Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys,

    I saw this workout claiming to burn 1,000 calories, based on what you know does this seem correct?

    Per Day Complete:
    400 jumping jacks
    300 crunches
    200 crunches
    100 push ups

    I currently eat around 1,500 calories so if this workout is correct I would be on 500 calories a day.
    Also, is this healthy? or should I be eating more calories. Will losing this much weight be unhealthy per week?

    I am 5ft 2 and weigh 122 pounds, 16 years old and am tired of being overweight.

    On top of this I also walk for 40 minutes a day.

    Bear in mind I cannot do push ups so may substitute those with oblique twists or some mild Pilates?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not sure about the workout burning 1000 calories, but I'm your age,and female too, and although I'm 5ft7, I still think only consuming 500 calories per day is not substantial enough to be honest. To really lose weight, you need 30 mins - an hour of moderate exercise several times a week. You'll just burn out if you're exercising but not fuelling your body properly

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 3mma_gal96)
    I'm not sure about the workout burning 1000 calories, but I'm your age,and female too, and although I'm 5ft7, I still think only consuming 500 calories per day is not substantial enough to be honest. To really lose weight, you need 30 mins - an hour of moderate exercise several times a week. You'll just burn out if you're exercising but not fuelling your body properly

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I would be eating 1,500 and burning 100 though, does that not make a difference?

    Do you think the work out burns at least 500 calories?

    But okay thanks for the help


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saywhatyoumean)
    Hi guys,

    I saw this workout claiming to burn 1,000 calories, based on what you know does this seem correct?

    Per Day Complete:
    400 jumping jacks
    300 crunches
    200 crunches
    100 push ups

    I currently eat around 1,500 calories so if this workout is correct I would be on 500 calories a day.
    Also, is this healthy? or should I be eating more calories. Will losing this much weight be unhealthy per week?

    I am 5ft 2 and weigh 122 pounds, 16 years old and am tired of being overweight.

    On top of this I also walk for 40 minutes a day.

    Bear in mind I cannot do push ups so may substitute those with oblique twists or some mild Pilates?
    That workout is a bunch of crap. You shouldn't be working the same muscle/body part everyday and when you do, it needs to be harder than that. You need a proper workout routine where you work a different body part everyday. Like on Monday you can work your chest and back by doing 12 sets of 30 push ups and 12 sets of 15 pull ups (you do a different type of push up and pull up each set like wide front push ups, diamond push ups, tower pull up, corn cob pull up etc)

    You can burn up to 1000 calories per workout with insanity. If you really want to lose weight the healthy way but want to see great results then you have to eat right and work really hard. Insanity requires no equipment
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saywhatyoumean)
    Hi guys,

    I saw this workout claiming to burn 1,000 calories, based on what you know does this seem correct?

    Per Day Complete:
    400 jumping jacks
    300 crunches
    200 crunches
    100 push ups

    I currently eat around 1,500 calories so if this workout is correct I would be on 500 calories a day.
    Also, is this healthy? or should I be eating more calories. Will losing this much weight be unhealthy per week?

    I am 5ft 2 and weigh 122 pounds, 16 years old and am tired of being overweight.

    On top of this I also walk for 40 minutes a day.

    Bear in mind I cannot do push ups so may substitute those with oblique twists or some mild Pilates?
    It's not as easy as "this exercise burns x amount of calories" because it depends on your body stats, fitness levels and effort you put into it. I would be more concerned about how much TIME all of those exercises would take out of your day!

    Also, if you're only eating 1,500 calories, walking for 40 minutes, doing all of those, plus whatever else you do during the day.. it sounds like a nightmare to me.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    500 calories per day is NOT enough, and not necessary. Stay on your 1500 calories, 1200 at the absolute minimum. If you wanna get fit, do a little cardio and heavy lifting. Eat your exercise calories.

    PS - crunches are useless. You're better off deadlifting or planking.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    500 calories per day is NOT enough, and not necessary. Stay on your 1500 calories, 1200 at the absolute minimum. If you wanna get fit, do a little cardio and heavy lifting. Eat your exercise calories.

    PS - crunches are useless. You're better off deadlifting or planking.
    She didn't mean eat 500 calories, she meant eat 1,500 and burn 1,000.. therefore leaving her net at 500.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    She didn't mean eat 500 calories, she meant eat 1,500 and burn 1,000.. therefore leaving her net at 500.
    I know .. Which is the same result... Undereating.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    I know .. Which is the same result... Undereating.
    You said "stay on your 1,500 calories" which shows you thought she meant eating 500. So it's not the same thing at all. In fact, you even suggested she could drop a further 300 cals, to 1,200!!

    I did say above that I thought it was too much exercise, but as far as dieting is concerned I'd think 1,500 would be okay for most people doing exercise sessions a couple of times a week.

    Also, it really depends on what you class as "under eating". The whole point of weight loss is to be in a calorie deficit, which means overall burning more calories than you eat. The important thing to do is to really concentrate on how you feel. If you feel unusually tired or irritable then perhaps you should up calories or reduce exercise. But personally, I ate 1,200 a day and exercised probably 700 calories a day (so same net as OP) for a long time and felt fine. Yet my Mum would feel faint if she did that.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saywhatyoumean)
    I would be eating 1,500 and burning 100 though, does that not make a difference?

    Do you think the work out burns at least 500 calories?

    But okay thanks for the help


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ah yeah, sorry, I see what you're saying, but I mean your overall calorie intake would still be effectively 500, which is definitely not enough.
    The workout may very well burn 500 calories, I'm not sure, but burning 500 calories is easier and safer when you know how and have a proper fitness regime, as another poster said. I've got excellent results going to the gym and just power walking on an incline for about 20 minutes, followed by a 25 minute stint on the cross trainer and then usually a run for about 20 minutes and I usually burn 700-800 calories. I do that about 4 times a week, (maybe a bit less with exams), and then also alternate days, and the days I'm not in the gym, I do some sit-ups, crunches, squats, etc. Hope this helps

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    You said "stay on your 1,500 calories" which shows you thought she meant eating 500. So it's not the same thing at all. In fact, you even suggested she could drop a further 300 cals, to 1,200!!

    I did say above that I thought it was too much exercise, but as far as dieting is concerned I'd think 1,500 would be okay for most people doing exercise sessions a couple of times a week.

    Also, it really depends on what you class as "under eating". The whole point of weight loss is to be in a calorie deficit, which means overall burning more calories than you eat. The important thing to do is to really concentrate on how you feel. If you feel unusually tired or irritable then perhaps you should up calories or reduce exercise. But personally, I ate 1,200 a day and exercised probably 700 calories a day (so same net as OP) for a long time and felt fine. Yet my Mum would feel faint if she did that.
    That's YOUR misunderstanding, I know I was referring to net calories consumed. So if she wanted to burn 1000 calories per day with this workout, she could eat 2500 calories per day, therefore being NET 1500. Hence why I mentioned eating her exercise calories.

    500 calories per day is undereating. That's a fact. 1500/1200 is enough of a deficit. Lower than 1200 is not recommended by medical professionals and anyone with sense. You may have been okay netting 500 calories per day, but it's irresponsible of you to suggest that to others.

    Edit: And I don't think this workout is a good idea anyway, so I suggested her staying on 1500 calories. And if she wants to do some more meaningful exercise, calculating calories burnt and eating them back so she's still netting 1500.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    That's YOUR misunderstanding, I know I was referring to net calories consumed. So if she wanted to burn 1000 calories per day with this workout, she could eat 2500 calories per day, therefore being NET 1500. Hence why I mentioned eating her exercise calories.

    500 calories per day is undereating. That's a fact. 1500/1200 is enough of a deficit. Lower than 1200 is not recommended by medical professionals and anyone with sense. You may have been okay netting 500 calories per day, but it's irresponsible of you to suggest that to others.

    Edit: And I don't think this workout is a good idea anyway, so I suggested her staying on 1500 calories. And if she wants to do some more meaningful exercise, calculating calories burnt and eating them back so she's still netting 1500.
    She's not eating 500 calories a day though, she's eating 1,500.

    I don't mean to sound pedantic (honestly) but you can't say her net calories are 1,500 either.. I absolutely understand what you mean, but.. in order to lose weight then the actual "net" needs to be a minus figure, otherwise fat wouldn't be burned.

    The 1,200 (which is an incredibly random number thrown around, I'm not even sure anybody knows why.. do you?) is food eaten, not net calories. I've never read that the 1,200 is "net".

    What do you count as "exercise" towards the "net"? Because everything burns calories.. you're just counting her workouts, right? Well what if she has a busy day and does a lot of walking around. Why is that not unhealthy, but a scheduled exercise session would be?

    And about you saying I'm suggesting it. Absolutely not. You clearly didn't read my first post where I said the amount of exercise she's suggesting sounds too much. I simply said that I PERSONALLY coped well eating that amount of calories whilst exercising. I lost the weight I needed to, always had enough energy to get through the day (and in fact completed years 2 and 3 of my degree, including dissertation and finals) and my mood didn't suffer. And I also said that it's important to see how you FEEL whilst you're losing weight. I said that although I was okay, when my Mum tried it she couldn't cope with it. So I don't think that was me telling her to go ahead and do it regardless. I dread to know what you'd think about my 2 months on the alternate day diet .

    Losing weight is usually a short term (as in a very small percentage of your life, assuming you do it successfully) so it's not as though that's the lifestyle you have to maintain. If you cope, and you see no negative effects of your regime, then I'd say it's worth it to lose weight. 1,500 calories a day is not a starvation diet by any means, as long as it is only short term.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    OP. If you are serious about losing weight just try the workout and see how you get on. If you are serious about weight loss or getting fit - you go out and do; you don't sit around and theorise about numbers that are too awkward to calculate with any degree of success.

    At 16 years old at your height and weight, I can guarantee that you don't need to focus on losing weight anyway. Just aim to get fit and you will start to improve your figure.

    That said, I doubt that I would burn 1,000 calories doing that routine. You are probably only talking about 15-20 mins of work.

    The only good thing about it is the pressups really - jumping jacks are just a warm up and 500 crunches will probably just **** up your posture.

    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    She's not eating 500 calories a day though, she's eating 1,500.

    I don't mean to sound pedantic (honestly) but you can't say her net calories are 1,500 either.. I absolutely understand what you mean, but.. in order to lose weight then the actual "net" needs to be a minus figure, otherwise fat wouldn't be burned.

    The 1,200 (which is an incredibly random number thrown around, I'm not even sure anybody knows why.. do you?) is food eaten, not net calories. I've never read that the 1,200 is "net".

    What do you count as "exercise" towards the "net"? Because everything burns calories.. you're just counting her workouts, right? Well what if she has a busy day and does a lot of walking around. Why is that not unhealthy, but a scheduled exercise session would be?

    And about you saying I'm suggesting it. Absolutely not. You clearly didn't read my first post where I said the amount of exercise she's suggesting sounds too much. I simply said that I PERSONALLY coped well eating that amount of calories whilst exercising. I lost the weight I needed to, always had enough energy to get through the day (and in fact completed years 2 and 3 of my degree, including dissertation and finals) and my mood didn't suffer. And I also said that it's important to see how you FEEL whilst you're losing weight. I said that although I was okay, when my Mum tried it she couldn't cope with it. So I don't think that was me telling her to go ahead and do it regardless. I dread to know what you'd think about my 2 months on the alternate day diet .

    Losing weight is usually a short term (as in a very small percentage of your life, assuming you do it successfully) so it's not as though that's the lifestyle you have to maintain. If you cope, and you see no negative effects of your regime, then I'd say it's worth it to lose weight. 1,500 calories a day is not a starvation diet by any means, as long as it is only short term.
    This basically. This 'net' calorie business is not something people should focus on so much. Just weigh yourself every so often and then you will see how many calories you 'net'.

    I net 0 calories per day and eat up to 3,000 calories. I know I net 0 because my weight stays fairly constant. It is just as simple as that really.

    People need to stop obsessing about numbers and consult the freaking obvious like how they feel and perform.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xoxAngel_Kxox)
    She's not eating 500 calories a day though, she's eating 1,500.

    I don't mean to sound pedantic (honestly) but you can't say her net calories are 1,500 either.. I absolutely understand what you mean, but.. in order to lose weight then the actual "net" needs to be a minus figure, otherwise fat wouldn't be burned.

    The 1,200 (which is an incredibly random number thrown around, I'm not even sure anybody knows why.. do you?) is food eaten, not net calories. I've never read that the 1,200 is "net".

    What do you count as "exercise" towards the "net"? Because everything burns calories.. you're just counting her workouts, right? Well what if she has a busy day and does a lot of walking around. Why is that not unhealthy, but a scheduled exercise session would be?

    And about you saying I'm suggesting it. Absolutely not. You clearly didn't read my first post where I said the amount of exercise she's suggesting sounds too much. I simply said that I PERSONALLY coped well eating that amount of calories whilst exercising. I lost the weight I needed to, always had enough energy to get through the day (and in fact completed years 2 and 3 of my degree, including dissertation and finals) and my mood didn't suffer. And I also said that it's important to see how you FEEL whilst you're losing weight. I said that although I was okay, when my Mum tried it she couldn't cope with it. So I don't think that was me telling her to go ahead and do it regardless. I dread to know what you'd think about my 2 months on the alternate day diet .

    Losing weight is usually a short term (as in a very small percentage of your life, assuming you do it successfully) so it's not as though that's the lifestyle you have to maintain. If you cope, and you see no negative effects of your regime, then I'd say it's worth it to lose weight. 1,500 calories a day is not a starvation diet by any means, as long as it is only short term.
    It seems you don't know much about weight loss LOL.

    I really can not be bothered with this inane argument anymore.

    OP, I stick to my original post. Good luck!

    P.S - 1500 is a deficit. So you will lose weight. And of course it's not a starvation diet. Where are you going with this? :/ but burning off 1000 calories and leaving yourself with NET 500 calories is a starvation diet. Because your body has burnt off the energy you've consumed.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mark85)
    OP. If you are serious about losing weight just try the workout and see how you get on. If you are serious about weight loss or getting fit - you go out and do; you don't sit around and theorise about numbers that are too awkward to calculate with any degree of success.

    At 16 years old at your height and weight, I can guarantee that you don't need to focus on losing weight anyway. Just aim to get fit and you will start to improve your figure.

    That said, I doubt that I would burn 1,000 calories doing that routine. You are probably only talking about 15-20 mins of work.

    The only good thing about it is the pressups really - jumping jacks are just a warm up and 500 crunches will probably just **** up your posture.



    This basically. This 'net' calorie business is not something people should focus on so much. Just weigh yourself every so often and then you will see how many calories you 'net'.

    I net 0 calories per day and eat up to 3,000 calories. I know I net 0 because my weight stays fairly constant. It is just as simple as that really.

    People need to stop obsessing about numbers and consult the freaking obvious like how they feel and perform.
    This thread is hilarious.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    It seems you don't know much about weight loss LOL.

    I really can not be bothered with this inane argument anymore.

    OP, I stick to my original post. Good luck!

    P.S - 1500 is a deficit. So you will lose weight. And of course it's not a starvation diet. Where are you going with this? :/ but burning off 1000 calories and leaving yourself with NET 500 calories is a starvation diet. Because your body has burnt off the energy you've consumed.
    She is right. Although ending at a net of 500 is too low, it is totally different from only eating 500. Any fitness expert would say the same thing.
    Even if you're using fitnesspal, the important point is how much you consume, even if you burn some of it. You can eat 1500 calories and burn 400 of them, which will leave you at a net 1100, and it's still much healthier than only eating 1100.
    So don't be so rude, xoxAngel_Kxox made a decent point, she's not retarded.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopefulMidwife)
    It seems you don't know much about weight loss LOL.

    I really can not be bothered with this inane argument anymore.

    OP, I stick to my original post. Good luck!

    P.S - 1500 is a deficit. So you will lose weight. And of course it's not a starvation diet. Where are you going with this? :/ but burning off 1000 calories and leaving yourself with NET 500 calories is a starvation diet. Because your body has burnt off the energy you've consumed.
    No, I know nothing at all about weight loss. I've only lost 10 stone, a fairly insignificant amount, I agree.

    Burning off 1000 calories DOESN'T leave you with NET 500 calories, because everything else you do in the day burns calories as well, so you ALWAYS end up in a MINUS net, as Mark explained above. You're talking as if it's a bad thing to burn the energy you've consumed.. that's kind of the whole basis of weight loss.. and you say I know nothing about it!!
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.