Yes, the standard convention to estimate calories is to include your underlying metabolism as well as the additional calories burned through exercise. This applies across websites, wearable HRM's, laboratory measurements, etc.
The reason for this is that scientists and doctors are usually interested in the TOTAL load on the heart and lungs, which of course includes the need to supply oxygen for metabolism as well as exercise.
While for weight loss purposes, this is perhaps technically a double count (given metabolism is nomally accounted for elsewhere), for short duration intense exercise, the double count is really pretty insignificant, and probably less than the margin of error in calorie estimation anyway. It does become more of an issue for exercise that lasts for several hours (eg. a century bike ride, hiking several miles, etc).
Fitness Minutes: (25,094)
1,102 1/23/14 5:26 P
Ha! I was thinking the EXACT same thing last night as I was doing my workout. I don't know if anyone has the answer to that, but I am curious.
Fitness Minutes: (898)
4 1/23/14 2:28 P
So we've all used it, but I got to thinking. Every time I start over, I always find a calculator that tells me how much I burn if I do nothing. Then after exercise, I'll use the calculator to tell me how I burned. So here's my question, does this exercise calorie calculator include the calories you would've burned just sitting around or are these calories on top of what you would burn anyway? Because if just sitting around doing nothing burns about 90 calories per hour and I lift weights for 30 minutes, which according to the calculator burns about 100 calories,so did I burn just 100 calories in that thirty or the 100 + 45?
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.