Eating back your gym calories, yes or no?

Veganvibesss

Personally I don't ever eat them back unless I don't feel to great, I know alot of people say you should but alot say you shouldn't so how about you guys? What's your opinion?

lalepepper

MyFitnessPal will make its calculations on the assumption you will eat back calories. I tend to see how I feel and make moderate estimates of my exercise calories. If I am hungry, I will eat some more within my daily limit+exercise cals, but if I am not (and I usually am not) I will just take the extra deficit. Because I eat on an IF schedule and tend to work out in the evening just before eating or after, I tend to be pretty satisfied by my normal sedentary intake without taking in any extra.

MeanderingMammal

A lot depends on what your goals are, how much you need to replenish and how you're estimating your expenditure.

Personally I eat to fuel my training, rather than restrict to lose weight. If I don't fuel my training, I won't perform to an adequate level.

malibu927

If you're following MFP's goals it's expected that you eat back at least a portion of them to fuel your body and keep your deficit consistent. If you follow TDEE, then they're already factored in.

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation

Maxematics

MFP at its core is designed for the user to eat back purposeful exercise calories that are separate from their provided daily activity level, as the needed deficit is already built in. Exercise calories shouldn't be viewed as a "bonus" deficit, since a calorie deficit shouldn't be viewed as bigger=better.

There are a lot of factors to consider but some of the most important ones, in my opinion, are as follows:

1. People who have more weight to lose generally find it easier to not eat their calories back.
   This is because the more body fat someone has, the easier it usually is to sustain a larger deficit. When I was 139 pounds I could eat 1200 to 1400 calories without issue. Now that I'm 112 pounds, I usually need a minimum of 1700 calories to fuel my activity.
   
   
2. Many people don't log accurately.
   I think not eating back exercise calories is better for someone to do if they know they're not that accurate in their logging and want to use the exercise calories as a buffer. Those that are meticulous about the database entries they use, as well as using a food scale, can usually afford to eat back more exercise calories.
   
   
3. Calorie burns are estimates.
   Some people use fitness trackers, others use gym machines, others use the MFP database, and/or some combination of the listed methods to estimate how many calories they burn when exercising. All burns should be taken with a grain of salt, data should be analyzed every 4 to 6 weeks to see how the actual results compare to the projected ones, and adjustments should be made from there.
   

Aside from that, those who are not using MFP as intended and use their own calorie goal provided by a TDEE calculator should not be eating any exercise calories back, as they are already accounted for in the calorie goal and the user would be "double dipping".

Graelwyn75

I generally eat mine back unless I have done a really heavy cycling session and cannot manage to. I have always eaten mine back and I have both lost and maintained doing that at various times. I eat to fuel my activity. I find that if I do not eat at least a large number of them back, my ability to train hard rapidly declines. It isn't such an issue if I am just walking but I choose to workout hard and that means taking in adequate calories to push myself.

lemurcat12

Veganvibesss wrote: »

Personally I don't ever eat them back unless I don't feel to great, I know alot of people say you should but alot say you shouldn't so how about you guys? What's your opinion?

It depends on how you calculate your goal calories.

I don't, because I base my goal calories on expected activity.

If you base your goal calories on an aggressive (2 lb per week or 1200) target for a sedentary person and then exercise hard, I think it's a bad idea not to and will be counterproductive in the long run. At least, if you log carefully and accurately. I think a lot of people use not eating exercise calories as a way to cover sloppy logging, and whatever, that's fine.

Tabbycat00

I've never eaten back calories. I just don't trust the "calories burned".

GottaBurnEmAll

I knew I was a very accurate calorie tracker, but I didn't trust the calorie estimates for activities, so I ate a portion of my exercise calories, and adjusted based on how I lost weight.

When I got a Fitbit and synced it to MFP, I did the same thing. I trusted it to some extent, and made adjustments until data matched the results.

A couple of points stand out and refer back to previous posts:

• Accuracy in calorie tracking is key
• Calorie estimates for exercise burns are unreliable
• Adjustments can and should be made based on real world results
• Most importantly, MFP is designed so that (unless you have set it up using a TDEE method) you should be eating back your exercise calories, or at least a portion of them.

lalepepper

GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »

A couple of points stand out and refer back to previous posts:

• Accuracy in calorie tracking is key
• Calorie estimates for exercise burns are unreliable
• Adjustments can and should be made based on real world results
• Most importantly, MFP is designed so that (unless you have set it up using a TDEE method) you should be eating back your exercise calories, or at least a portion of them.

• Absolutely - if you're making little concessions for bites/slight overages, it can "eat in" to any deficit you've established very easily.
• This is an important point. If you're not eating back your exercise calories and aren't getting any increased loss, something is off with tracking. If you are and aren't losing anything, your exercise calories may be off.
• Yes, but your points of accuracy being important apply here. MFP's calorie counts for exercise are notoriously high. This is I think the biggest consideration to make when determining whether to eat back exercise calories. For example, I took a moderate 45 min bike ride today. MFP thought I burned 735 calories, which I feel is way too high. If I ate all those calories back, I would be negatively effecting my overall rate of loss.

sijomial

lalepepper wrote: »

GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »

A couple of points stand out and refer back to previous posts:

• Accuracy in calorie tracking is key
• Calorie estimates for exercise burns are unreliable
• Adjustments can and should be made based on real world results
• Most importantly, MFP is designed so that (unless you have set it up using a TDEE method) you should be eating back your exercise calories, or at least a portion of them.

• Absolutely - if you're making little concessions for bites/slight overages, it can "eat in" to any deficit you've established very easily.
• This is an important point. If you're not eating back your exercise calories and aren't getting any increased loss, something is off with tracking. If you are and aren't losing anything, your exercise calories may be off.
• Yes, but your points of accuracy being important apply here. MFP's calorie counts for exercise are notoriously high. This is I think the biggest consideration to make when determining whether to eat back exercise calories. For example, I took a moderate 45 min bike ride today. MFP thought I burned 735 calories, which I feel is way too high. If I ate all those calories back, I would be negatively effecting my overall rate of loss.

Ref the bold.
For many exercises there are far better ways than the MFP database to generate an estimate.
The generic entries such as "elliptical" are useless (intensity/effort is missing).
The cycling entries are very inflated - unless perhaps people are super fit and cycling uphill in snow on a very heavy bike....

A bit of self-calibration using more reliable methods and the application of common sense goes a long way in making calorie estimates reasonable.
I know with a good level of probability my maximum net calorie burn for an hour (from a power meter) and also my long distance moderate cycling pace so I get a good feeling what is reasonable across all forms of cardio.
I agree your feeling that 735cals was way too high for a moderate 45 min ride was very well founded!

I eat back all my exercise calories (otherwise I would have shrunk away to nothing!) but the only MFP database estimate I use is the strength training category - can't be measured anyway so the modest MFP guesstimate is as good as anything.
The eating back exercise calories method (or TDEE calculations) both work if done sensibly.

Holly_981

Example - 1200 calories is a deficit for you to lose weight. You burn 300. You eat 1500 and are still at your deficit of 1200. Eat them back. Otherwise you're only functioning on 900 calories for the day and will be setting yourself up for damage long term.

canadianlbs

Veganvibesss wrote: »

What's your opinion?

i don't have many opinions about what other people should do for myself, it's been a long time since i even logged or did the calorie thing, but iirc i did like you and based it on whether or not it seemed like a good idea. whether or not i wanted to was another thing. and i'd split the difference a lot - eat half of them, or whatever.

it partly depends on how aggressive your deficit is to begin with, i think. and then on how much you just burned. i kept a 1200 calorie goal, which was already just 80% of my supposed daily requirement. so if i strolled to the store and burned 80 calories that seemed to me like it wasn't too big a deal. but a 300-calorie bike ride was too much of a hit for me to feel right about NOT eating back. basically, i guess you could say that i just didn't bother with eating back all the nickel-and-dime kinds of htings.

AnnPT77

MFP does assume you eat back exercise calories, and calculates your pre-exercise goal to build in a deficit for weight loss. Even if letting MFP estimate your goals:

• If your deficit is small (slow actual weight loss rate) and your exercise calories fairly low, it's probably fine not to eat back exercise calories. Keep an eye on your actual loss rate, and keep it safe.
• If your deficit is high (fast loss rate) and exercise calories large, it's important to eat back some/most/all of your exercise calories. It risks your health to do otherwise.
• If your deficit is high and your exercise calories small, or your deficit is small and exercise calories high, the specific numbers matter. Most people should not be losing more than about 1% of body weight weekly, and less when closer than about 50 pounds to goal.

I estimated my exercise calories carefully, and ate back pretty much all of them, while losing 60+ pounds (1/3 of my body weight) in just less than a year.

DX2JX2

I don't eat mine back as a general rule but will eat if I feel my energy levels changing. That said, I have a ton of calories to work with in my base target and am not in much risk of going below minimum requirements.

cwolfman13

Veganvibesss wrote: »

Personally I don't ever eat them back unless I don't feel to great, I know alot of people say you should but alot say you shouldn't so how about you guys? What's your opinion?

It's not really opinion. If you're using this app as designed, your activity level doesn't include exercise...just your day to day stuff. Common sense would dictate that ultimately all activity should be accounted for one way or another...with MFP, exercise is accounted for on the back end of the maths...

Other calculators include exercise in your activity level and would thus give you a higher calorie target to account for that activity...so while you're not directly logging and "eating back", you essentially are...they're just accounted for in the front end of the maths...in this case, you wouldn't log and eat additional calories because they're already accounted for in the activity level.

lets say you have a 1200 calorie target and you go burn 500 calories in a workout session...if you don't account for that, it's the exact same thing as only eating 700 calories...does that sound healthy to you?

TeaBea

Tabbycat00 wrote: »

I've never eaten back calories. I just don't trust the "calories burned".

So zero is closer?

This is why many people START by eating back 50%. Then after a few weeks of actual results, they can tweak that number up or down.

I eat my calories back because I want fat loss......not just weight loss. I'm well over 50 and have lost enough lean muscle mass already.

TR0berts

TeaBea wrote: »

Tabbycat00 wrote: »

I've never eaten back calories. I just don't trust the "calories burned".

So zero is closer?

This is why many people START by eating back 50%. Then after a few weeks of actual results, they can tweak that number up or down.

I eat my calories back because I want fat loss......not just weight loss. I'm well over 50 and have lost enough lean muscle mass already.

This makes twice today that I'm glad I read the rest of the thread before replying.

Yeah - eating 0 exercise Calories is much worse (in regards to properly using MFP per the MFP/NEAT method) than eating some or all.

gothchiq

Half of them because I am pretty sure MFP overestimates what I burn.

MarieMckenji85

Tabbycat00 wrote: »

I've never eaten back calories. I just don't trust the "calories burned".

this, unless I do more exercise then I had originally planned for the day.

Penthesilea514

I have been eating about half back but I am thinking that I need to bump them up- I am starting to feel lagged in my workouts and daily life, so I think I am going to revisit the calculators. It can be trial and error to figure out what works best for each person and their goals. But I (personally) think not eating back exercise calories can be potentially detrimental, especially to lean muscle mass (like @TeaBea said).