Why does Strength Exercise not show estimated calories burnt like cardio one?

If you want to log calories burned, log this under strenght training or calisthenics in cardio section.

Just work out, your muscles will thank you. Calorie burnt doing these are minimal...

bothered me too, my strength training involves a lot of circuits, and I stay active even in recovery. I know I'm burning calories but I was never able to log them properly. After a few months of losing weight I thought..."who cares". Calories burned are definitely still quite minimal and I treat them as bonus burns. I stopped logging any cardio work for the same reason to be honest. I wasn't interested in eating them back and didn't trust the estimated burns anyway.
I was able to find a strength training entry in the cardio section if you are interested in keeping track, or you can just enter it manually.

I was also a bit annoyed by this, if you sync mfp with map my run you can enter weight, reps & time of strength training and it will give you the calories burned & it will then show up on mfp. I burn around 300 calories doing 30 mins lifting 25kg (doing cosgrove complex)

mshanepace wrote: »

Okay, I've been sitting back and reading but I thought I'd voice this really quickly. I barely do "cardio" as most would call it. I lift weights AT LEAST three days a week, I am for 5 days though. On the calorie listing, which I get from my Microsoft Band, I get around 1300 calories burned in a period of around 75 minutes. I thinking that ISN'T a little amount of calories, and challenge anyone to do "cardio" for the same timeline and even match the caloric burn. That being said, it's hard to know what the caloric count is without an external tracker... A thought.

I have cardio workouts that are GPS tracked and show a greater calorie burn per hour, some in excess of 1200 calories per hour. But I've also accepted that the fitness tracker is flawed, and would suggest that unless you are very, very large and strong and completely monster it in the weight room you're falling prey to the same inconsistencies that the fitness trackers often expose.

Based on any reputable study I've seen, cardio will always burn calories at a greater rate than lifting will. The only place lifting even came close was stuff that was essentially using weights to create a cardio type workout. But on the flip side, I personally think any hard cardio is using more muscle than most people would give it credit for.

I can use two different fitness trackers and do the exact same workout and show differing calorie burns. I did it with biking apps and quit using the one for that very reason.

dlm7507 wrote: »

I've decided to put a minimal calorie burn for strength exercise (all exercise actually) and let it be a bonus to my reduced caloric input. Eating at a deficit causes you to loose both fat and lean mass (muscle and internal organs) so strength training isn't really about fat loss, it's about muscle preservation to reduce the damage to your body of dieting. Just consider strength training to be a gift to yourself and not worry about how much more you can eat because you did it.

MyFitnessPal provides a very useful model to help us in our quest for the scale weight we want, but it's just a model. Results are the true feedback.

That's exactly how I see it. All I'm out for is to hold on to what muscle I have.

mshanepace wrote: »

Okay, I've been sitting back and reading but I thought I'd voice this really quickly. I barely do "cardio" as most would call it. I lift weights AT LEAST three days a week, I am for 5 days though. On the calorie listing, which I get from my Microsoft Band, I get around 1300 calories burned in a period of around 75 minutes. I thinking that ISN'T a little amount of calories, and challenge anyone to do "cardio" for the same timeline and even match the caloric burn. That being said, it's hard to know what the caloric count is without an external tracker... A thought.

These kind of monitors are not accurate for weight lifting.