One actual example of strength training calories

Azdak · January 2016

This question comes up a lot and I thought it might be of interest to look at a "real-world" example. There are lots of studies out there that have investigated the calorie burn for various strength exercises and routines, but this one was simple and informative (and it is a diversion from doing actual work, for which I am not greatly motivated this morning).

This study was done in 2010 and I read about it in an article on the Cooper Institute website.
The study actually compared regular sets to supersets, but the independent data is useful. Subjects were (as usual), young adults, avg weight 165. They performed a circuit of exercises, 4 sets of 10 repetitions. One group did one set with 60 sec recovery. The other did pairs of exercises in a superset, with 60 sec recovery. Total workout times were 36 min for regular, 30 for superset.

Here is the relevant passage:

Researchers measured the total calorie burn during the workout, calories burned per minute, and the extra calories burned during 60-minutes of recovery. The total calorie burn during the superset workout was 241 calories while the traditional workout totaled 227 calories. Due to the fewer rest periods during the superset workout, subjects averaged 8.0 calories per minute and the traditional workout averaged 6.3 calories per minute. During the 60 minutes of recovery, the superset workout burned an extra 19 calories compared to the traditional workout which burned 14 calories above baseline resting caloric expenditure.

Keep in mind that in this type of workout, you are moving at a good "pace". In a research study, they would keep the timing precise. Someone doing a heavier routine than 10reps and longer time between sets would burn fewer calories per minute overall.

Also note that the "afterburn" is relatively small--about 7% of the total, and the actual number of calories is negligible. This is not definitive--studies looking at "afterburn" (or EPOC) show varied results--but most studies show that the "afterburn", whether after HIIT or strength training, is in this ballpark.

Links:
Article: http://www.cooperinstitute.org/2010/05/are-you-short-on-time-make-weight-training-count/

Study: Fairchild, T. J., Hackney, K. J., Kelleher, A. R., Keslacy, S., and Ploutz-Snyder, L. L. (2010). The metabolic costs of reciprocal supersets vs. traditional resistance exercise in recreationally active adults. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(4), 1043-1051

jacksonpt · January 2016

Good stuff, thanks.

The cals burned is a bit higher than I expected, but the afterburn isn't surprising. It's not the holy grail magazines and fitness stars would have you believe.

stealthq · January 2016

I'd say based on this, my estimate of 100cals for a 45min heavy lifting session a la Starting Strength or similar isn't too far off for me (I'm a lot lighter than the research subjects), though I may be estimating a bit high.

rileyes · January 2016

Azdak wrote: »

This question comes up a lot and I thought it might be of interest to look at a "real-world" example. There are lots of studies out there that have investigated the calorie burn for various strength exercises and routines, but this one was simple and informative (and it is a diversion from doing actual work, for which I am not greatly motivated this morning).

This study was done in 2010 and I read about it in an article on the Cooper Institute website.
The study actually compared regular sets to supersets, but the independent data is useful. Subjects were (as usual), young adults, avg weight 165. They performed a circuit of exercises, 4 sets of 10 repetitions. One group did one set with 60 sec recovery. The other did pairs of exercises in a superset, with 60 sec recovery. Total workout times were 36 min for regular, 30 for superset.

Here is the relevant passage:

Researchers measured the total calorie burn during the workout, calories burned per minute, and the extra calories burned during 60-minutes of recovery. The total calorie burn during the superset workout was 241 calories while the traditional workout totaled 227 calories. Due to the fewer rest periods during the superset workout, subjects averaged 8.0 calories per minute and the traditional workout averaged 6.3 calories per minute. During the 60 minutes of recovery, the superset workout burned an extra 19 calories compared to the traditional workout which burned 14 calories above baseline resting caloric expenditure.

Keep in mind that in this type of workout, you are moving at a good "pace". In a research study, they would keep the timing precise. Someone doing a heavier routine than 10reps and longer time between sets would burn fewer calories per minute overall.

Also note that the "afterburn" is relatively small--about 7% of the total, and the actual number of calories is negligible. This is not definitive--studies looking at "afterburn" (or EPOC) show varied results--but most studies show that the "afterburn", whether after HIIT or strength training, is in this ballpark.

Links:
Article: http://www.cooperinstitute.org/2010/05/are-you-short-on-time-make-weight-training-count/

Study: Fairchild, T. J., Hackney, K. J., Kelleher, A. R., Keslacy, S., and Ploutz-Snyder, L. L. (2010). The metabolic costs of reciprocal supersets vs. traditional resistance exercise in recreationally active adults. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(4), 1043-1051

Cardio vascular work burns more calories than anaerobic work? I wonder how much fat/muscle is lost.

clairegreen1974 · January 2016

I've often tried to find something that would indicate calorie burn from strength exercises so that I have a better idea when logging exercise/food allowance on MFP, but it's just such an unexact 'science' it must vary so much with the person doing it, their weight, the weights they are lifting, reps and so on, it'd be a bit of a Nightmare to try and include it on here, I guess with cardio it's a little easier? ( gym newbie here!)

One actual example of strength training calories

Replies

Categories