How do YOU determine how many calories you're burning? - 3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community

mkendrick · 04-19-2010, 08:53 AM

I'm still struggling with this. What I wouldn't give to have the money for a bodybugg (I think that's the name?) that I could wear and know exactly how many calories I'm burning. But alas, I am a poor college student, and even $30 for a basic heart rate monitor is a chunk of change for me to spend on a gadget.

The way I've been determining the calories I've been burning is through caloriecount.com. It has ziiiillions of activities to choose from, I type in my minutes, it knows my height/weight/frame, and it records how many calories I supposedly burned. Also, on cardio machines at the gym, I always plug my weight in 15lbs lower than my actual weight. So right now, I'm 142, when the treadmill asks my weight, I say 127lbs. Hopefully this does some to make up for the gross overestimation of burned calories on those machines. Generally, that number is very close to the number that caloriecount.com estimates. For example, the treadmill tells me I've burned 150 calories after 15:40min of running at 5.2mph. When I plug "running - 5.2mph, 15min" into caloriecount, it tells me I burned 147 calories.

I also purposefully record less exercise than I actually do. So, I might run 27min, but record it as 25min. Or I might walk for 30min on an incline, but record it as level ground. And of course, I never record normal daily movement as exercise. Walking around Walmart for 40 min or carrying 10lbs of textbooks uphill to class must burn some calories, but I do not record them.

So, I'm proactively trying to avoid calorie burn overestimation, but I'm always paranoid that I'm not doing enough. What if I'm assuming that I've burned 500 calories, and adjust my calorie intake for the day around that number, when I'm really only burning 350? Thoughts like that concern me.

astrophe · 04-19-2010, 09:10 AM

What if I'm assuming that I've burned 500 calories, and adjust my calorie intake for the day around that number, when I'm really only burning 350? Thoughts like that concern me.

Even an HRM or bodybugg would be an estimate. Perhaps a closer estimate, but estimate nonetheless.

I think it's better to just relax about it. Stressing out over 150 calorie difference is stressing out over a bit more than a cup of OJ.

While you want to keep a general eye on things so it moves in the direction your goal is, neither do you want to micromanage and get all stressed out over either. That's not healthy.

GL!

A.

LBLAZY · 04-19-2010, 10:40 PM

I don't really keep track of the calories burned exactly, but what I have been doing is monitoring what each machine says I burn at the gym, even though I realize they are overestimations.

Since I've always gone by their numbers, I know that if it tells me I burned a total of 500-700 calories doing the various cardio equipment I've actually burned less, but since I have been continually losing while monitoring that estimation range of 500-700 every time I go to they gym, I don't think too much about it. If I know my calories are a bit high for the day, then I'll do some more time on a machine and bump up that range at tad, vice versa if my calories are lower....I suppose I could be more exact, but it works for me....and as long as I'm sweating, I know I'm doing something right.

Alexandra · 04-20-2010, 02:19 AM

The stationary bike at the gym says that in an hour I burn 500 calories. The bike at home (which I don't like very much) says I only burn 200. The calorie counter says that I burn 700.

mandalinn82 · 04-20-2010, 02:44 AM

I don't.

I figure if I'm losing (or now, maintaining), it's enough. If I'm gaining, it's not enough. But other than that, I really don't worry about it and the exact calculations. I don't eat more regardless of the exercise I do. It's just a "bonus" on top of my regular deficit.

nelie · 04-20-2010, 09:33 AM

I've never worried about the calculations for exercise. I know I need to exercise regularly so I do.

saef · 04-20-2010, 09:45 AM

For me, it's like what Mandalinn and Nelie said.

I'll elaborate: When I set out to lose & maintain a weight loss, I decided that I did not want to engage in any behavior that wasn't sustainable for years & years. And I couldn't see myself doing the math on intake & expenditure all the time: Always working out calculations with a pen or pencil on scraps of paper. I saw that as crazy-making. My body's intake & expenditure doesn't work quite like balancing a checkbook & I would be capable of making it into that, as I can get hung up on stuff like that.

So I just spend my days with a general idea of whether the food I'm eating is high or low calorie & whether there's been too much of it or a more reasonable amount, and that I need to get in my exercise. It's more doable & more like how naturally slender & healthy people live. I am trying to mimick that as much as possible, despite my "specialness" (broken metabolism, history of disordered eating, or what have you).

mkendrick · 04-20-2010, 10:28 AM

Thanks guys

I didn't mean to make it sound like I was obsessively needing to know the exact number of every calorie I burned. However, I'm a calorie counter which is a VERY sustainable lifestyle for me, and the simple rule of it is tracking calories in and out. More coming out = weight loss. And my body seems to burn weight most efficiently when I have a deficit of between 500-750cal. So yes, for my plan, having a good estimate of how many calories I'm burning is decently important. I am not obsessive at all, in fact, I commit calorie counting crimes all the time (not counting every fat free condiment, not weighing food, etc). I'm not worried about being obsessively exact, but having a good ballpark feel is important to me.

I was just wondering what methods people used to estimate their burn numbers.

Tomato · 04-20-2010, 12:23 PM

I have the same approach as Amanda and Nelie - I need to work out every day so I am making sure that happens. If I am losing, I am doing enough. If am not losing, I am not doing enough. :-)
I don't count calories that I eat and I don't count calories that I burn.

WarMaiden · 04-20-2010, 12:35 PM

I track my calories in FitDay, so I track my activity in FitDay too. I'm not worried about the exactness of it, but I do like feeling like I've "racked up" a lot of activity for a particular day.

I also work on correlating my approximate deficit to how that affects my body--for example, yesterday's approx deficit was fairly high for me, and then I really didn't sleep solidly last night--and that makes complete sense, because a significant deficit often leads to poorer sleep. (Sleep problems are one possible side effect of ongoing weight loss.) I also know that a significant deficit can affect me the day after by greater feelings of tiredness (like I just don't quite have enough energy for my usual activity), or muscle aches independent of strength training, or increased hunger.

So watching the deficit actually helps me to remain calm about what is going on with my body, thus, I do track my activity.

Another way that tracking my activity helps me is the accountability factor. I track all my major activities, including housework and time spent standing while working. If I wasn't tracking, I'd be tempted to slack off on spending time on those things, and I'd end up doing less.

That might seem "obsessive", but to me it's all very functional and helps me do what I need to do.

oodlesofnoodles · 04-20-2010, 01:39 PM

I dunno I don't really track calories burned because I don't trust the little online doohickeys. I know I sweat like **** and I feel tired after, so I know I worked out enough.

I wish I had a budybugg too

they're so mega expensive. It makes me sad.

MelloFatto · 04-20-2010, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oodlesofnoodles

I dunno I don't really track calories burned because I don't trust the little online doohickeys. I know I sweat like **** and I feel tired after, so I know I worked out enough.

I wish I had a budybugg too

they're so mega expensive. It makes me sad.

DOOHICKY!

Robsia · 04-20-2010, 01:52 PM

My garmin tells me.

However, I don't factor it into my food intake as if you go and exercise then just eat the calories that you've burned off, what's the point? I just eat the same as I eat on days I don't exercise, then I actually lose more weight by exercising than I would otherwise.

Autumn Gold · 04-28-2010, 08:39 PM

Well I have one of those high-tech heart-rate monitors and I think even these overestimate a little bit. If I work out for 20 minutes HARD (80-90% of my ability,) the HR monitor tells me I've burnt about 280 calories. I usually round that down to about 220 at the most. Mainly because, if I were merely standing/sitting still I would burn SOME calories in 20 mins, so I take off what I think I would burn doing nothing in 20 mins.

Not sure whether that makes sense.

redsox33 · 04-28-2010, 08:54 PM

I don't keep track of calories I burn while exercising. I know I'm burning much more than chilling on the couch and I've cut back on my portion sizes (after devoting two months prior to exercising regularly to changing from junk foods/processed/fast foods to healthy made-from-scratch whole foods).

I'm losing weight at a rate I'm very comfortable with and am happy with the results. Maybe I could be losing faster if I kept track, but, I don't think it's possible to measure exactly how much one loses in a given workout. Just my two cents. I applaud any and all methods to a healthy lifestyle, so please don't think I'm "dissing" measuring caloric burn. It works for SO many people and I think that's just wonderful! It doesn't do anything for me, therefore I don't do it. Keep doing what works for you!