Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
SERENA35 SparkPoints: (2,324)
Fitness Minutes: (3,379)
Posts: 10
2/22/13 5:36 P

Thanks for your reply! I do appreciate it and yes I am aware that no calorie burner is that accurate

SERGEANTMAJOR Posts: 6,412
2/22/13 3:16 P

My point is that since no calorie burn number outside of a laboratory setting is accurate choose an algorithm you are comfortable with and use that single one so you have a consistent number value to record.

SERENA35 SparkPoints: (2,324)
Fitness Minutes: (3,379)
Posts: 10
2/22/13 12:37 P

Controlling my calories in is not an issues. In fact sometimes I might be too on with my calorie intake recording everything. I'm learning about healthy eating more than loosing weight, but it's a known fact you have to record what's going in and what's going out ..in order to loose a lb. it was just a simple question requesting a simple answer. I just want to know I'm working my ass off for a reason and getting the results for my hard work.

SERGEANTMAJOR Posts: 6,412
2/22/13 11:17 A


The point to remember is that no formula, machine or any other application will give you an accurate number for calories burned doing anything. The only accurate measurement is done in a laboratory measuring oxygen consumption, anything else is a SWAG, a scientific wild ass guess. Choose one method and stick with it if you want to play the numbers game. Abetter way to get a semi accurate value is to measure and control your calories in and not worry about those out.

SHAKESALOT Posts: 1,281
2/22/13 7:38 A

emoticon

SERENA35 SparkPoints: (2,324)
Fitness Minutes: (3,379)
Posts: 10
2/21/13 11:59 A

Thanks guys :) I figure I'm somewhere in the middle not to slow not too fast haha

ZORBS13 SparkPoints: (99,005)
Fitness Minutes: (100,188)
Posts: 13,073
2/21/13 9:20 A

I too, always take the lowest number.

ASHLING9 SparkPoints: (11,195)
Fitness Minutes: (22,815)
Posts: 122
2/21/13 9:17 A

I know this doesn't help, but I always like to go with the lowest calories burned! It's better to underestimate than overestimate!

MOTIVATED@LAST Posts: 14,110
2/21/13 9:03 A

One of the problems with online calculators (including Spark) is that there is an implicit assumption that calorie burn is proportionate to body weight. This holds true for most activities (eg. walking, running, aerobics), but there are exceptions.

And water aerobics is one of those exceptions. Your bodyweight is largely irrelevant, as your weight is supported by the water. What matters is how vigorously you are moving against the resistance of the water. So Spark will underestimate the burn for lighter people, and overestimate the burn for heavier people.

It is possible for two people in the same water aerobics class to burn different amounts, as someone can be doing the movements vigorously, while someone else does them fairly gently. And as this happens underwater, it is hard to tell the difference.

As a very rough guide, a reasonably fit person working out vigorously will probably burn around 10-12 calories per minute on a sustained basis.

M@L

SERENA35 SparkPoints: (2,324)
Fitness Minutes: (3,379)
Posts: 10
2/21/13 7:37 A

Ive seen different calories being burned for the same excercise and time. What is the accurate calories being burned? Its for Water Aerobics and Sparks seems to be the lowest at 148 calories burned. This doesnt make any sense to me. I can go on the treadmill and burn equal amount for 1/2 the time. Swimming/ water aerobics burns more calories than walking.We all know that! The lowest calories burned for water aerobics on any other site for 1hr is 236 ( at 130lbs) Im 120lbs, so what is the right answer and why does Spark have it so low??

Page: 1 of (1)  




Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
prediabetes 8/28/2013 2:49:31 PM
Heart Attack and Exercise 9/5/2013 9:37:45 AM
Zumba? 8/3/2013 1:44:38 PM
Any trikers here? 9/17/2013 11:54:31 AM
You Can Do It!!! 7/25/2013 5:14:09 AM

Diet Resources: exercise and heat | heat exercise | exercise in heat