Who else burns basically 0 calories walking? anyone else worse at burning calories?

This is more of just a humorous frustration but curious if anyone else basically burns ZERO calories walking and is frustrated that they are so well conditioned it's basically impossible to burn more than 400 Active calories in an hour (with external HR monitor garmin Run)

Background info:

34 year old male, typical resting HR 35, max HR 155. 6% body fat about 133 pounds and 5 foot 8. Typically do the stair master 4 to 6 hours per day and do a 2-hour plank 5 days per week. If I push myself to near death on the stair master I can barely burn more than 400 active calories per hour which is stupid and annoying haha

It's totally embarrassing and frustrating that if I walk a mile I burn maybe 20-30 Active calories! What is the point of even trying lol? Does anyone else have similar results? What is your typical heart rate when walking? Walking is a "NO ZONE" HR zone for me, my HR is usually between 60 and 70 during a moderate pace walk, even if uphill.

I'm sure there are many other people with better conditioning than me who suffer the same issues lol. curious to hear who else struggles to basically burn any meaningful active calories.

0 jim_m_58 over 5 years ago

Maybe this post in the Fenix5x forum will help, as it could be the same thing.

0 Darkice2 over 5 years ago

Hi jim_m_58

I already have activity class set to 10.

But here is what is odd. If I do NOTHING for an hour that burns 75 calories based on my BMR on the Garmin watch. If I walk 3 miles in an hour, I'll burn 70-90 ACTIVE calories at most. How can it possibly be correct that I'm usually burning more doing nothing than walking 3 miles in an hour? At best I'll burn 90 active calories walking 3 miles, which is only 15 more than if I did nothing for an hour...

0 Former Member over 5 years ago

How can it possibly be correct that I'm usually burning more doing nothing than walking 3 miles in an hour?

You're not. Active calories are the calories burned from the activity and not the total calories burned. For example; and I'll round numbers for simplicity, if you burn 100 calories an hr with your BMR and do an activity that burned 300 calories for exactly an hr, your active calories would be 300, total calories 400 for that hour. In your case the total would be 165 total calories. 75 BMR + 90 active calories = 165. Active calories displays calories burned outside of BMR calories for that activity.

0 Darkice2 over 5 years ago

Hi TMK17

Let me re-explain. As you know the watch itself has an "active calories" reading. Lets say I walk 3 miles (doing no "activity" on the garmin watch) and simply watch how much the "active calories" goes up. In 1 hour if I walk 3 miles, I'll burn at most 90 active calories. Again this is without any activity tracking.

My "BMR" is 75 calories per hour. Again I just don't see how it makes sense that doing nothing for an hour I burn about the same amount from if I walked 3 miles in an hour.

0 Former Member over 5 years ago

Darkice2 Active calories are calories burned outside of your BMR. I may have confused you, but it doesn't need to be recorded in an activity to register. Anything you do in that hr that burns calories outside your 75 per BMR will show as active calories, be it a no activity 3 mile walk or sitting on the couch constantly clapping your hands. It's registering nothing more than calories burned in addition to your normal BMR

If you go into your Connect app and look under the Calorie Details tab you'll find 3 circles. One is resting calories (BMR), one is active calories and the third total calories. If Garmin has your hourly BMR at 75, your resting calories circle will show 1800 for every day unless you were to change the value. The active calories circle shows your daily calories burned outside of resting calories. That can come from running 10 miles, vacuuming the floor, cutting the lawn, etc. The total calories circle is the other two circles combined. Does this clear it up a little?

0 Darkice2 over 5 years ago

TMK17 I already understand all those points you made, I think we have a disconnect somewhere. I'm 100% aware what you are saying.

For the day I will burn 1800 calories no matter what if I do nothing. I get that

In one hour I will burn 75 calories doing nothing.

But here is what doesn't make sense... This is the point I am trying to make:

How is it possible that my body runs on 75 calories per hour doing nothing, but walking 3 miles in an hour only burns FIFTEEN calories more than my hourly BMR??? And sometimes walking 3 miles burns LESS than my hourly BMR. Occassionally I will go 3 miles and burn 60 active calories. How can running my body doing nothing for an hour take MORE effort than if I walked 3 miles in an hour?

0 mcbadger over 5 years ago

It doesn't.
In that hour, your total burn is your BMR plus the active calories.

0 Darkice2 over 5 years ago

mcbadger thanks for the reply but I'm still confused and here is why

We can all agree that garmin gives me 75 BMR calories per hour regardless.

The "active" calories on the watch have nothing to do with the BMR.

Let's say it's 1AM. My active calories read 0 and my resting reads 75. I walk 3 miles and stop at 2AM. Now my active calories reads 60 and my BMR reads 150. The BMR is constant and precalculated per hour and have nothing to do with the "active".

Yes I am aware that technically from 1AM to 2AM I burned 135 calories (75+60). But how can it possibly make sense that garmin thinks my body does more "work" (75 calories) doing nothing in an hour than walking 3 miles in an hour (60 calories)?

Do you agree it seems totally bogus that Garmin considers 1 hour 3 mile walk 15 calories less than my hourly BMR?

0 mcbadger over 5 years ago

Could your question be phrased as "why do I burn less than twice the calories walking as my BMR alone?"

I recommended in your other thread that you get a lab test done if you want to be sure about your calorie burn rate. Nothing more to suggest I'm afraid.

0 JasonCollins over 5 years ago

Max HR @ age 35 = 155

Must try harder!