A Fitness & exercise forum. FitnessBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » FitnessBanter.com forum » Fitness & Exercise » Weights
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Calories burn pound of fat



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 20th 11, 11:53 PM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Existential Angst[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 835
Default Calories burn pound of fat

"dogbone" wrote in message
...
how many calories does a pound of fat burn a day?


Poorly worded, but a pound of fat provides about 3600 cals of energy.

BUT, 3600 cals worth of exercise does NOT mean you have burned a lb of
fat -- not even close.

Longish story, waaaay over Friedes head, proly over Jason's head, as iirc
Jason subscribes to that asshole on DragonDoor who purports to lose 4 lbs of
fat per week, or some dumb **** like that......
--
EA


  #2  
Old April 21st 11, 01:47 AM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Jason Earl[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 761
Default Calories burn pound of fat

On Wed, Apr 20 2011, Existential Angst wrote:

"dogbone" wrote in message
...
how many calories does a pound of fat burn a day?


Poorly worded, but a pound of fat provides about 3600 cals of energy.


Actually, assuming he wants to know the metabolic cost of maintaining a
pound of fat tissue per day, I think that the question was decently
worded. I have no idea what the answer is, a bit of googling simply
turned up that the cost was very low. I am sure that it has got to cost
*something* though.

Jason
  #3  
Old April 21st 11, 04:53 PM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Jim Janney[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 477
Default Calories burn pound of fat

Jason Earl writes:

On Wed, Apr 20 2011, Existential Angst wrote:

"dogbone" wrote in message
...
how many calories does a pound of fat burn a day?


Poorly worded, but a pound of fat provides about 3600 cals of energy.


Actually, assuming he wants to know the metabolic cost of maintaining a
pound of fat tissue per day, I think that the question was decently
worded. I have no idea what the answer is, a bit of googling simply
turned up that the cost was very low. I am sure that it has got to cost
*something* though.


Heat generated is a decent marker for metabolic activity, and I remember
reading somewhere that the normal body temperature for fat is lower than
other tissue. Then there are secondary effects: the insulating effect
of subcutaneous fat reduces the amount of heat you need to generate just
to stay warm, but the extra weight means you work a bit harder just
moving around. Hard to put numbers to any of this.

--
Jim Janney
  #4  
Old April 21st 11, 07:27 PM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Jason Earl[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 761
Default Calories burn pound of fat

On Thu, Apr 21 2011, dogbone wrote:

On Apr 20, 8:47*pm, Jason Earl wrote:
On Wed, Apr 20 2011, Existential Angst wrote:
"dogbone" wrote in message
...
how many calories does a pound of fat burn a day?


Poorly worded, but a pound of fat provides about 3600 cals of energy.


Actually, assuming he wants to know the metabolic cost of maintaining a
pound of fat tissue per day, I think that the question was decently
worded. *I have no idea what the answer is, a bit of googling simply
turned up that the cost was very low. *I am sure that it has got to cost
*something* though.

Jason


Yes you understood the question correctly.


That's good to know.

I couldn't find the answer anywhere on the net, it's got to cost
something to keep it going.


Exactly, it is living tissue. At the very least it costs the heart
extra work to push blood through all of the extra capillaries. I think
that this is a good question. I wish I knew the answer.

Mainly I'm looking for the answer if you want to lose 10 pounds of
fat, how many less calories do you need to consume each day.


I have written down everything I have eaten for well over a year now,
and I also track my workouts (although I generally don't try and
calculate how many calories I burned). Personally, I think that it is
unlikely that you are going to be able to track the many variables
involved in weight loss precisely enough that knowing the metabolic cost
of your fat tissue can become an issue. I still think your question is
a good one, but I don't think that the answer is particularly relevant
to losing weight.

From a practical standpoint you would almost certainly be better off
making sure you don't eat an extra half tablespoon of peanut butter than
trying to figure out how many extra calories you get to eat because you
are carrying around extra fat.

On the bright side, my own personal experience also shows that if you
have a fair amount of fat to lose then losing weight is pretty easy.
When I first started losing weight it did not hardly matter what I did.
The first few weeks that I started tracking my food intake I lost two
pounds a week despite the fact that I wasn't trying to reduce my food
intake at all. I just wanted a baseline.

Now, if you are already pretty lean, then things are far more
difficult. However, if that is the case then the metabolic cost of
maintaining the little bit of fat that you have left is likely to be
very *very* low.

Even if you are very careful about recording what you eat and how much
you exert yourself you are likely to find that your weight loss is not
even remotely linear. I weigh myself daily, and have found that my
weight on any given morning rarely has anything to do with the amount of
calories I ate the day before. If I take the 7 day moving average of my
weight and calories then it becomes clear that there is a correlation,
but otherwise, not so much.

In short, unless you are already very lean (in which case you probably
need more expert advice than I can give) you are probably over-thinking
the weight loss process. Spend a few weeks figuring out how many
calories you eat. Just write everything down. You will probably lose
weight, even though that is not the goal. Once you have an idea about
how much you eat try and eat a little less (and work a bit more). I
would recommend that you take it easy at first. Generally people fail
because they try and do too much. They cut their calories to a
ridiculously low level and begin training for a marathon, and they
wonder why it takes so much willpower to lose weight.

You did not put the extra weight on at the rate of 10 pounds per week.
Do not be surprised if you have problems taking the weight off at that
rate.

Jason
  #5  
Old April 21st 11, 10:18 PM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Jason Earl[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 761
Default Calories burn pound of fat

On Thu, Apr 21 2011, dogbone wrote:

On Apr 21, 2:27*pm, Jason Earl wrote:
I have written down everything I have eaten for well over a year now,
and I also track my workouts (although I generally don't try and
calculate how many calories I burned). *Personally, I think that it is
unlikely that you are going to be able to track the many variables
involved in weight loss precisely enough that knowing the metabolic cost
of your fat tissue can become an issue. *I still think your question is
a good one, but I don't think that the answer is particularly relevant
to losing weight.


I guess I have to disagree. You have to ask the question, what if
someone overeats 100 calories/day, will he keep gaining weight
forever, the answer is no. You see it all the time with people, they
overeat, gain weight up to a certain point and stop, so why? It has to
be the extra fat burning off all those extra calories. An equilibrium
exists.


Actually, I still think that we agree. I certainly agree that the
bigger you get the more calories you burn. The problem is that there
are a lot of variables involved, and at a certain level it becomes very
difficult to actually measure how much each of the variables actually
contributes to the end result.

Your example is actually a very good one. If you add 700 calories per
week your body will find a new higher stable weight instead of
continuing to add weight indefinitely. However, it is very difficult to
know if the weight loss stopped because of the metabolic cost of the
added tissue or the physical cost of hauling around the extra weight.
Not to mention the fact that the higher caloric intake could probably be
combined with a change in diet in such a way that the you actually lose
weight. Not all calories are as available to the body as others.

The body is a complicated system, and it resists attempts to simplify
things to this level.

Anyway, in my case, I was trying to lose 4-5 pounds, could never do,
but I did eat toast with butter on Sunday morning as a treat. When I
stopped that, I lost the 5 pounds, took a long time, but they went
off. It must be the toast with butter once a week was enough to
maintain the 4 pounds of fat.


If you are disciplined enough in your tracking of what you eat that 140
(or so) calories per week actually makes a difference in how much you
weigh over time then perhaps it is possible that the metabolic cost of a
pound of fat *is* a number that would be useful to you. I try and be
careful when I weigh and measure my food, but I am not that careful.
That's about 20 calories per day difference. I could be off by more
than that just by having the kid at Wendy's put an extra slice of bacon
on my burger. When I order a Double Stack I don't count the slices of
cheese to see if the calories add up. I doubt I have ever eaten a
Double Stack that was precisely the 360 calories that Wendy's says it
is, but that doesn't stop me from writing each Double Stack down as
containing 360 calories.

This is not to say that I don't believe you. I have no problems
believing that you lost 5 pounds over time by cutting out a weekly toast
binge. I just think that it is somewhat more likely that the toast (or
lack of it) had an impact on how much water your body retained, than
that you measure your food carefully enough that 140 calories per week
was anything more than a rounding error. Heck, the real cause for your
weight loss could be as simple as you believing that toast made you fat,
and your faith making it true. The mind is a very powerful instrument.

As for your original question. I wish that I could point you to some
solid numbers on the metabolic cost of fat, but I do not have any. As
far as I can tell there has been all sorts of scientific studies on the
metabolic costs of muscle tissue, but fat tissue, not so much.

Jason
  #6  
Old April 22nd 11, 04:10 PM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Jim Janney[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 477
Default Calories burn pound of fat

dogbone writes:

On Apr 21, 5:18*pm, Jason Earl wrote:
*As
far as I can tell there has been all sorts of scientific studies on the
metabolic costs of muscle tissue, but fat tissue, not so much.


found it! (just needed to use the right google search terms)

http://www.thefactsaboutfitness.com/news/cals.htm

2 calories/day for fat (see chart in middle of article)

so 7days*4pounds*2 calories/day/pound = 56 calories/week to maintain 4
pounds of fat

that is two pats of butter/week, come to think of it, I stopped eating
the butter alltogether, but sometimes had the plain toast


Thanks for the link. Interesting point is that resting metabolism is
relatively low for both muscle *and* fat. Brain hypertrophy, that's
what we really need :-)

--
Jim Janney
  #7  
Old April 26th 11, 08:21 AM
build build is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by FitnessBanter: Apr 2011
Posts: 15
Default

3500 calories is the rough estimate for the energy contained in one pound of fat. This means that to lose one pound per week, you must create a deficit of 3500 calories per week. Since a week as 7 days, that means a deficit of 3500 / 7 = 500 calories per day. This is a great starting point.
  #8  
Old May 9th 11, 04:37 AM posted to misc.fitness.weights
Seth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 85
Default Calories burn pound of fat

In article ,
dogbone wrote:

I guess I have to disagree. You have to ask the question, what if
someone overeats 100 calories/day, will he keep gaining weight
forever, the answer is no. You see it all the time with people, they
overeat, gain weight up to a certain point and stop, so why? It has to
be the extra fat burning off all those extra calories. An equilibrium
exists.


If he gains fat, he then builds more muscle to help schlep the fat
around, so there's extra muscle (a little) and fat (mostly). At some
point, together they burn the extra 100 calories.

Seth
  #9  
Old August 5th 11, 01:06 PM
larded larded is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by FitnessBanter: Aug 2011
Posts: 3
Lightbulb

Green tea is really helpful to burn the calories of the body in best way without facing the any serious problem of the body. So try it to get the good results.

Last edited by larded : August 6th 11 at 09:53 AM.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dear fat bashers: Undeniable proof that 300+ pound women can be fit. Real BBW Weights 52 July 29th 05 08:51 PM
How many calories does _____ burn? Spammers_Should_Be_Shot Weights 0 July 1st 04 09:09 PM
Swim Slower and Burn More Calories 4precious Swimming 34 September 19th 03 06:27 PM
What does a pound of fat look like? Hitchking Weights 16 August 7th 03 10:09 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 FitnessBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.