Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Barbell Lifting - Calories Burned WTF page 2

  1. #11
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8,403
    Quote Originally Posted by maclrc View Post
    Maybe so. I'm following 5/3/1 using the BBB variation and a couple of further assisstance exercises each day. Whilst I agree that it isn't as intense as say starting strength, I'm still not exactly just messing around in the gym.

    But at 75kg my BMR is apparently 1775 kCal factor in a sedentary lifestyle (Harris Benedict equation) and that gives 2130 kCal.

    If I add a couple of activities on a weekly basis):

    Cycle commute 800 kCal 3 or 4 times a week = 2400-3200
    Rugby match 800 kCal once a week

    This gives me 18,110-18910 kCal per wk or around 2650 per day

    If I factor in 3 weights sessions at say 1000 kCal I'm at around 3100 per day without factoring in 1 or 2 crossfit sessions a week or any other lighter activity I may end up doing. If I want to gain weight (muscle mass) I'd be looking at close to 4000 kCal per day, if not more!

    In fact, having worked quickly through that, it does help illustrate just how much an active person has to eat in order to bulk up. Also how cardio (in my case cycling and crossfit) are likely to limit bulking efforts.

    Very interesting...
    Yeah, every single one of those figures is speculative and variable, of course, but I bet you burn a lot more energy as a result of your lifting sessions than you realize.

  2. #12
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,066
    Quote Originally Posted by KimchiNinja View Post
    It was mentioned on a different thread today the human can store 2000 calories of muscle glycogen.

    Heavy lifting exhausts a large portion of these stores true? Which they aren't counting in their calories burned figure? That would explain the ~1000 calorie delta.

    Someone needs to fix their numbers. I think if we made a proper bar chart showing calories burned /hr of various exercises there would be walking, jogging, bla bla, and then lifting as this massive mountain way above the rest.
    Well depending on your workout...if you are keeping it under an hour its highly unlikely that you burn more than 100g or 400 calories of glycogen during a session. I would attribute the extra calorie burn to muscle synthesis and repair along with increased metabolic rate over the course of the next 24 hours.

  3. #13
    KimchiNinja's Avatar
    KimchiNinja is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by maclrc View Post
    But at 75kg my BMR is apparently 1775 kCal factor in a sedentary lifestyle (Harris Benedict equation) and that gives 2130 kCal.
    We are about the same stats. I've done a lot of cardio in my past, same as you it looks like. Done the full heart-rate calcs and know how much I burn, and proved it by adding that many calories back and being weight neutral. Cardio calories make sense.

    That's why I was really shocked at how much I ate following just 45min of NEAR MAX lifting. I'm backing into the number by using the "calories required to stay weight neutral" logic, and concluding that 1800 are spent or triggered for future use during those 45min. It seems the current methods are cardio-based measures applied to heavy lifting, and I'm not sure that captures much of anything useful.

    As one poster mentioned it could be that some of those calories are being used to make muscle, certainly hope so! It's interesting we say 3500 calories is a pound of fat but we don't specify how many are required for a pound of muscle. Anyhow I'm gaining at most 1lb per month according to the InBody composition analysis machine.

    So I'm eating a surplus of 21,600 calories a month, staying weight neutral, losing some body fat, and gaining about .7lb muscle. Yeah, I still say whoever made those formulas on the internet got their math wrong. Unless we are saying it takes 21,600 surplus calories to make a pound of muscle

    Anyhow, I just think it is interesting in that it is probably a very complex formula if anyone ever actually got it right.
    Last edited by KimchiNinja; 04-24-2013 at 12:55 AM.

  4. #14
    KimchiNinja's Avatar
    KimchiNinja is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by ronnyyun View Post
    You don't get this same metabolic event from steady state cardio.
    So the formula is actually probably something like...

    [cardio burn (small) + increased metabolism (short term boost) + gyclogen depletion (perhaps sigificant) + calories used to generate muscle (lots)]

    In other words manly heavy lifting burns an ass load of calories.

  5. #15
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8,403
    Quote Originally Posted by KimchiNinja View Post
    Unless we are saying it takes 21,600 surplus calories to make a pound of muscle
    It takes a lot, but I don't know if anyone has even bothered to guess at a number. A pound of muscle is only 600-something calories, but the process of synthesizing it is apparently quite an energy-intensive event. Sounds like you're having great success with your 21,600 kCal surplus and your training. Keep it up and keep counting those calories and let us know what the number is after you've put on 20 or 30 lbs of lean meat.

  6. #16
    KimchiNinja's Avatar
    KimchiNinja is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    2,000
    ^ That may take some time, added 10lbs lean meat year-to-day. My goal was 15lbs by year end, so looking good.

    I guess I rip on the field of nutrition a lot, because honestly it's just so underdeveloped. In investment management we have thick texts on derivatives where smart people have worked out every single formula imaginable. In nutrition people are just "meh, calories in calories out basically". It's lazy. And worse yet, most of the nutrition field seems like politics, marketing and voodoo. What a mess.

    We need guys like Peter Attia and his new company to work out these equations...it shouldn't be that hard.

  7. #17
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,066
    Quote Originally Posted by KimchiNinja View Post
    ^ That may take some time, added 10lbs lean meat year-to-day. My goal was 15lbs by year end, so looking good.

    I guess I rip on the field of nutrition a lot, because honestly it's just so underdeveloped. In investment management we have thick texts on derivatives where smart people have worked out every single formula imaginable. In nutrition people are just "meh, calories in calories out basically". It's lazy. And worse yet, most of the nutrition field seems like politics, marketing and voodoo. What a mess.

    We need guys like Peter Attia and his new company to work out these equations...it shouldn't be that hard.
    Well investment management is a man made entity with fairly finite variables. The human body on the other hand is an exceedingly complex system that we have barely scratched the surface of. Sure we learn more about it each passing day, but for the most part all we learn opens the doors to more questions. Part of the reason biology is still a "soft science", its primarily theoretical due to our inability to reduce its systems to a mathematical equation. I do like Peter Attia's stuff though...

  8. #18
    RichMahogany's Avatar
    RichMahogany is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8,403
    Quote Originally Posted by KimchiNinja View Post
    ^ That may take some time, added 10lbs lean meat year-to-day. My goal was 15lbs by year end, so looking good.

    I guess I rip on the field of nutrition a lot, because honestly it's just so underdeveloped. In investment management we have thick texts on derivatives where smart people have worked out every single formula imaginable. In nutrition people are just "meh, calories in calories out basically". It's lazy. And worse yet, most of the nutrition field seems like politics, marketing and voodoo. What a mess.

    We need guys like Peter Attia and his new company to work out these equations...it shouldn't be that hard.
    I can't disagree with any of that.

  9. #19
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,425
    Quote Originally Posted by RichMahogany View Post
    It takes a lot, but I don't know if anyone has even bothered to guess at a number. A pound of muscle is only 600-something calories, but the process of synthesizing it is apparently quite an energy-intensive event. Sounds like you're having great success with your 21,600 kCal surplus and your training. Keep it up and keep counting those calories and let us know what the number is after you've put on 20 or 30 lbs of lean meat.
    I think that how much work a person must do to stimulate their body to grow muscle is somewhere between mostly and entirely genetic.

  10. #20
    KimchiNinja's Avatar
    KimchiNinja is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    2,000
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Some more observations...

    Switching to 8x8 sets at 60% of my heavy lifting amount, with only 30sec rest between sets. Same 45 min set but much lighter weights and much less resting.

    Absolutely eat a lot less. These sets are hard, almost cardio, but I only eat about +800 calories compared to +1800 doing max lifts. Need about a month doing these 8x8s to really get a grip on it. I adjust the additional calories every day until I find the "weight neutral" spot.

    Guess --> perhaps true HEAVY lifting burns something way beyond just a hard sweaty workout? So take the extreme, one of these power lifters, he only lifts 1000lbs pounds once, but then needs to go eat a trillion calories for that 10 second lift? Or perhaps at the other extreme, dicking around in the gym doing curls and such while chatting would probably do almost nothing.

    No idea, just find it interesting.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •