How many calories to log.

mcafton
mcafton Posts: 190 Member
edited November 19 in Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
I've been lifting weights and am starting to watch my calories to also lose weight. I'm doing moderate amounts of weight with short breaks in between sets. mostly dumbell and kettle bell work. deadlines, squats, swings, farmers carry high lift, bench, shoulder press, curls etc. I get fairly winded and try to keep a good pace. Weight training for 40 minutes is around 210 calories burned. does that seem accurate? Seems like they give you more burned calories for mowing the lawn for that amount of time.

Replies

  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Weight training simply isn't a big calorie burner despite it feeling hard.

    Just log the entire duration of your workout under the Cardio section of your diary as "strength training". It's as good an estimate as any for something that can't be measured.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,427 MFP Moderator
    mcafton wrote: »
    I've been lifting weights and am starting to watch my calories to also lose weight. I'm doing moderate amounts of weight with short breaks in between sets. mostly dumbell and kettle bell work. deadlines, squats, swings, farmers carry high lift, bench, shoulder press, curls etc. I get fairly winded and try to keep a good pace. Weight training for 40 minutes is around 210 calories burned. does that seem accurate? Seems like they give you more burned calories for mowing the lawn for that amount of time.

    May not be too inaccurate, but I generally consider 150 to 250 would be a good estimate for an hour. You can always log it for a month and if you notice your weight loss is slower than you like, just dont log calories from weight training.
  • bethany_rose8
    bethany_rose8 Posts: 102 Member
    Just trust he estimate, if sometimes it's an overestimation and sometimes it's an underestimation it will all balance out in the end, don't overthink✌
  • distinctlybeautiful
    distinctlybeautiful Posts: 1,041 Member
    I always log half the amount of time I'm in the gym, so if I'm there for an hour, I log 30 minutes. I figure that accounts for my rest times, more or less.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    distinctlybeautiful wrote: »
    I always log half the amount of time I'm in the gym, so if I'm there for an hour, I log 30 minutes. I figure that accounts for my rest times, more or less.

    @distinctlybeautiful

    The estimate already assumes "standard" rest times between sets - you are making the rough estimate less accurate not more accurate.
  • distinctlybeautiful
    distinctlybeautiful Posts: 1,041 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    distinctlybeautiful wrote: »
    I always log half the amount of time I'm in the gym, so if I'm there for an hour, I log 30 minutes. I figure that accounts for my rest times, more or less.

    @distinctlybeautiful

    The estimate already assumes "standard" rest times between sets - you are making the rough estimate less accurate not more accurate.

    Holy moly! How did you know that?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    distinctlybeautiful wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    distinctlybeautiful wrote: »
    I always log half the amount of time I'm in the gym, so if I'm there for an hour, I log 30 minutes. I figure that accounts for my rest times, more or less.

    @distinctlybeautiful

    The estimate already assumes "standard" rest times between sets - you are making the rough estimate less accurate not more accurate.

    Holy moly! How did you know that?
    Haven't got the link to the study to hand sadly - it's not quite as random as people assume and is based on METS.
    The biggest variable is total weight shifted of course.
    Personally I've always just taken the number at face value - it's not that big a number to be particularly significant and consistency evens things out over time.
  • distinctlybeautiful
    distinctlybeautiful Posts: 1,041 Member
    Interesting.
  • pbryd
    pbryd Posts: 364 Member
    I've never logged my exercise. Just counting calories. If I don't lose weight on 2200, I drop it down to 2100, etc etc.

    Maybe if I was trying to get down to single figures bf%, but just for general being healthy, looking good, why make it more complicated?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    pbryd wrote: »
    I've never logged my exercise. Just counting calories. If I don't lose weight on 2200, I drop it down to 2100, etc etc.

    Maybe if I was trying to get down to single figures bf%, but just for general being healthy, looking good, why make it more complicated?

    Because some people have irregular exercise schedules, prefer to eat more on an exercise day or in some cases actually need to fuel their workouts (long duration cardio for example).

    Your method (TDEE method) is fine too - you are just eating an average amount of exercise calories whether they are labelled as such or not.
  • FiverLagomorph
    FiverLagomorph Posts: 15 Member
    This is a good guide to calories for different activities, "the compendium of physical activities".
    https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/
  • VintageFeline
    VintageFeline Posts: 6,771 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    pbryd wrote: »
    I've never logged my exercise. Just counting calories. If I don't lose weight on 2200, I drop it down to 2100, etc etc.

    Maybe if I was trying to get down to single figures bf%, but just for general being healthy, looking good, why make it more complicated?

    Because some people have irregular exercise schedules, prefer to eat more on an exercise day or in some cases actually need to fuel their workouts (long duration cardio for example).

    Your method (TDEE method) is fine too - you are just eating an average amount of exercise calories whether they are labelled as such or not.

    Yeah this. Various factors make my workout schedule irregular. Just easier to use NEAT.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories