Not getting this

anonymous1210
anonymous1210 Posts: 22 Member
edited December 19 in Health and Weight Loss
Hi everyone :)
So my fav workout is using my mini stepper. However I recently bought an airwalker.
Is it possible that I burn more calories on the mini stepper , even though I feel more tired and sweaty when using the airwalker?
I burn about 400 per hour on airwalker and about 450 per hour on mini stepper.
I weigh 112 lbs.

Thanks

Replies

  • apullum
    apullum Posts: 4,838 Member
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    Hi everyone :)
    So my fav workout is using my mini stepper. However I recently bought an airwalker.
    Is it possible that I burn more calories on the mini stepper , even though I feel more tired and sweaty when using the airwalker?
    I burn about 400 per hour on airwalker and about 450 per hour on mini stepper.
    I weigh 112 lbs.

    Thanks

    It's doubtful you burn that many calories in an hour given your size

    I’m the same weight and my calorie burn in an hour of running (about 10k) is within the same range as OP mentioned. I agree that you’d *really* have to be pushing yourself consistently on those pieces of equipment to get those calorie burns, but it may not be too far off depending on OP’s level of exertion.
  • anonymous1210
    anonymous1210 Posts: 22 Member
    apullum wrote: »
    How tired and sweaty you are is not a good indicator of how many calories you've burned.

    Really? I seriously did not know that! So whats a good indicator? Because if you're working hard , that means heart rate is higher right? ( sorry if I am sounding stupid)
  • anonymous1210
    anonymous1210 Posts: 22 Member
    firecat1987 wrote: »
    How are you measuring your calorie burn? That seems very high.

    Fitbit
  • apullum
    apullum Posts: 4,838 Member
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    apullum wrote: »
    How tired and sweaty you are is not a good indicator of how many calories you've burned.

    Really? I seriously did not know that! So whats a good indicator? Because if you're working hard , that means heart rate is higher right? ( sorry if I am sounding stupid)

    That's only part of the story, though. I can easily get sweaty and tired from doing basic house cleaning on a warm day, but I didn't necessarily burn a lot of calories doing the housework.
  • apullum
    apullum Posts: 4,838 Member
    edited February 2019
    yirara wrote: »
    apullum wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    Hi everyone :)
    So my fav workout is using my mini stepper. However I recently bought an airwalker.
    Is it possible that I burn more calories on the mini stepper , even though I feel more tired and sweaty when using the airwalker?
    I burn about 400 per hour on airwalker and about 450 per hour on mini stepper.
    I weigh 112 lbs.

    Thanks

    It's doubtful you burn that many calories in an hour given your size

    I’m the same weight and my calorie burn in an hour of running (about 10k) is within the same range as OP mentioned. I agree that you’d *really* have to be pushing yourself consistently on those pieces of equipment to get those calorie burns, but it may not be too far off depending on OP’s level of exertion.

    Though I'm sure running outside burns more calories. After all, you propel yourself into the air and forward with every step running, while your movements are supported on a stepper or similar things. The whole forward movement and jumping against gravity thing is missing here.

    All reasonable points. And please keep in mind that I’m a thoroughly mediocre runner! Someone faster than me would burn more in the same hour.

    The point I hoped to make is just that if OP cranks up the stair stepper and goes full tilt at it, then their stated calorie burn might be in the ballpark. A little high, perhaps, but probably not super inflated.

    However, if OP is going at a more moderate level of exertion...yeah, that’s a high estimate.

    OP, another way to go about this is to see what your weight does over time. At 112 pounds, I’m assuming you’re trying to maintain, gain, or recomp. 112 is going to be in either an optimal or underweight BMI range depending on your height, unless you’re *really* short. (I’m 4’ 11.75” and maintain at 110-115.)

    If you’re trying to recomp, then we can direct you to the relevant discussions.

    If you’re trying to maintain or gain, give it a few weeks, see what your weight does, adjust your calorie intake accordingly. Keep in mind that if this is a new exercise plan for you, then you’re probably going to gain some temporary water weight.
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    OP,

    One of the best ways to tell how accurate your Fitbit exercise calories are for you generally will be your weight loss over time. However, in order to gauge the accuracy of the "calories out" part of the equation, your "calories in" part needs to be on point.

    Most folks here will recommend using a digital food scale for all solids (including pre-packaged foods like yogurts and frozen foods as well as self-packaged foods like eggs, slices of bread, and pieces of cheese). Weighing really does make a huge difference! Measuring cups/spoons work well for liquids like juice and milk.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,597 Member
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    apullum wrote: »
    How tired and sweaty you are is not a good indicator of how many calories you've burned.

    Really? I seriously did not know that! So whats a good indicator? Because if you're working hard, that means heart rate is higher right? ( sorry if I am sounding stupid)

    Not necessarily. A very fit person walking a mile in 20 minutes barely raises their heart rate. A very unfit person of the same size will likely have their heart beating hard walking a mile in 20 minutes on the exact same course. But they both burn roughly the same number of calories, because moving each body through a mile of terrain is about the same amount of work.

    How much work one does (in pretty much the physics sense of "work") is the major determinant of how many calories we burn doing exercise. Sweat doesn't matter, heart rate as such doesn't much matter.

    There are a few activities that have good rules of thumb for estimating calorie burn (as for walking, running). Some kinds of exercise offer the opportunity to buy equipment (usually $$$) that measures power expenditure (watts); in an excercise with a relatively narrow band of efficiency variation (like cycling), these can be a fairly accurate way to estimate calorie expenditure.

    Generally, it's all about estimates, often not very precise or reliable ones. Consistent estimates are good enough, though, in a calorie counting context - workable - as long as we monitor our weight results and adust intake accordingly.
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    firecat1987 wrote: »
    How are you measuring your calorie burn? That seems very high.

    Fitbit

    Fitbit's estimating calories, not measuring. Even the HR models.

    This is an oldie, but still a goodie:

    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-21472
  • anonymous1210
    anonymous1210 Posts: 22 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    apullum wrote: »
    How tired and sweaty you are is not a good indicator of how many calories you've burned.

    Really? I seriously did not know that! So whats a good indicator? Because if you're working hard, that means heart rate is higher right? ( sorry if I am sounding stupid)

    Not necessarily. A very fit person walking a mile in 20 minutes barely raises their heart rate. A very unfit person of the same size will likely have their heart beating hard walking a mile in 20 minutes on the exact same course. But they both burn roughly the same number of calories, because moving each body through a mile of terrain is about the same amount of work.

    How much work one does (in pretty much the physics sense of "work") is the major determinant of how many calories we burn doing exercise. Sweat doesn't matter, heart rate as such doesn't much matter.

    There are a few activities that have good rules of thumb for estimating calorie burn (as for walking, running). Some kinds of exercise offer the opportunity to buy equipment (usually $$$) that measures power expenditure (watts); in an excercise with a relatively narrow band of efficiency variation (like cycling), these can be a fairly accurate way to estimate calorie expenditure.

    Generally, it's all about estimates, often not very precise or reliable ones. Consistent estimates are good enough, though, in a calorie counting context - workable - as long as we monitor our weight results and adust intake accordingly.
    anonymous1210 wrote: »
    firecat1987 wrote: »
    How are you measuring your calorie burn? That seems very high.

    Fitbit

    Fitbit's estimating calories, not measuring. Even the HR models.

    This is an oldie, but still a goodie:

    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-21472

    And also since there is not an option for 'stepper' , I just use the 'workout' option
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    There's something called "perceived effirt." Some things "feel" more difficult, or like more work, even though they aren't.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    edited February 2019
    Don't manually log anything if you have the Fitbit on - not required and not always a good idea.

    If steps are being seen there's a decent chance the distance calculated is decent and therefore calorie burn is within range.

    But as above comments on HR show - if really out of shape the HR-based calorie burn calc's would be inflated.

    In fact if it's a low HR just barely into the exercise zone, even after the Fitbit has had a couple weeks getting to know your heart - it'll be inflated - and distance based calorie burn from steps would have better chance of being right.
  • Duck_Puddle
    Duck_Puddle Posts: 3,237 Member
    One last point on calorie burns for specific periods of time on a Fitbit.

    Your Fitbit is a 24/7 device and the info it gives you is in terms of you wearing it 24/7.

    You burn calories just being alive (probably 50-ish per hour for you). Even if you’re sleeping, sitting on the couch or otherwise doing nothing special, you’re still burning calories. That’s why Fitbit shows you burned 500 calories already when you first wake up in the morning. Fitbit is monitoring and estimating all the calories you’re burning all day long.

    When you record a workout on your Fitbit, the numbers it gives you are for the the total calories burned in that time-which includes the calories you would have burned had you been sleeping plus the calories you burned doing your workout. That’s why the workout summary says 450 of 1700 calories. It’s not telling you that you burned 450 extra calories. it’s telling you that of the 1700 you burned total in this day, 450 of them were burned in the time you were doing this workout.

    If your Fitbit is synced to mfp, this is all handled in the syncing and you don’t need to worry about it.

    If your Fitbit is not synced to mfp, and you’re using the Fitbit calorie burns to log on mfp-you are overlogging just a bit (as the calories you burn just by being alive and doing your basic daily activities are already included in your mfp total).

    I think you’re probably working with a very small deficit so even a little bit of an overestimate of calories burned could make a difference.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories