Burning calories lifting weights
Replies
-
manolocort wrote: »Hey guys, I am lifting weights several times a day and my goal is to get a lean cut, but I can’t figure out how many calories I am burning. Any suggestions in how to keep track with this? It will really help me!
Is anyone going to pick up on the fact the OP said they are lifting several times a day?
OP - why are you lifting so often? You need to give your muscles time for recovery. You should not be lifting more than once a day and probably no more than 5 days a week (others with more experience may have better guidance).
3 -
manolocort wrote: »Hey guys, I am lifting weights several times a day and my goal is to get a lean cut, but I can’t figure out how many calories I am burning. Any suggestions in how to keep track with this? It will really help me!
Is anyone going to pick up on the fact the OP said they are lifting several times a day?
OP - why are you lifting so often? You need to give your muscles time for recovery. You should not be lifting more than once a day and probably no more than 5 days a week (others with more experience may have better guidance).
yep if you go back to the first page I asked why they were lifting several times a day.1 -
What great info!0
-
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »clintonfry wrote: »This is an interesting question.
Also, what about "afterburn" caloric burn from weight training. Recovery burn from weights can last up to a full day after lifting.
Are there any tools or calculators to accurately account for that?
the after burn is not as long as you think. I know for me its only an hr or two after I lift or workout that my burns are higher but it eventually returns to normal a few hours later.so no its not a full day of afterburn. for example lifting I burn about 5-7 calories a min on average,
I continue burning them for 2-3 hrs after. then its usually the 2-4 I burn just moving around (depending on what Im doing). I tracked this for a month or so just to see if there were any truth to it and for me there isnt.maybe someone else who is more active through the day could keep the burn at a similar level. but once I slow down it slows down.
Curious to know how you know how much you are burning each hour?1 -
I have a fitness band that estimates my calories burned. I have kept data the last 4 years,while its not 100% exact. I used that info and used my weight lost per week as a gauge as well.parksgirl40 wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »clintonfry wrote: »This is an interesting question.
Also, what about "afterburn" caloric burn from weight training. Recovery burn from weights can last up to a full day after lifting.
Are there any tools or calculators to accurately account for that?
the after burn is not as long as you think. I know for me its only an hr or two after I lift or workout that my burns are higher but it eventually returns to normal a few hours later.so no its not a full day of afterburn. for example lifting I burn about 5-7 calories a min on average,
I continue burning them for 2-3 hrs after. then its usually the 2-4 I burn just moving around (depending on what Im doing). I tracked this for a month or so just to see if there were any truth to it and for me there isnt.maybe someone else who is more active through the day could keep the burn at a similar level. but once I slow down it slows down.
Curious to know how you know how much you are burning each hour?
I am now maintaining so my calories and the calories burned are also coinciding and Im maintaining weight. Ive kept track of how much I burned lifting,how much I burn at rest.how much I burn for certain exercises and how much I burn while asleep/just existing. That is how I figured out that my BMR is 200-300 calories less than what all the calculators give me,because I kept data. BMR calculators give me 1400-1600 calories,its more like 1272.
so with the calories I burn and my calories I can gauge about how many calories I burn in excess to what I burn by just being alive.my fitness band has been pretty accurate for me according to all the data.
5 -
apple watch
2 -
Best way for any exercise is to buy a chest strap and monitor your heart rate and go off those calories burned. I just wear my chest strap and go.4
-
LilRedRooster wrote: »Best way for any exercise is to buy a chest strap and monitor your heart rate and go off those calories burned. I just wear my chest strap and go.
still an estimated number and heart rate really doesnt have anything to do with calories burned. as for chest strap its only going to be more accurate(still and estimate) for steady state cardio. I have both a chest strap HR monitor and a fitness band. unless you have one that measures Vo2 max then all others will be more of an estimate and weight lifting doesnt burn a whole lot of calories per hr . heart rate isnt an indication of calories burned(many posts about that here if you do a search) I have a heart rhythm disorder and while walking at a slow pace my heart rate was jumping up to 150 or more which was almost triple my resting rate. I was not burning anymore calories because it was higher than any other time walking. I was walking the same speed as I always do. I wasnt working any harder than normal.3 -
To the OP-
1. Don't lift weights 7 days a week...Pick a proven 3 or 4 day split and go from there. You can add 2-3 cardio sessions per week aside from your lifting if you feel so inclined. It's good for your heart, and can help build a larger deficit if you are trying to burn fat. Unless you are training for a endurance/marathon-type events it is counterproductive in most cases.
2. Tracking exercise calories is like trying to shoot a moving target. You're better off inputting your activity level, age, weight, etc. into a calculator and get a ballpark estimate of what you need. Be as consistent as possible for 2-3 weeks and then see where your weight goes. Gained more than you wanted? - eat less. Lost more than you wanted? - eat more. Maintained the same weight? - congratulations you just found your maintenance calories. + or - 500 calories depending on your goals will get you gaining or losing weight - adjust according.
IMO most of us make tracking far more complicated than it has to be. I am guilty of this as well. It all comes down to how much quantum mathematics you're willing to do to justify eating that Oreo staring at you on the counter..
<_<
>_>2 -
Someone goes out on Saturday and does a 10 mile run. I agree that the body has to supply (say) 1,000 extra calories of energy to support that 10 mile run, but I am not educated as to where the body gets that energy. So then after the run, the runner goes to McDonalds and eats a quarter pounder with cheese and a large fries, which is 1.040 calories. According to MFP the runner has just broke even, and there should be no weight gain. But the food in the stomach still has to get digested, which is a different process than, as you say, "metabolising calories to perform exercise". It will balance out, but not the same day.
Who has the goal of making it balance out within the same day though? I mean, yeah . . . eating food will temporarily add to your body weight as your body physically processes the food. But gaining actual weight (in the form of fat or muscle) *is* determined by your day-in-day-out calories in versus calories out.
If you burn 1,040 calories, you've burnt them.3 -
LilRedRooster wrote: »Best way for any exercise is to buy a chest strap and monitor your heart rate and go off those calories burned. I just wear my chest strap and go.
Heart rate monitors don't measure calorie burn, they estimate it. And they don't do it very accurately for weight training, HIIT, circuit training, interval training (lower intensity than HIIT), and a bunch of other stuff that isn't close to steady-state cardio. They also do various misleading things, like estimating calorie burn higher in unfit people, on hot days, etc.
This is a good read:
https://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-214726 -
I'd go hard for at least 30 minutes and give myself 250 calories credit for burn. I think new rules might say something like 200.
I don't eat back exercise calories these days, so it doesn't matter quite as much to me. Curious as to what others say.0 -
I have used MFP for a long time, but I have stopped "taking credit" for burning calories. I don't enter exercise. I only enter food. Why? Because MFP will subtract your exercise calories from your food calories to calculate net calories. Mathematically this is correct and if it works for you then go for it. MFP balances the books each day, and I don't think the body will react that quickly. So just pick a number of calories per day (for me it is 1800 if I want to lose weight), and go out and exercise and enjoy life, living on just that 1800 per day.
I have an entry called remove exercise calories. It just negates my exercise calories with empty ones (no macro or micronutrient values).0 -
As a newbie - I track my calories etc but I want / need to lose 20kilos … yes, 20 kgs! ( 6 months I'm guessing ) ….. I've given myself 1800 calories allowance a day and I'm happy with that - I also have started the gym doing weights 3 times weekly and cardio three times a week. The question is …. If I'm aiming to lose the Kgs should I add the calories 'burned' ….. apologies in advance if this has previously been asked / answered …..0
-
JustinAnimal wrote: »I'd go hard for at least 30 minutes and give myself 250 calories credit for burn. I think new rules might say something like 200.
I don't eat back exercise calories these days, so it doesn't matter quite as much to me. Curious as to what others say.
My five years of data from following powerlifting or a power/hypertrophy program has me at about 150/hour. I do eat these and have lost, bulked, maintained right on target. For comparison, I'm 44, years old, 5'3" and 125 lbs.
Edited for typos.2 -
The best way to determine calories is to pick an estimate, eat a portion of it back and re-evaluate after you have enough data (6 weeks-ish).3
-
candicew70 wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »aside from the calorie burning why are you lifting several times a day? once a day for 30-60 min is sufficient enough if lifiting heavy(proper form is needed of course).
This ^^. And I wouldn't bother trying to track calories burned during weight lifting. It's inconsequential, and it's not the reason one lift weights.
I don't lift for calories but I track them and eat them because having the extra food helps with my recovery and my lifts. I feel a distinct difference when I don't add them in. I'm petite and a couple hundred calories make a big difference.
this... Strength training creates (for me & many) a hunger that far surpasses the calories burned - I'm at least going to eat those back (even if they aren't many).2 -
I have a setting on my Garmin 920XT for strength training that just tracks time and heart rate -- that will give me an estimate of how much my body has been working during lifting as far as cardio.
It allots 0 calories (unless maybe if you wear a HR monitor - which is moot for weight training..then it may use a generic cardio equation based on HR).
ETA: FYI- I am NOT one of the people that woo'd you.1 -
sephiroth66 wrote: »To the OP-
1. Don't lift weights 7 days a week...Pick a proven 3 or 4 day split and go from there. You can add 2-3 cardio sessions per week aside from your lifting if you feel so inclined. It's good for your heart, and can help build a larger deficit if you are trying to burn fat. Unless you are training for a endurance/marathon-type events it is counterproductive in most cases.
2. Tracking exercise calories is like trying to shoot a moving target. You're better off inputting your activity level, age, weight, etc. into a calculator and get a ballpark estimate of what you need. Be as consistent as possible for 2-3 weeks and then see where your weight goes. Gained more than you wanted? - eat less. Lost more than you wanted? - eat more. Maintained the same weight? - congratulations you just found your maintenance calories. + or - 500 calories depending on your goals will get you gaining or losing weight - adjust according.
IMO most of us make tracking far more complicated than it has to be. I am guilty of this as well. It all comes down to how much quantum mathematics you're willing to do to justify eating that Oreo staring at you on the counter..
<_<
>_>
If it's said anything untoward about me, it's getting eaten regardless of how much quantum anything it can do.3 -
JustinAnimal wrote: »I'd go hard for at least 30 minutes and give myself 250 calories credit for burn. I think new rules might say something like 200.
I don't eat back exercise calories these days, so it doesn't matter quite as much to me. Curious as to what others say.
My five years of data from following powerlifting or a power/hypertrophy program has me at about 150/hour. I do eat these and have lost, bulked, maintained right on target. For comparison, I'm 44, years old, 5'3" and 125 lbs.
Edited for typos.
I just read that someone said burn is lower than we thought and that the whole after-burn thing is more or less a myth... or at least not as much as previously thought. Thanks for your feedback. I still will not eat back exercise calories, but it's good to know that I've been logging inaccurately.1 -
JustinAnimal wrote: »JustinAnimal wrote: »I'd go hard for at least 30 minutes and give myself 250 calories credit for burn. I think new rules might say something like 200.
I don't eat back exercise calories these days, so it doesn't matter quite as much to me. Curious as to what others say.
My five years of data from following powerlifting or a power/hypertrophy program has me at about 150/hour. I do eat these and have lost, bulked, maintained right on target. For comparison, I'm 44, years old, 5'3" and 125 lbs.
Edited for typos.
I just read that someone said burn is lower than we thought and that the whole after-burn thing is more or less a myth... or at least not as much as previously thought. Thanks for your feedback. I still will not eat back exercise calories, but it's good to know that I've been logging inaccurately.
The burn is lower than the same amount of time doing cardio, for most people.
I, like kami3006, have data to work out my average burn.
Lifting gives me 200 cals for 90min (65, 5'1, 102lbs) that is about half to two thirds of my cardio burn.
Whether cardio or lifting, I need those cals to perform, so I eat them.
(And, though it is grey, l am fond of my hair and would hate to lose it)
Afterburn is lower than advertised in a lot of the 'get thin and fit in 10 days' ads and programmes.
If you don't want to eat back your exercise calories, please keep an eye on your energy levels, hair, nails, and skin condition, as well as general lethargy. Up your cals as soon as you see problems in any of these. They are the first indications of undernourishment, and it can take a while to recover.
Cheers, h.3 -
joemac1988 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »Not many. That's not why you're lifting. You're lifting to preserve or build muscle.
If you enter it into MFP under cardio it will give you a guess.
Not many? I burn more calories on an intense leg day or doing volume deadlifts than by doing the same time of HIIT.
Well HIIT doesn't burn much either, so...5 -
what @taunto said. I only ever enter 1 calorie. Interestingly, I was gifted a chest strap HRM recently and started using it during my workouts (lifting only, I don't really cardio). Where in the past MFP would estimate that I burnt like 112 calories doing 45 minutes of strength training or whatever they call it, in reality depending on my workout I burn on average 350-400 and almost 500 on heavy leg days. Which is a fair way off the generic 100-and-a-little-bit that MFP gave me.
I never "eat back my calories" if i'm trying to lose or maintain. I work out the TDEE as mentioned above and eat accordingly.4 -
Cahgetsfit wrote: »what @taunto said. I only ever enter 1 calorie. Interestingly, I was gifted a chest strap HRM recently and started using it during my workouts (lifting only, I don't really cardio). Where in the past MFP would estimate that I burnt like 112 calories doing 45 minutes of strength training or whatever they call it, in reality depending on my workout I burn on average 350-400 and almost 500 on heavy leg days. Which is a fair way off the generic 100-and-a-little-bit that MFP gave me.
I never "eat back my calories" if i'm trying to lose or maintain. I work out the TDEE as mentioned above and eat accordingly.
A chest hrm isn't going to give you anywhere close to an accurate burn for lifting weights. I'd wager the 100ish is closer to reality than the 450 or 500 is for an hour lifting weights. I am lucky if I hit 450 or 500 in an hour doing steady cardio and I'm 6ft 185ish lbs.2 -
MalkinMagic71 wrote: »Cahgetsfit wrote: »what @taunto said. I only ever enter 1 calorie. Interestingly, I was gifted a chest strap HRM recently and started using it during my workouts (lifting only, I don't really cardio). Where in the past MFP would estimate that I burnt like 112 calories doing 45 minutes of strength training or whatever they call it, in reality depending on my workout I burn on average 350-400 and almost 500 on heavy leg days. Which is a fair way off the generic 100-and-a-little-bit that MFP gave me.
I never "eat back my calories" if i'm trying to lose or maintain. I work out the TDEE as mentioned above and eat accordingly.
A chest hrm isn't going to give you anywhere close to an accurate burn for lifting weights. I'd wager the 100ish is closer to reality than the 450 or 500 is for an hour lifting weights. I am lucky if I hit 450 or 500 in an hour doing steady cardio and I'm 6ft 185ish lbs.
This. You cannot expect a hrm to estimate anaerobic activity. Plus, if you’re using TDEE then you are eating exercise calories. I don’t want anyone lurking to misunderstand that.2 -
The reason to build muscle is that it is active even at rest. For every pound of muscle you add to your frame you will increase your resting metabolic rate by 50 to 100 calories per day.6
-
The reason to build muscle is that it is active even at rest. For every pound of muscle you add to your frame you will increase your resting metabolic rate by 50 to 100 calories per day.
False. A pound of muscle burns about 6 calories per day, a pound of fat burns about 2 calories per day. So you'd have to add over 16 pounds of muscle (and not lose any fat) to burn an extra 100 calories per day.1 -
Cahgetsfit wrote: »what @taunto said. I only ever enter 1 calorie. Interestingly, I was gifted a chest strap HRM recently and started using it during my workouts (lifting only, I don't really cardio). Where in the past MFP would estimate that I burnt like 112 calories doing 45 minutes of strength training or whatever they call it, in reality depending on my workout I burn on average 350-400 and almost 500 on heavy leg days. Which is a fair way off the generic 100-and-a-little-bit that MFP gave me.
I never "eat back my calories" if i'm trying to lose or maintain. I work out the TDEE as mentioned above and eat accordingly.
Heart rate increases for lots of reasons. Aerobic work (which burns calories) is one of them. Another is strain or pressure, which there's a lot of in weight training - more of that than there is of calorie-burning work. Others
include but are not limited to environmental heat, stress, fear or other high emotion, and dehydration. HRM numbers for weight training are not reliable. If you used NEAT + exercise rather than TDEE, time would've given you a more reliable perspective on those weight training calorie burn numbers.2 -
If you use TDEE to determine your calorie goal, then you do not log exercise and eat those extra calories, because your TDEE already includes your exercise. If you are using TDEE, you are already eating your exercise calories, so you don't add them separately.
If you get your calorie goal from MFP, that's your NEAT, not your TDEE, and you are supposed to log your exercise and eat those calories back. In fact, if your data is good, your MFP NEAT calorie goal + your exercise cals should = your TDEE. Folks who use the MFP calorie goal and don't eat back exercise calories and lose at their expected rate are most likely not logging their food accurately and the exercise calories are making up for the underestimated food.
Unless you are working out in a lab hooked up to machines and monitored by techs, there is no accurate way to measure calories burned. You just start with a reasonable estimate and tweak based on your results over time. Which is the beauty of accurate and consistent logging
Hopefully OP meant they were lifting several times a week, not day, but they haven't been back so I doubt we're going to find out!1 -
LilRedRooster wrote: »Best way for any exercise is to buy a chest strap and monitor your heart rate and go off those calories burned. I just wear my chest strap and go.
This. You all are getting weird with caveats. Wear a heart rate monitor and understand it's the closest thing you're going to get aside from testing under laboratory conditions.
Better to pick a static calorie number that takes into account an average activity level and just try and hit that -- don't worry about "eating back" your exercise calories. Evaluate after a couple weeks and make adjustments.6
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions