Calories per workout
- Thread starter KikiJohn
- Start date
How many calories are burnt during a workout? It really depends on your size, fitness, and how much exercise you're doing. From what I can gather that kind of thing is hard to gauge.
To be honest, it's much easier to lose weight and create a calorie deficit by changing your diet (and no matter how much exercise you're doing, if you're eating too much, you won't lose weight).
To be honest, it's much easier to lose weight and create a calorie deficit by changing your diet (and no matter how much exercise you're doing, if you're eating too much, you won't lose weight).
Well I'm 5 ft 10, average build and weigh 13 stone 9, I've tried eating less and more healthy, more water and less fizzy drinks and take aways, also go to the gym 3 times a week but that's for bodybuilding..
So just wondering really how many calories i should be burning per workout if I workout 4/5 times a week
Paradise comes at a price..
So just wondering really how many calories i should be burning per workout if I workout 4/5 times a week
Paradise comes at a price..
My understanding is that to work out precisely what you're burning, you need a team of specialists and some very expensive machinery. I don't know why you're worrying about it, there are other ways to factor exercise into weight loss (BMR plus Harris Benedict formula, for example, as a guide to your calorie allowance, bumps up your calories depending on how much exercise you do- this is an estimate too, but you can find that on Google and it's a pretty good guide for most purposes)
I also don't think "should" comes into it. Are you working reasonably hard (pushing yourself but not making yourself feel sick or dizzy, nor injuring yourself), doing something that you can sustain (whether you enjoy it or simply don't hate it) and fitting it in with your other commitments? If so, you're doing well. If not, you need to rethink.
Edit to add: none of this will work if you don't think about diet. For example, if you need to eat 2500 calories a day to maintain your weight at your activity level (as unfortunately it all comes down to this), and you eat 2000, you'll lose; if you eat 3000, you'll gain. Where exercise changes this is if you need to eat 2500 calories working out 5 days a week, you may only need 2000 if you don't work out. A lot of people think they can eat more if they exercise- while this is true, it's only true compared to your calorie allowance- if you're gaining weight, start exercising, and then eat even more, chances are you'll still put on weight.
I also don't think "should" comes into it. Are you working reasonably hard (pushing yourself but not making yourself feel sick or dizzy, nor injuring yourself), doing something that you can sustain (whether you enjoy it or simply don't hate it) and fitting it in with your other commitments? If so, you're doing well. If not, you need to rethink.
Edit to add: none of this will work if you don't think about diet. For example, if you need to eat 2500 calories a day to maintain your weight at your activity level (as unfortunately it all comes down to this), and you eat 2000, you'll lose; if you eat 3000, you'll gain. Where exercise changes this is if you need to eat 2500 calories working out 5 days a week, you may only need 2000 if you don't work out. A lot of people think they can eat more if they exercise- while this is true, it's only true compared to your calorie allowance- if you're gaining weight, start exercising, and then eat even more, chances are you'll still put on weight.
Last edited:
Spinner19641
New member
I went to Mexico for Easter and worked out in the Spa gym on upright bikes (normally I use a spinner bike & it doesn't show mileage or calories burned). I went to the same speed (I ride to music) and roughly the same resistance and the calorie burn was supposedly 800 calories per hour.
Really?
I then do about 20 - 30 minutes intense floor and weight work (which works my cardio harder than any bike) so that would mean I burn something around 1,000 (or even more) calories per session.
I do that 5 - 6 days a week.
Is that calorie burn even possible?
And I eat 1,800 - 2,500 calories per day (I'm 5ft 9in, 47 years old and slim but not skinny). Generally I eat around 1,800 calories during the week and on weekends I eat closer to 2,500.
According to that calorie logic I am eating 1,800 - 2,500 calories, burning 1,000 calories and therefore only getting 800 - 1,500 calories per day. I should be losing weight but I don't gain or lose weight.
So, something in this calorie vs calorie burning logic doesn't make sense to me.
Really?
I then do about 20 - 30 minutes intense floor and weight work (which works my cardio harder than any bike) so that would mean I burn something around 1,000 (or even more) calories per session.
I do that 5 - 6 days a week.
Is that calorie burn even possible?
And I eat 1,800 - 2,500 calories per day (I'm 5ft 9in, 47 years old and slim but not skinny). Generally I eat around 1,800 calories during the week and on weekends I eat closer to 2,500.
According to that calorie logic I am eating 1,800 - 2,500 calories, burning 1,000 calories and therefore only getting 800 - 1,500 calories per day. I should be losing weight but I don't gain or lose weight.
So, something in this calorie vs calorie burning logic doesn't make sense to me.
How are you calculating those figures? From what I've read, a lot of the readings on machines are notoriously inaccurate, and it all depends so heavily on individual factors that machine calculation or online calculators can't possibly take into account (for example, a "calories burned" website may ask if your workout is moderate or intense- moderate or intense according to who? That's a completely subjective measure). Hence my "don't worry about it" to the original poster, and advice on how to go about looking at weight loss using calories and estimations of calories in activity.
To you, I'd say that any of the following three is true: you're miscalculating the calories you need/ consume, you're miscalculating the calories you're burning, or you have a medical condition that stops you from metabolising normally.
To you, I'd say that any of the following three is true: you're miscalculating the calories you need/ consume, you're miscalculating the calories you're burning, or you have a medical condition that stops you from metabolising normally.
Spinner19641
New member
To my knowledge I have no metabolism issues at all. My blood work ups are always completely within range for everything. I also have no problems losing or gaining weight.
Can't speak for the calorie calculation of the bike. I'm just repeating what it read while I was on holiday. Normally I don't have a clue how many calories I am burning and don't care anyway.
As for calorie consumption. Rough estimates only so for all I know they are wrong. But if that bike was right then I must be eating over 3,000 calories per day and I would be surprised if my estimates were that wrong but I suppose it is possible.
I don't really care about it but I was puzzled by the apparent calorie burn.
Jeanette401
New member
While it's possible, it's generally pretty unlikely. Machines tend to overestimate, and they also tend to add in the calories you'd have burned even if you weren't on the bike to make the numbers look better.
The bike doesn't know your level of fitness, either. So the numbers are especially untrustworthy if it's not checking your heart rate.
If you really want to check it out, you could try a heart rate monitor and calculate the calories based on that, but if it were me I'd assume that the machine was overly optimistic.
The bike doesn't know your level of fitness, either. So the numbers are especially untrustworthy if it's not checking your heart rate.
If you really want to check it out, you could try a heart rate monitor and calculate the calories based on that, but if it were me I'd assume that the machine was overly optimistic.
Johnwilliam
New member
I am little bit fatty and do exercise regularly but can't get good results. How we can judge the calories per workout?
Dietoptimist
New member
Its incredibly difficult to accurately measure the calories one burns per workout because it depends on the metabolism and a lot other factors.
Spinner19641
New member
Rightly or wrongly I have always assumed it doesn't matter how many calories I burn in my gym routine. I suspect it varies by a whole pile of factors I have no way of measuring - fitness levels, how familiar my body is with the routine, my adrenalin levels due to other stresses, hormonal fluctuations affecting my energy levels, etc.
I just aim to work out hard (otherwise why bother), work up a sweat, leave feeling physically tired and always eat well.
That seems to work without all the endless counting of calories in vs calories out.
Sometimes I think the whole subject gets over complicated.
But that's just me - I believe in the 'Keep it Simple Stupid' principle.
I just aim to work out hard (otherwise why bother), work up a sweat, leave feeling physically tired and always eat well.
That seems to work without all the endless counting of calories in vs calories out.
Sometimes I think the whole subject gets over complicated.
But that's just me - I believe in the 'Keep it Simple Stupid' principle.
Asylum
New member
Same exact thing here, i don't count calorie eaten or burnt at all. I just work out hard and eat really well and slowly and smaller portion. Listening to your body is really important.