Looking for Information
Options
wowisforstuds1238
Posts: 77 Member
Just done a full body workout. (Detailed in my journal) Am wondering how many calories roughly I burned. Since I don’t know, it’s throwing off my daily caloric intake and at this point I’m just guessing. Can someone tell me where I can find information regarding how many calories certain presses spend and I can tailor it to my weight lifted? Thanks to anyone willing to help!
1
Replies
-
Suggest you search the cardiovascular part of the exercise for the entry called "strength training" and enter the duration of your workout for a reasonable estimate of something it's impossible to measure outside of a laboratory.
It's not a huge number (sadly!) but a reasonable estimate.
Note the strength training part of the exercise diary has no calorie functionality, it's just for making notes.1 -
I researched a little and found that in general a workout for 1 hour burns around 500 calories. Is that an accurate assumption?1
-
wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »I researched a little and found that in general a workout for 1 hour burns around 500 calories. Is that an accurate assumption?
That's probably a massive over-estimate if your "workout" is in a traditional strength training style of heavy weights, relatively low reps and significant breaks between sets.
If your "workout" is something else you need to be more descriptive.2 -
500 calories is a very high over-estimate. Log your workout under cardio - strength training. It should give you a value of 230ish calories for a 60 minute workout. It's very difficult to get an accurate measure of caloric burn for sets/reps. I would focus on your calculated TDEE and log your meals accurately if your goal is weight loss, or maintenance.2
-
Your BMR, TDEE, how many calories you burn doing a particular exercise, and even the number of calories listed for particular foods, isn't 100% accurate and can vary quite a bit from person to person. The best approach is to use them as a starting point, watch your weight over a time period (a week is usually good for males) and adjust by about 10-15% accordingly. For example, if you're trying to gain weight and all your calculations say you need to eat 2,500 calories per day to do so and you do that for a week and don't gain weight then add 250 calories per day and see if that gets you to the rate you want to get to.2
-
The big compound movements will generally burn more calories compared to accessory movements.
Track your heart rate when doing squats, deadlifts, pull up, bench press, and dips.....then see what you get by doing hammer curls and tricep extensions.
I am on a full body program and generally start my lifts with Squats, deadlifts, or Lunges. I find this wakes me up and gets my heart rate in the zone.
I track my cals burned with an i-watch while hammering out the laid out full body lifts, which generally takes about 40 mins. I keep a good pace....sweating at the end of the 40 mins for sure while pushing for PR’s and burn about 250 top end. I finish off with 20 mins cardio, shadow boxing, cycling, or the eliptical to crank out some more cals if needed. Its usually pretty easy to keep your heart rate up post resistance training.0 -
wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »I researched a little and found that in general a workout for 1 hour burns around 500 calories. Is that an accurate assumption?
probably a gross overestimation:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30768553/
1 -
New topic to refresh post for all who are Interested in giving their opinions. My question is, when just starting out losing weight and eating healthy, is it perfectly ok to see weight gain from 1 week to the other vs. Weight loss even when exercising and eating properly for the most part. I felt discouraged when I saw I’ve gained almost 2 pounds even though I have inserted weight training this week on top of my cardio and also eating pretty well. ( Is gaining 2 pounds even possible) or am I just trippin for no reason. Thanks!0
-
wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »New topic to refresh post for all who are Interested in giving their opinions. My question is, when just starting out losing weight and eating healthy, is it perfectly ok to see weight gain from 1 week to the other vs. Weight loss even when exercising and eating properly for the most part. I felt discouraged when I saw I’ve gained almost 2 pounds even though I have inserted weight training this week on top of my cardio and also eating pretty well. ( Is gaining 2 pounds even possible) or am I just trippin for no reason. Thanks!
water retained for repair can easily be 2 lbs.
water stored with more glycogen in muscles because your workout now asks for anaerobic fuel can add to that.
water retained due to general stress and increasing cortisol could keep going up hiding scale loss for weeks - that is no good.
That can easily be because deficit is more than body is happy with. Be concerned with other adaptations the body will make to stop what it doesn't like.3 -
The big compound movements will generally burn more calories compared to accessory movements.
Track your heart rate when doing squats, deadlifts, pull up, bench press, and dips.....then see what you get by doing hammer curls and tricep extensions.
I am on a full body program and generally start my lifts with Squats, deadlifts, or Lunges. I find this wakes me up and gets my heart rate in the zone.
I track my cals burned with an i-watch while hammering out the laid out full body lifts, which generally takes about 40 mins. I keep a good pace....sweating at the end of the 40 mins for sure while pushing for PR’s and burn about 250 top end. I finish off with 20 mins cardio, shadow boxing, cycling, or the eliptical to crank out some more cals if needed. Its usually pretty easy to keep your heart rate up post resistance training.
If watching HR is merely for the purpose to see the fact bigger muscle usage burns more, the reason the HR increases is not for more oxygen delivery for fuel oxidation or cooling - different purpose.
Anaerobic fuel is already in the muscles for that short usage and anaerobic means without oxygen so don't need increase of that.
If the watch is basing calorie burn on HR - that's where others have already commented incorrect usage of HR-based calculations.
HR isn't a measure of calorie burn, it usually a measure of increased oxygen for increase aerobic fuel since fat requires it. (and there are other reasons for increase HR that have nothing to do with that - hence ability to fool a HR-based calculation)
Anaerobic efforts like lifting are carb from the muscles.
So the calorie burn you are getting is likely to be badly inflated if you are having a good workout.
Unless your watch, like some Fitbit's - is using a database rate of burn, usually 3-4 x your BMR rate of burn. Usually about 3.5 is the MET value found in studies.2 -
If watching HR is merely for the purpose to see the fact bigger muscle usage burns more, the reason the HR increases is not for more oxygen delivery for fuel oxidation or cooling - different purpose.
Anaerobic fuel is already in the muscles for that short usage and anaerobic means without oxygen so don't need increase of that.
If the watch is basing calorie burn on HR - that's where others have already commented incorrect usage of HR-based calculations.
HR isn't a measure of calorie burn, it usually a measure of increased oxygen for increase aerobic fuel since fat requires it. (and there are other reasons for increase HR that have nothing to do with that - hence ability to fool a HR-based calculation)
Anaerobic efforts like lifting are carb from the muscles.
So the calorie burn you are getting is likely to be badly inflated if you are having a good workout.
Unless your watch, like some Fitbit's - is using a database rate of burn, usually 3-4 x your BMR rate of burn. Usually about 3.5 is the MET value found in studies.
I can’t speak to how accurate the watch is, I am not the designer. I thought it was fairly simple when it comes to heart rate and burning calories....this can be done by expending energy with physical activity, or even as simple as using a ‘fat burner’ to burning calories.
I prefer expending physical energy, but to each their own.
I have found that any heart rate monitor on a piece of exercise equipment varies and is inflated in comparison to the watch. The watch I enter my weight and age and the calories tracked is less or more depending on which type of exercise that I am doing. For example calorie tracking while resistance training is less than the eliptical, and kick boxing tracks more again....and each are different depending on the amount of energy that I apply to any of the variables.
The watch allows you enter the activity that you are doing as well and then tracks based on what activity is entered. So when tracking calories when resistance training, that is the setting that I enter.
What is 100% accurate who knows....
The calorie tracking in MFP is always inflated so I wouldn’t recommend anyone use it.
0 -
If watching HR is merely for the purpose to see the fact bigger muscle usage burns more, the reason the HR increases is not for more oxygen delivery for fuel oxidation or cooling - different purpose.
Anaerobic fuel is already in the muscles for that short usage and anaerobic means without oxygen so don't need increase of that.
If the watch is basing calorie burn on HR - that's where others have already commented incorrect usage of HR-based calculations.
HR isn't a measure of calorie burn, it usually a measure of increased oxygen for increase aerobic fuel since fat requires it. (and there are other reasons for increase HR that have nothing to do with that - hence ability to fool a HR-based calculation)
Anaerobic efforts like lifting are carb from the muscles.
So the calorie burn you are getting is likely to be badly inflated if you are having a good workout.
Unless your watch, like some Fitbit's - is using a database rate of burn, usually 3-4 x your BMR rate of burn. Usually about 3.5 is the MET value found in studies.
I can’t speak to how accurate the watch is, I am not the designer. I thought it was fairly simple when it comes to heart rate and burning calories....this can be done by expending energy with physical activity, or even as simple as using a ‘fat burner’ to burning calories.
I prefer expending physical energy, but to each their own.
I have found that any heart rate monitor on a piece of exercise equipment varies and is inflated in comparison to the watch. The watch I enter my weight and age and the calories tracked is less or more depending on which type of exercise that I am doing. For example calorie tracking while resistance training is less than the eliptical, and kick boxing tracks more again....and each are different depending on the amount of energy that I apply to any of the variables.
The watch allows you enter the activity that you are doing as well and then tracks based on what activity is entered. So when tracking calories when resistance training, that is the setting that I enter.
What is 100% accurate who knows....
The calorie tracking in MFP is always inflated so I wouldn’t recommend anyone use it.
0 -
New question to refresh thread! So I’m about 1 month into my diet and training and I’ve noticed recently that my left knee cap pops every time I extend it ( definitely sounds like cartilage or grissle) and retract it. Is this normal and will go away over time as I build muscle, stay the same, or could be a medical condition and get worse? Last thing I want trying to get my health better is develop some type of training condition which will make it harder for me to train and be mobile.0
-
If watching HR is merely for the purpose to see the fact bigger muscle usage burns more, the reason the HR increases is not for more oxygen delivery for fuel oxidation or cooling - different purpose.
Anaerobic fuel is already in the muscles for that short usage and anaerobic means without oxygen so don't need increase of that.
If the watch is basing calorie burn on HR - that's where others have already commented incorrect usage of HR-based calculations.
HR isn't a measure of calorie burn, it usually a measure of increased oxygen for increase aerobic fuel since fat requires it. (and there are other reasons for increase HR that have nothing to do with that - hence ability to fool a HR-based calculation)
Anaerobic efforts like lifting are carb from the muscles.
So the calorie burn you are getting is likely to be badly inflated if you are having a good workout.
Unless your watch, like some Fitbit's - is using a database rate of burn, usually 3-4 x your BMR rate of burn. Usually about 3.5 is the MET value found in studies.
I can’t speak to how accurate the watch is, I am not the designer. I thought it was fairly simple when it comes to heart rate and burning calories....this can be done by expending energy with physical activity, or even as simple as using a ‘fat burner’ to burning calories.
I prefer expending physical energy, but to each their own.
I have found that any heart rate monitor on a piece of exercise equipment varies and is inflated in comparison to the watch. The watch I enter my weight and age and the calories tracked is less or more depending on which type of exercise that I am doing. For example calorie tracking while resistance training is less than the eliptical, and kick boxing tracks more again....and each are different depending on the amount of energy that I apply to any of the variables.
The watch allows you enter the activity that you are doing as well and then tracks based on what activity is entered. So when tracking calories when resistance training, that is the setting that I enter.
What is 100% accurate who knows....
The calorie tracking in MFP is always inflated so I wouldn’t recommend anyone use it.
10 to 1 it's doing by HR.
Physical stat's are used in the calculation of HR to a calorie burn - which again, is easy to fool with non-aerobic workouts like lifting, kickboxing (you pause and rest?), intervals anything, ect.
elliptical is best use case for calculations from HR - though that can be an HR higher partly for cooling effect, not to burn energy.
Just letting you know it's inflated calorie burn for things you think it must be accurate on.
The reason for the differences between workouts is average HR.
Not because of the the amount of energy you are applying - there is no direct measurement you might think is there.1 -
wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »New question to refresh thread! So I’m about 1 month into my diet and training and I’ve noticed recently that my left knee cap pops every time I extend it ( definitely sounds like cartilage or grissle) and retract it. Is this normal and will go away over time as I build muscle, stay the same, or could be a medical condition and get worse? Last thing I want trying to get my health better is develop some type of training condition which will make it harder for me to train and be mobile.
That's a hard one to know if my innocuous knee pops are the same as yours.
It could easily stay the same, get worse, or go away with training.
Had all three happen in the past to various body parts. You regret the 1st two, especially when pain is involved.
And you promise you won't don't something so stupid in the future.
And then a different body part and you do it again anyway - because you know, human and hopeful and foolish sometimes.
I'd say I've learned - as I'm dealing with proximal hamstring tendinopathy likely brought on by doing straight-leg deadlifts past a point I should have known better.
If just a popping and no pain or muscle twinge - it may be the same as many of us get, and mean nothing.
But I'm guessing this is different than the normal bend down and stand up and knees pop noise.
Or you've never experienced that before.0 -
Reposting new topic to refresh thread. I am looking for information concerning TDEE, vs. DCI/BMR. When my diary has the calories set for my weight loss goal is that number, even if met daily or exceeded, to still be in a calorie deficit. Should I be trying to hit the TDEE or DCI/BMR? Much clarification on this issue would be greatly appreciated as I’m only 1 month and some change into my diet and trying to learn as I go here.0
-
TDEE would be your estimated weight maintenance calories, the number you have to undercut to lose weight.
It varies day by day so when people use a TDEE calculator it actually gives them an average TDEE.
BMR is what you burn at total rest and in a fasted state. You don't need to even think about that as it's calculated in the background when you do your goal set up.
But MyFitnessPal is not a TDEE calculator, it gives you TDEE minus your exercise.
Your calorie deficit goal is selected by picking a desired rate of weight loss in your set up. The goal that appears on your home page is the goal to achieve your calorie deficit but goes up when you log exercise as exercise is not taken into account until after you do it. (With TDEE calculators you still eat exercise calories, just a same every day average instead of a variable amount.)
If your calorie goal on your home page is showing at for example 2000cals that means your calorie goal to achieve the rate of loss you selected is 2000 + exercise calories.
0 -
So if my TDEE is like 2800 but my DCI with my activity based on my BF% is less. Then I can go over my number on the app and still lose weight as long as I’m 500 less then my TDEE. I’m confused because if the app takes into consideration the TDEE and the number on my page is factored out. It’s a lot less then if I was to do it on a calculator online.0
-
wowisforstuds1238 wrote: »So if my TDEE is like 2800 but my DCI with my activity based on my BF% is less. Then I can go over my number on the app and still lose weight as long as I’m 500 less then my TDEE. I’m confused because if the app takes into consideration the TDEE and the number on my page is factored out. It’s a lot less then if I was to do it on a calculator online.
You haven't grasped that MyfitnessPal is not a TDEE calculator - I did mention that above. You do get that exercise is part of TDEE?
TDEE calc = BMR multiplied by a combined daily activity and exercise multiplier.
MyFitnessPal = BMR multiplied by a daily activity multiplier. Excercise added separately.
Yes the number given will be lower than a TDEE calcuator as exercise isn't included up front but when you add exercise it's going to be close - over the course of a week it will probably even out.
Just decide if you want a variable daily goal in line with exercise or a same every day goal from a TDEE calc.
Remember I have no idea what calculator you used or what activity and exercise multiplier you selected.
Just like the activity (only) setting you picked on here isn't public.
Any number under your true TDEE will result in weight loss, 500 is the estimate to lose a pound a week,
All these estimates are just that, estimates, and may need adjusting when you have a few weeks of consistent data.
3 -
Harvard published an article on it, it's a list with calories burned for different things, and there are more lists out there, should give you some idea:
https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet-and-weight-loss/calories-burned-in-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities
According to them weight lifting for an hour is between 180 and 266 calories, depending on the body weight range they are citing from 125 to 185 pounds
which I agree with above saying is just an estimate, and takes time to dial in for you, and which may change over time depending on factors
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions