The "Burn 100 Calories Quick" Claim

slp51
slp51 Posts: 201 Member
edited November 18 in Fitness and Exercise
I've seen this all over Pinterest: Burn 100 calories quickly by doing the following

40 jumping jacks
30 crunches
20 squats
10 pushups

My question is how accurate is this claim? Don't factors like age, current weight, form, speed, etc. play a role in how quickly calories are burned? I'm really curious about this...

Replies

  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    That looks like it would take 2-3 minutes. No way it burns 100 calories.
  • tinklemar
    tinklemar Posts: 71 Member
    That might burn about 30 calories, but definitely not 100, at least for me!
  • zoeysasha37
    zoeysasha37 Posts: 7,088 Member
    Yeah for me that would not even come close to burning 100.
  • DaveAkeman
    DaveAkeman Posts: 296 Member
    ROUGHLY speaking, running can burn up to about 15 calories per minute. (Maybe more if you're a 300 pound sprinter. I'm talking ROUGH numbers here) At 15 calories per minute, it would take almost 7 minutes to burn 100 calories.

    So . . . does this regime equal the same amount of work as running for 7 minutes? (Answer: If you want to burn 100 calories fast, I would start by lacing up the running shoes . . .)
  • DaveAkeman
    DaveAkeman Posts: 296 Member
    Here's another rule of thumb: If it's "all over Pinterest", then it's pretty much guaranteed to be false!!!
  • Jruzer
    Jruzer Posts: 3,501 Member
    I get about 100 calories by going down to the treadmill, cranking it up to 15% incline, and trudging at 3-3.5 MPH for 10 minutes or so. There's no way this is that intense.
  • fr3smyl
    fr3smyl Posts: 1,418 Member
    Maybe they're using a different time measuring system. Maybe 4=1 or something like that.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    no way...
  • DaveAkeman
    DaveAkeman Posts: 296 Member
    fr3smyl wrote: »
    Maybe they're using a different time measuring system. Maybe 4=1 or something like that.

    :smiley:
  • disasterman
    disasterman Posts: 746 Member
    edited May 2015
    Yes, factors like age, current weight, form, speed, etc. all determine how many calories an individual will burn during a particular activity. I agree with everyone else that 100 calories for these seems unlikely for what would be maybe 3 or 4 minutes of work.

    I do similar workouts that last an hour using mostly body weight but some kettlebells and dumbells with cardio interspersed - these are all out, butt-kicking, sweat drench fests with very little rest and I usually log about 500 calories based on the times I've worn a heart rate monitor.
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Only in my dreams would that burn 100 calories.

    Just for kicks, I went ahead and did it with my Fitbit Surge tracking it.
    Time: 2 mins 16 seconds
    Calories burned: 9
    AVG HR: 100bpm
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    shadow2soul wrote: »
    Only in my dreams would that burn 100 calories.

    Just for kicks, I went ahead and did it with my Fitbit Surge tracking it.
    Time: 2 mins 16 seconds
    Calories burned: 9
    AVG HR: 100bpm

    :laugh:

    That actually seems a bit low. I believe I read somewhere that jacks burn one calorie for every two jacks. Made up? ;)

  • Michael190lbs
    Michael190lbs Posts: 1,510 Member
    Oh they forgot to mention they were on crystal meth and inbetween the individual exercises painted a room mowed three lawns you get the picture
  • slp51
    slp51 Posts: 201 Member
    Michael190lbs wrote: »
    Oh they forgot to mention they were on crystal meth and inbetween the individual exercises painted a room mowed three lawns you get the picture

    LOL!!! Best reply of the night.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories