Weight lifting calories burned

Markiel_tero
Markiel_tero Posts: 22
edited December 18 in Fitness and Exercise
So, I did a lifting work out, biceps/triceps and forearms. 8 exercises, 4 sets of each exercise. I took my heart rate manually after the second set if each exercise. The workout took 40 minutes and I averaged all the heart rates to get the average heart rate for the workout. I plugged the numbers into here and came up with 400 calories burned. MFP's cardio strength training puts it at like 160 calories burned. I knew it was off, but really? Should I use 400, 160, or the median 280?

Replies

  • CMmrsfloyd
    CMmrsfloyd Posts: 2,380 Member
    I would go with the average between the two. That way if it is over or under, at least it's not by very much.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Assuming you were lifting heavy (heavy weight, fewer reps), the HRM are not a good estimator of cals burned. Strength training burns very few cals during the workout. I guestimate about 3 cals per minute during my lifting sessions (compared to 10+ during cardio).
  • biddy249
    biddy249 Posts: 76 Member
    I strength train 3 days a week and do cardio 7 days a week. I don't track my strength training only the cardio. I consider the strength training a bonus and use those calories burned for other miscalculations I may make. Pluse that is just to much to keep track of IMO. Just my 2-cents.
  • Markiel_tero
    Markiel_tero Posts: 22
    Assuming you were lifting heavy (heavy weight, fewer reps), the HRM are not a good estimator of cals burned. Strength training burns very few cals during the workout. I guestimate about 3 cals per minute during my lifting sessions (compared to 10+ during cardio).

    My issue with this is how did you arrive at 3 cal/minute? There's already so much guestimation involved with counting calories that I don't like throwing in another arbitrary number in there if I don't have to.

    Also why isn't an HRM a good estimator of calories burned for strength training? Lifting elevates the heart rate, so why wouldn't using that elevated heart rate be good for calculations. It seems like the same principle as using it for cardio, just that cardio is more intense.

    I also don't lift extremely heavy. I prefer to do drop sets, starting at 10 or 12 and working my way to 4 for each exercise. I mix it up a lot to keep my body guessing though, so some days I do consistent sets of set weight with set reps, other days I do drop sets, and other days I do heavy weight for maxing. I'm also just getting back into the gym, as in this is my first full week of being there, and I don't like to go to heavy when just starting again. I also workout alone, therefore using heavy weight on some exercises is just not feasible.
    I strength train 3 days a week and do cardio 7 days a week. I don't track my strength training only the cardio. I consider the strength training a bonus and use those calories burned for other miscalculations I may make. Pluse that is just to much to keep track of IMO. Just my 2-cents

    I do the crossfit WOD early morning, then another 30 minutes of cardio mid morning, and then in the afternoon I knock out my lifting. I do this 5 days a week, the only part that gets removed is the WOD if my lifting made me too sore to do it (usually legs). I'm also trying to eat no more than 100 calories above my BMR each day, so if the calculations are off by that much it could be detrimental to my health. So unfortunately I can't just use them as error calories, and as I stated above I'm not very comfortable throwing another unknown into the already rather large sea of unknowns involved here. I'd much rather have another number to crunch to keep everything as consistent as possible.


    Not trying to sound snide or anything in these, just wondering if anyone has any information on coming up with calories burned by lifting.
  • Markiel_tero
    Markiel_tero Posts: 22
    Oh and by "Eat my BMR" I mean of course net after exercise.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Also why isn't an HRM a good estimator of calories burned for strength training? Lifting elevates the heart rate, so why wouldn't using that elevated heart rate be good for calculations. It seems like the same principle as using it for cardio, just that cardio is more intense.
    Because cals burned isn't based on HR, it's based on O2 uptake. Gas exchange doesn't change significantly during strength training like it does during cardio.
  • Markiel_tero
    Markiel_tero Posts: 22
    Ah, did not know that, interesting, just gave me some more stuff to look into. Thanks.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Ah, did not know that, interesting, just gave me some more stuff to look into. Thanks.
    Someone on here has a blog post about it that explains it pretty well... let me see if I can find it.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Here you go:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/hrms-cannot-count-calories-during-strength-training-17698

    That guy has a TON of HRM/cals burned related posts in his blog... definitely lots of good reading there.
  • Markiel_tero
    Markiel_tero Posts: 22
    Ah, that makes sense now, in a vague way anyways. Lifting is anaerobic in nature (hence why creatine is, in theory, a great supplement) and since all the equations based upon heart rate make use of O2 rates they are pretty much useless when it comes to lifting.
  • megg0616
    megg0616 Posts: 59 Member
    Bump.
  • Cmonnowguys
    Cmonnowguys Posts: 361 Member
    Here you go:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/hrms-cannot-count-calories-during-strength-training-17698

    That guy has a TON of HRM/cals burned related posts in his blog... definitely lots of good reading there.

    Bump
  • bcutler06
    bcutler06 Posts: 4
    Regarding the O2, when your heart rate increases it requires a greater exchange of gas, thereby causing the same effect as cardio exercise. The reason the heart rate increases is because the hard working muscles are requiring more oxygen which is delivered through the blood. So in fact, a vigorous lifting regimen can burn quite a few more calories than a slow weight lifting regimen, and just because it's not cardio doesn't mean that it doesn't burn a lot of calories. It just depends on how high you can get your HR going by doing it.
  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member
    Regarding the O2, when your heart rate increases it requires a greater exchange of gas, thereby causing the same effect as cardio exercise. The reason the heart rate increases is because the hard working muscles are requiring more oxygen which is delivered through the blood. So in fact, a vigorous lifting regimen can burn quite a few more calories than a slow weight lifting regimen, and just because it's not cardio doesn't mean that it doesn't burn a lot of calories. It just depends on how high you can get your HR going by doing it.

    my HR is 20bpm higher in a deadlift if i hold my breath. does that mean I burn more calories if I hold my breath while exercising?
  • bcutler06
    bcutler06 Posts: 4
    If you hold your breath while exercising, you are doing yourself a disservice. However, to answer your question, when you resume breathing, it will be at an even higher rate than if you had breathed normally in the first place. Or you could just hold your breath until you pass out...

    But no, you wouldn't necessarily burn more by increasing your hr, however, an increase in your hr leads to increase in V02. It has to, otherwise your blood will not have the correct balance of oxygen.
  • Shock_Wave
    Shock_Wave Posts: 1,573 Member
    Formulas available from the Journal of Sports Sciences provide the calorie expenditure calculations for both genders. Men use the equation Calories = [(0.6309 x average heart rate) -- (0.09036 x weight) + (0.2017 x age) -- 55.0969] x time / 4.184.

    Estimates
    That Mayo Clinic offers calorie expenditure estimates for weight training. A 30-minute weight training session burns about 109 calories if you weight 160 lbs. This weight training session burns about 137 calories if you weigh 200 lbs. and 164 calories if you weigh 240 lbs.


    Also out of all the counters I have used this link calculates the closest to the reputable guesstimates I posted above^^

    http://www.self.com/calculatorsprograms/calculators/caloriesburned/weight_lifting/result?weightPounds=214&duration=26&activity=&met=3.0&submit=
  • treetop57
    treetop57 Posts: 1,578 Member
    My recommendation? Take the harmonic mean of the numbers:

    8d5a941622352760cadde9f52209b89d.png

    Alternately, realize that all the variables involved are estimates (calories consumed, calories expended in exercise, basal metabolic rate). Knowing the exact calories burned in any one workout is neither possible nor terribly important.
  • TKRV
    TKRV Posts: 165 Member
    bump
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    you can't use blood pressure or heart rate monitors to gauge calorie burn during anaerobic resistance activity.

    Google the Valsalva Manuver and the pressor response.

    the heart immediately increases capacity based on the internal pressure from heavy resistance, since HRM's work of the BPM of a person, this will give false results.

    It's notoriously difficult to judge calories burned for weight training as not only does the weight training increase the calorie burn during the work out (although since it's a targeted activity, not nearly as high as a cardiovascular activity would increase, nor as consistent since different muscles are being targeted at different times of the workout) but also, because of the many hours and sometimes days it takes to repair the muscles that are worked, the metabolic rate is changed for that whole period. Long story short, I'd include a small increase (maybe 100 to 200 calories) but also be aware that you might burn an extra couple hundred over the next 24 hours.

    It's really a very personal thing you must do a little testing and experimentation with. it's almost impossible to create a generic formula that works for everyone.
  • TKRV
    TKRV Posts: 165 Member
    I have a question here then. If I can't measure accurately how many calories I burn, how can I be sure I am eating enough to build those muscles I am using weight training?

    For a person who is comfortably maintaining weight at 1520 cal a day, how much more should I eat assuming I am weight training for an hour 2-3 times a week. Is an extra hundred a day enough. Is there a way for me to calculate that? I'd hate to eat more calories than I should and gain fat instead of muscle.
  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member
    Now THAT is an easy one to answer... If you're new to weight training.

    You should be lifting MORE every session during linear newbie gains. If you run into an issue where you can't recover, you can't lift more weight, (despite deload cycle) increase rest. Increase calorie intake.

    You will gain fat and muscle. You will gain more fat than muscle, in fact. It just comes with the territory.

    You can probably get really far on neuromuscular adaptations. My wife got to nearly a 200lb squat in calorie deficit.

    Me, I couldn't break the 200lb squat until I went into a calorie surplus. So, ymmv.
  • corys8646
    corys8646 Posts: 41 Member
    I personally don't count caloric burn from weight lifting. If I try to, I feel like i'm micro-managing things. Same reason I don't count the walk from my house to the mailbox, just part of my every day living.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    I have a question here then. If I can't measure accurately how many calories I burn, how can I be sure I am eating enough to build those muscles I am using weight training?

    For a person who is comfortably maintaining weight at 1520 cal a day, how much more should I eat assuming I am weight training for an hour 2-3 times a week. Is an extra hundred a day enough. Is there a way for me to calculate that? I'd hate to eat more calories than I should and gain fat instead of muscle.

    it's a very customized situation, you can go about it a number of ways, you can be at maintenance or below and max out your existing muscle fiber utilization then add a small surplus to advance muscle growth, or you can start with a surplus and continue from there, both have advantages, but in the end they'll both get you to the same place, you either end up trying to lose more fat at the end, or at the beginning of a weight training cycle. The amount of surplus is really something you have to test and really decide on your own, depending on your body, your routine, your lifestyle, your sex, your age, your starting weight...etc. you can go small like a 100 calorie surplus, and gain lean mass slowly, or you can go fast and add a 300 to 400 calorie surplus, and you might get up to 2 plus pounds of lean mass per 6 weeks or so, but in the second scenario you'll probably add an equivalent amount of fat mass or maybe more. In the first scenario, if you control yourself well, you'll probably add at least some fat mass for that same cycle, it's hard to predict it since there are so many factors.
  • Jynus
    Jynus Posts: 519 Member
    I have a question here then. If I can't measure accurately how many calories I burn, how can I be sure I am eating enough to build those muscles I am using weight training?

    For a person who is comfortably maintaining weight at 1520 cal a day, how much more should I eat assuming I am weight training for an hour 2-3 times a week. Is an extra hundred a day enough. Is there a way for me to calculate that? I'd hate to eat more calories than I should and gain fat instead of muscle.
    step on a scale. if it's going up slowly, you're gaining weight, thus eating enough. If it's going up to fast, then eat less til it only goes up slowly.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories