Calories burned weight lifting

Discussion of peer refereed articles and clinical applications

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, darshana, stuward

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:11 pm

we have switched to kilo calories
and yes, its a silly converssation

robertscott
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4424
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by robertscott » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:17 pm

Oscar_Actuary wrote:we have switched to kilo calories
and yes, its a silly converssation
ya, very silly conversation.

So if I do 4 sets of ten of a 100lb dumbell bench, I burn 2000 calories? I highly doubt it.

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:18 pm

Dub wrote:After that, you haven't taken into account the time under tension. .
I know you want to both mock this and on the other hand provide your own input, so you are conflicted.

For the simple physical calculations, there is only "work" over distance. Holding weight apparently takes no effort. Now you got me wanting t oread about that.

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:20 pm

robertscott wrote:
Oscar_Actuary wrote:we have switched to kilo calories
and yes, its a silly converssation
ya, very silly conversation.

So if I do 4 sets of ten of a 100lb dumbell bench, I burn 2000 calories? I highly doubt it.
Actually probably more.
The rub is that a "food calorie" is actually 1000 calories. We just use the term "calories" for normal talk

tostig
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by tostig » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:35 pm

Just found this definition:
http://science.yourdictionary.com/calorie" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So now we have to make a distinction between small calories or large calories. My calculations would be for small calories (540 small calories = 2260J)

If we are talking about the calories in a cup of vanilla bean latte, then the 350 calories are large calories (350 000 small calories = 1.47 million Joules).

I would have to do 6500 reps of this dumbell press to burn off the latte.

Talking in Joules, here's one of my exercise sessions.

3 sets of Dumbbell Lunges - 3473J
3 sets of Dumbbell Presses - 7231J
3 sets of Dumbbell Rows - 5070J
3 sets of Cable pull down - 9600J

Total session - 25,374J in one hour.

One Vanilla Bean Latte - 350calories, 1.47million Joules?

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sun Jan 27, 2013 2:40 pm

yes

1 kilocalorie = 4184 joules
350 kilocalories = 1 464 400 joules

google.

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6610
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by stuward » Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:00 pm

You're getting close. Since we already know the answer you're trying to get to, that you will burn the latte off in about an hour or so in the gym, you still have some factors to work into your equation.

Of course the real question is what method promotes long term fat loss the best. Actual calorie burn may in irrelevant.
Stu Ward
_________________
Let thy food be thy medicine, and thy medicine be thy food.~Hippocrates
Strength is the adaptation that leads to all other adaptations that you really care about - Charles Staley
_________________
Thanks TimD

tostig
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by tostig » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:30 pm

stuward wrote:You're getting close. Since we already know the answer you're trying to get to, that you will burn the latte off in about an hour or so in the gym, you still have some factors to work into your equation....
Not close enough.

Between my dumbbell days -25,374J
and my barbell days -48,876J
that's an average of 37,125J in a one hour session.

If the latte is really 1.47 million Joules (350,000 calories), it'll take over 39,000 hours to burn it all off. That's 4.5 years for one cup of gourmet coffee. Can't be right.

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Jungledoc » Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:57 pm

tostig wrote:I would have to do 6500 reps of this dumbell press to burn off the latte.
Well, most of us think it's a good idea to program in some cycles of high-rep work! You could do 10 sets of 650 reps.
Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

tostig
Apprentice
Apprentice
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by tostig » Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:24 pm

In my first post, I mentioned the body was not 100% efficient. So I asked if anybody knew what efficiency factor to put into the calculations.

Here's what I found.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-lo ... iency.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
..Now, the next question to look at is how much caloric expenditure (e.g. to cover a certain distance) varies for that range of efficiencies. Let’s say I ride my bike and generate a total power output of 420 kj (I’m picking this odd value to make the math simpler). To convert this to calories, I divide by 4.2 so that’s 100 calories. But only that only represents some percentage of the total I burned because only 20-25% of what I burned calorically went into the actual power output that my Power meter measured.

So to calculate it back out, I can divide by 0.2 for 20% efficiency or 0.25 for 25% efficiency. I’m going to use the extremes to save a bunch of calculations and look at what the maximum realistic change might actually be.

100 calories /0.2 = 500 calories burned

100 calories /0.25 = 400 calories burned...
So my average 37,125J output can be 186,000J burned. Which equates to 7.8hours to burn off the 350calorie (1.46 million J) latte.


Here's another discussion equating 16 calories to a flight of stairs. The energy calculations is between 0.47 and 0.68 depending upon body weight and how high a flight is.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=270575" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So the efficiency factor can be from 5x to 35x.

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:07 am

Just pick which ever effeciency factor allows you the number of lattes you want to drink that week.

robertscott
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4424
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by robertscott » Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:07 am

I think the real question is why on earth you'd drink a vanilla bean latte...

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Re: Calories burned weight lifting

Post by Jungledoc » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:00 pm

If you drink real coffee, you can sit with me in the men's section, and I'll treat you to some nice BAKED goods from my oven, and that will take even longer to burn off.

I do admire you for burning off your latte with bench press instead of some stationary squirrel cage.

And I sure that no matter how efficient everyone else is, I'm less. That's just how I've found life is.
Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

Post Reply