Why do the more you do an exercise, the less calories it burns
Options
Replies
-
BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »I greatly appreciate all the feedback that you guys have given. I did not mention my calorie in-take above, but I try to only consume 1,200 to 1,300 calories a day. I do track my food in-take by using MFP, and I track my fitness by using my Apple watch and MFP. MFP has my calory in-take of 1,430 in order for me to get down to my goal weight. Sometimes I am full from just 1,200 calories a day, so I don't eat more than that. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry, so I don't go by the MFP calory in-take that much.
Hey Bianca! You're really on track to succeed here! Just a quick thing, though. How are you counting your calories? Are you using measuring cups or actual weights? I know that it seems like a tedious extra step, but I think you might be surprised about the huge discrepancy between weights and volume measurements (like cups). Amazon has a number of highly rated talking scale, and even one that pairs with Alexa, if you have one.2 -
How much weight have you lost?
A 200 lb woman doing an exercise is going to burn more calories than a 140 lb same height woman doing the same exercise and same intensity.BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »I greatly appreciate all the feedback that you guys have given. I did not mention my calorie in-take above, but I try to only consume 1,200 to 1,300 calories a day. I do track my food in-take by using MFP, and I track my fitness by using my Apple watch and MFP. MFP has my calory in-take of 1,430 in order for me to get down to my goal weight. Sometimes I am full from just 1,200 calories a day, so I don't eat more than that. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry, so I don't go by the MFP calory in-take that much.
Is that your net calories or your total calories eaten?
If you're only eating a total of 1200 calories with all that exercise, you may be risking serious health problems.
Are you eating back most of your exercise calories earned?1 -
How are you measuring that reduction in calories burned? While it’s true that we get more efficient as we practice exercise (and thus burn fewer calories), and that smaller bodies require fewer calories to move, those changes happen really slowly. That’s not a change that should be impacting your day-to-day burns or intake, unless you’re talking about a difference over a long period of time or after a significant reduction in weight.2
-
You don’t fewer calories as you become more fit or more “efficient”. Your fitness tracker or HRM becomes more inaccurate. Efficiency does occur, but it has only a modest effect and is irrelevant for most people.
Your heart rate and perceived exertion become less at the same workload, but that does not affect calories burned. Calorie burn is determined by the workload, not the effort per se.
And whatever small effect that efficiency does have is easily offset by........just working harder—which you should be able to do because.....you have become more efficient. There is no law, state or federal, that prevents someone from exercising at a higher workload as their fitness level improves.
6 -
Weight loss is definitely determined in the kitchen. May need to examine the type of food being eaten, and how it's prepared. The best thing that helped me with weight loss was to have a weekly meal and exercise plan and tracking them consistently and family participation.0
-
Here is some reasons that your scale didn't move.
1. If you started to exercise more just recently, it could be just your body retained more fluid and you'll see a drop when your body is used to the new intensity of excercise.
2. You could gained more muscle weight and balanced out the fat loss, have your checked your waist or arm, did your cloth fit better?
3. How accurate is your logging? Try weight your food if you want more accurate data. If you really is consuming 1200 to 1300 a day and didn't eat back any excercise calorie, your should see a very fast weight drop because you have a huge deficit
1 -
Something just doesn't add up for me. Eating only 1,200 calories while excercising 6 days a week and walking a lot? How are you not passing out or dizzy at the gym?
How long have you done this and what is your age, height, and weight?3 -
You don’t fewer calories as you become more fit or more “efficient”. Your fitness tracker or HRM becomes more inaccurate. Efficiency does occur, but it has only a modest effect and is irrelevant for most people.
Your heart rate and perceived exertion become less at the same workload, but that does not affect calories burned. Calorie burn is determined by the workload, not the effort per se.
And whatever small effect that efficiency does have is easily offset by........just working harder—which you should be able to do because.....you have become more efficient. There is no law, state or federal, that prevents someone from exercising at a higher workload as their fitness level improves.
This whole post, 100% endorsed. I agree with the theory (and @Azdak is way more experienced and knowledgeable than I, regardless
).
And I've seen it in practice.
My rowing machine knows what my work is: The same meters, at the same power, in the same time period = the same work, and the same actual calories required.
My heart rate monitor is not so bright. When I get fitter or stronger, my heart labors less to do the same work, so my HRM thinks I've burned fewer calories doing that same work It's wrong. 3 -
I didn't read all of the responses, so forgive any redundancy. Don't think about the actual calorie output, but rather, about how your body feels. Basically, you are burning fewer calories because your body is using less energy to perform the activity.
Think about how you felt after your first workout and how you feel after a workout today. Maybe you sweat less and you're breathing easier. Maybe you don't have as much post workout tension. Maybe you're finding that activities that used to be difficult are super easy today. For example, you say you practice yoga once a week. Perhaps you struggled to get into Vakrasana (half spinal twist) in the beginning, but now, you use Ardha Matsyendrasana (more complex version of Vakrasana) as one of your go-to resting post workout stretches (when you're checking your phone or talking to a workout buddy). So, even if the numbers don't seem encouraging, you're definitely making progress.
If you're really worried about the numbers, try mixing it up. Switch your cardio workout around. If you're using machines, increase the level of difficulty. If you're taking aerobics classes, switch to a danced based class (like Hip-Hop or Zumba). In your yoga practice, try some of the advanced modifications for the asanas (only after you've perfected your form - you don't want to hurt yourself).
Remember, your journey is not about weight and measurements, it's about achieving/maintaining optimal health.
7 -
Beyond a couple of very accurate posts about it not actually being the fact you burn less the more you do a workout - I'll throw in an idea.
With the amount of workouts you are doing, and if accurate with the amount of calories you are eating - I'll bet the reason it appears you burn less is because your workouts have really started sucking and becoming mediocre.
As others mentioned it appears the sole reason for your workouts is weight loss, rather than the body transformation it should be.
But since you seem to be doing everything to make recovery from workouts suck, it naturally follows the workouts themselves will start being not what they could be, nor what they used to be.
Meaning less calorie burn.
I'll bet your body has also adapted max it can for rest of your day, and despite step/distance goals, probably less active than you think.
While in that state of poor workouts, it doesn't feel like it generally - still feels like giving it your all, still feels hard, still feel tired, ect.
But until you compare it with how it feels not in that state - you'd never realize it.
Considering cardio and lifting has efficiency in form improvements when starting out, that should make it feel easier doing the same intensity/weight, to make it feel the same with proper recovery intensity/weight should be improving. and that initial improvement doesn't even require the body improving and getting stronger yet.
Is your cardio measurable for performance - getting better/faster, ect?
Is the weight in lifting going up from the form and strength improvements?4 -
OP hasn't been back to Community since this post on Jan 5 US time:BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »I greatly appreciate all the feedback that you guys have given. I did not mention my calorie in-take above, but I try to only consume 1,200 to 1,300 calories a day. I do track my food in-take by using MFP, and I track my fitness by using my Apple watch and MFP. MFP has my calory in-take of 1,430 in order for me to get down to my goal weight. Sometimes I am full from just 1,200 calories a day, so I don't eat more than that. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry, so I don't go by the MFP calory in-take that much.
Again, I'm voicing my concerns if she ever comes back that she might be grossly undereating.
If she's exercising like crazy and not losing and only eating 1200 calories, it could be adaptive thermogenesis here.4 -
Are you perhaps burning fewer calories because you weigh less?
I need to walk 20 minutes now to burn the calories I used to in 10, but that’s because I’m moving a lot less weight!1 -
skinnyjingbb wrote: »Here is some reasons that your scale didn't move.
1. If you started to exercise more just recently, it could be just your body retained more fluid and you'll see a drop when your body is used to the new intensity of excercise.
2. You could gained more muscle weight and balanced out the fat loss, have your checked your waist or arm, did your cloth fit better?
3. How accurate is your logging? Try weight your food if you want more accurate data. If you really is consuming 1200 to 1300 a day and didn't eat back any excercise calorie, your should see a very fast weight drop because you have a huge deficit
1. Is accurate.
2. Is not. No one can gain muscle on a one to one basis with fat loss. You can lose 5 lbs of fat in a few weeks. To gain that amount of muscle would take months.
3. I think this is the real issue. Lack of accurate logging and exercise burns. Underestimating one and overestimating the other. There is the possibility that, if the cals are correct, cortisol is causing water weight that is masking fat loss. But my guess is lack of accuracy in food and exercise logging.3 -
BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »I greatly appreciate all the feedback that you guys have given. I did not mention my calorie in-take above, but I try to only consume 1,200 to 1,300 calories a day. I do track my food in-take by using MFP, and I track my fitness by using my Apple watch and MFP. MFP has my calory in-take of 1,430 in order for me to get down to my goal weight. Sometimes I am full from just 1,200 calories a day, so I don't eat more than that. I don't want to eat when I'm not hungry, so I don't go by the MFP calory in-take that much.
Hey Bianca! You're really on track to succeed here! Just a quick thing, though. How are you counting your calories? Are you using measuring cups or actual weights? I know that it seems like a tedious extra step, but I think you might be surprised about the huge discrepancy between weights and volume measurements (like cups). Amazon has a number of highly rated talking scale, and even one that pairs with Alexa, if you have one.
Oh wow! I had no idea that there were measuring cups and scales accessible with Aleixa. How do I search for these items? I do use a combination of both scales and measuring cups to measure my foods.0 -
Live_life_well wrote: »Something just doesn't add up for me. Eating only 1,200 calories while excercising 6 days a week and walking a lot? How are you not passing out or dizzy at the gym?
How long have you done this and what is your age, height, and weight?
I just started this routine about a month ago. I am 28, five feet 2 inches, and currently I weigh 181.0 -
So you'll be making progress no matter how badly things are done with only a month in.
Not the best progress possible if done right, but some that could make it feel like it's being done right.
But you'll plateau quicker and get less improvements then you could.0 -
Ok guys. I think I know what the problem is. I am depending too heavily on my apple watch to track my heart rate and calories burned. When I do certain exercises, my watch says I burn fewer calories than MFP says I burn doing the same exercise for the same amount of time. For instance, I walk on my treadmill for 30 minutes and my heart rate monitor says I only burned 125 calories, but I walked for 1.66 miles in 30 minutes. Also, it says that my heart rate was 120 BPM. When I am done working out, I am usually covered in sweat and breathing hard, so I know I am exerting energy while I walk. My pace is usually as brisk as I can make it. I have to hold on to the bars to keep myself steady since I am blind, so I probably am not walking as fast as I probably could if I had my hands free. I think I am going to just stick to what MFP says my calorie burn is and use the watch as a secondary tracker. I just felt disappointed when I saw the amount of calories that I was burning was much fewer than it had been only a week ago. I have never used a wearable until now, so it is still taking some getting used to. Usually I would just go by what MFP says, and I would lose the weight. I guess having two ways of tracking my fitness is causing my confusion.0
-
BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »Ok guys. I think I know what the problem is. I am depending too heavily on my apple watch to track my heart rate and calories burned. When I do certain exercises, my watch says I burn fewer calories than MFP says I burn doing the same exercise for the same amount of time. For instance, I walk on my treadmill for 30 minutes and my heart rate monitor says I only burned 125 calories, but I walked for 1.66 miles in 30 minutes. Also, it says that my heart rate was 120 BPM. When I am done working out, I am usually covered in sweat and breathing hard, so I know I am exerting energy while I walk. My pace is usually as brisk as I can make it. I have to hold on to the bars to keep myself steady since I am blind, so I probably am not walking as fast as I probably could if I had my hands free. I think I am going to just stick to what MFP says my calorie burn is and use the watch as a secondary tracker. I just felt disappointed when I saw the amount of calories that I was burning was much fewer than it had been only a week ago. I have never used a wearable until now, so it is still taking some getting used to. Usually I would just go by what MFP says, and I would lose the weight. I guess having two ways of tracking my fitness is causing my confusion.
I don't think you focusing you exercise calories is the problem at all. If you aren't eating those calories back it doesn't matter. You are eating less than what MFP gives you as calories so you should be losing weight. If you aren't you are eating more than you think you are.
1 -
If you've gone from no working out to doing nearly 2 hours a day in the gym, your body is also going through a huge adjustment period. Your muscles are needing to repair themselves (this is a good thing), so they will be retaining water (which will affect the scale by a LOT sometimes). I'd also recommend getting measurements done weekly as that can be a better indicator of weight loss.
Going to the gym has tons of benefits outside of weight. Not only does it help with so many "diseases" your body also heals faster and better, is better able to fight off sickness and other issues, etc, etc. The list goes on and on. Keep up your workouts regardless of the scale
0 -
BlaqueDiamond1989 wrote: »Ok guys. I think I know what the problem is. I am depending too heavily on my apple watch to track my heart rate and calories burned. When I do certain exercises, my watch says I burn fewer calories than MFP says I burn doing the same exercise for the same amount of time. For instance, I walk on my treadmill for 30 minutes and my heart rate monitor says I only burned 125 calories, but I walked for 1.66 miles in 30 minutes. Also, it says that my heart rate was 120 BPM. When I am done working out, I am usually covered in sweat and breathing hard, so I know I am exerting energy while I walk. My pace is usually as brisk as I can make it. I have to hold on to the bars to keep myself steady since I am blind, so I probably am not walking as fast as I probably could if I had my hands free. I think I am going to just stick to what MFP says my calorie burn is and use the watch as a secondary tracker. I just felt disappointed when I saw the amount of calories that I was burning was much fewer than it had been only a week ago. I have never used a wearable until now, so it is still taking some getting used to. Usually I would just go by what MFP says, and I would lose the weight. I guess having two ways of tracking my fitness is causing my confusion.
Using an online calulator, at 180 lbs and walking at a 3.0 MPH pace you would burn around 5 calories per minute. That come out to about 150 calories in 30 minutes. If you walk faster, you burn more. Your pace is slightly faster. So, maybe 175 calories?
Heart rate is only loosely correlated with calorie burns and sweat and being out of breath have no relationship. They only tell you that you are not in strong condition yet. No surprise after the short time you've been at it.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions