM is probably right, but you have to back out your maintenance calories as the HRM tells you total calories burned but MFP already accounts for your maintenance amount. So you would have to back out 1.2-1.5 calories for every minute you workout. May not sound like a lot but in 90 minutes of working out you would have to back out around 135 (90*1.5) from the total
Great point! Thanks!!0 -
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time
I'd try setting my HR monitor to beep at 180-minus by age, and not go over that number.
Below is a link to an article about burning Fat as fuel.
You can also google
Low Heart Rate training
Phil Maffetone -The Big Book of Endurance Training
Stu Mittleman -- Slow Burn
Link ---->
http://www.markallenonline.com/maoArticles.aspx?AID=2
I would disagree with this. The fat burning mode is a crock of S%&t. You may burn a higher % of calories from fat, but you will burn so many less calories that in total you will burn less calories from fat (although the % is higher) The harder you workout the more calories you burn and the better shape you get in.0 -
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time
I'd try setting my HR monitor to beep at 180-minus by age, and not go over that number.
Below is a link to an article about burning Fat as fuel.
You can also google
Low Heart Rate training
Phil Maffetone -The Big Book of Endurance Training
Stu Mittleman -- Slow Burn
Link ---->
http://www.markallenonline.com/maoArticles.aspx?AID=2
I would disagree with this. The fat burning mode is a crock of S%&t. You may burn a higher % of calories from fat, but you will burn so many less calories that in total you will burn less calories from fat (although the % is higher) The harder you workout the more calories you burn and the better shape you get in.
I guess it depends on what the definitoion of better shape is. To me, it is lower body fat percentage, which would mean low intensity would be better. If you are only concerned about being lighter, then go for total calories. Coming from the bodybuilding/weight training world, that seems crazy to me, but I know that not everyone has the same goals that I do.
Think about what your real goal is. Is it getting the scale to say what you want, or fitting in your old favorite jeans? For me, I could care less about the scale and more about the mirror.0 -
800 seems way too high to me. Does your HRM have a chest strap or is it just a wrist unit? Have you set it up with your age, weight, etc?0
-
Wait, your HRM is saying you are burning 800 calories doing 38min of walking/jogging? I don't think that's right, not by a long shot!! Have you updated your HRM sinc eyou started using it (since you lost weight?)?
I will say the last few pounds are a killer. Is it absolutely necessary for you to los ethat last pound? I'm 5-8lb from my goal, have been since I started here back in March. While it's frustrating to not see the scale move, I know that I'm eating better than before and my exercise is on point. I'm hoping the scale will reward me at some point, but fo rnow, knowing I'm being healthy, and my clothes are fitting better is enough for me!0 -
DId YOU put your calorie goal at 1200 or did mfp? That sounds low. If you did, let MFP calculate it. IAlso do you put things in like "carring a 15 pound load/baby" in an those calories? Because that is a joke. New moms likely rack up a couple dozen biceps curls each day by scooping up junior and a prolonged arm muscle contraction by cradling him—but cardio exercise it’s not. You shouldn't be replacing those calories if you are. Your body gets used to doing it that itts not effective.
800 doesn't sounds high to me actually. If you are walkin quickly, pushing a stroller and doing hills, I can burn that in like an hour but I go up hill both ways.0 -
When I'm walking/jogging, I'm pushing my target heart rate within the 90% almost the entire time
I'd try setting my HR monitor to beep at 180-minus by age, and not go over that number.
Below is a link to an article about burning Fat as fuel.
You can also google
Low Heart Rate training
Phil Maffetone -The Big Book of Endurance Training
Stu Mittleman -- Slow Burn
Link ---->
http://www.markallenonline.com/maoArticles.aspx?AID=2
I would disagree with this. The fat burning mode is a crock of S%&t. You may burn a higher % of calories from fat, but you will burn so many less calories that in total you will burn less calories from fat (although the % is higher) The harder you workout the more calories you burn and the better shape you get in.
I guess it depends on what the definitoion of better shape is. To me, it is lower body fat percentage, which would mean low intensity would be better. If you are only concerned about being lighter, then go for total calories. Coming from the bodybuilding/weight training world, that seems crazy to me, but I know that not everyone has the same goals that I do.
Think about what your real goal is. Is it getting the scale to say what you want, or fitting in your old favorite jeans? For me, I could care less about the scale and more about the mirror.
You will lose more fat, in total, at higher intensity and improve athletic performance and energy levels (which will give you a lower BF%, probably lower than low intensity cardio as you will reach your goal quicker). You would have to workout almost twice as long per session at lower intensity to burn as many calories, and you athletic performance would not increase by as much even if you did twice as much low intensity. If you want to be able to run a 5k, Keep up with your kids, improve your strength and endurance then you need to exercise at the higher intensity more often than you would at the lower intensity.
Most body builders do very little caridio and when the do a lot do HIIT training as they will lose less muscle mass with this type of training.0 -
If you want to be able to run a 5k, Keep up with your kids, improve your strength and endurance then you need to exercise at the higher intensity more often than you would at the lower intensity.
Most body builders do very little caridio and when the do a lot do HIIT training as they will lose less muscle mass with this type of training.
I agree with the part that I quoted for sure. Thats the only reason I do HIIT myself still. However, the rest of what you typed I disagree with, as I have never seen any sort of proof that HIIT leads to lower BF% (in fact quite the opposite). Although my point of view of LIT is when it is used directly following weight lifting, and your body is already in a calorie blasting state.
Like I said before. Its all about goals. If you want to increase your cardiovascular endurance (athletic performance) and burn more calories, do HIIT (I do this myself a few days per week). If you want to lower your bodyfat percentage while maintaining your muscle mass and LOOKING slimmer, do LIT after a workout.0 -
You should check out the HowStuffWorks.com article on "How Exercise Works"You will lose more fat, in total, at higher intensity and improve athletic performance and energy levels (which will give you a lower BF%, probably lower than low intensity cardio as you will reach your goal quicker). You would have to workout almost twice as long per session at lower intensity to burn as many calories, and you athletic performance would not increase by as much even if you did twice as much low intensity. If you want to be able to run a 5k, Keep up with your kids, improve your strength and endurance then you need to exercise at the higher intensity more often than you would at the lower intensity.
Most body builders do very little caridio and when the do a lot do HIIT training as they will lose less muscle mass with this type of training.
http://health.howstuffworks.com/wellness/diet-fitness/exercise/sports-physiology.htm
The reason that the 80% of MaxHR is usually recommended is because of the the way your body can use different kinds of fuels. Fat must be converted into glycogens in order to be actually used as fuel, and cells can only convert this at certain rate. When your energy need goes beyond this ability, you will need sugars in the blood from a recent meal to make up the difference, or muscle protein will be cannibalized for the purpose.
HIT does not lose much muscle mass because it falls in a short timeframe, so the body's glycogen stores can easily make up the difference.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions