To eat the burned calories or not?!

abakaska
abakaska Posts: 9
edited November 10 in Health and Weight Loss
Trying to decide whether to eat the calories I burn or not? Any advice?? 5'6" 173 burn 700 calories a night 6 days a week. I eat 3 meals a day (400calories a meal) and try to remember to snack in between...
«1

Replies

  • amtru2015
    amtru2015 Posts: 179 Member
    I personally don't eat my calories burned back when I'm trying to lose. For me, that's maintaining. Personal choice though I think. I lost 20 lbs that way.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    How are you getting 700 calorie burns?
  • IsaackGMOON
    IsaackGMOON Posts: 3,358 Member
    If you do eat them back (which I advise), then eat back 50-75% to compensate for any inaccuracy in the burns.

  • higgins8283801
    higgins8283801 Posts: 844 Member
    I eat them back if I'm hungry, don't if I'm not.

    Are you sure you're burning 700? That seems like an awful lot: I only get that if I run 6 miles and I only hit it twice.
  • ya that's what I was thinking, but then you hear about "starvation mode" just got me wondering....thanks!!
  • iam doing 5% incline at 3.5 on a treadmill 90mins
  • great link thanks!!
  • higgins8283801
    higgins8283801 Posts: 844 Member
    abakaska wrote: »
    iam doing 5% incline at 3.5 on a treadmill 90mins

    What is telling you you are burning 700? That is an awful high number for walking 3.5mph

  • The treadmill...
  • higgins8283801
    higgins8283801 Posts: 844 Member
    abakaska wrote: »
    The treadmill...

    Those are really inflated and inaccurate cal burns. If you're going to eat them back, eat half. You will be eating too many if you eat 700.
  • How else would I gauge my calories burned if the equipment is over inflating them? I have yet to eat them back as of yet, looks like I will be keeping my same course. Just looking for some insight :)
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    1 - The way this tool is designed is that you get a calorie goal as per your stats and the activity level you told this calculator along with your desired rate of loss...this calculator calculates a calorie goal that is a deficit from your maintenance level of calories WITHOUT exercise...meaning, you just eat to that goal (consistently and accurately) and you will lose weight. Exercise is an activity that needs to be accounted for though...with MFP, you do that on the *kitten* end of the calculation when you log it and get those calories to eat back. Other calculators include such an estimate upfront in your calculation...so you are in fact eating those calories, but they're just already included in your initial goal.

    2 - Does 1200 - 700 = 500 net calories per day even sound remotely healthy or good for you? You're giving your body very little to work with to perform your other daily functions, not to mention the mere act of existing and your heart pumping, lungs working, etc.

    3 - It is likely that your burn is inflated...I don't know anybody who burns 700 calories walking for 90 minutes...my guess would be more like 400 or so tops.

    5 - This tool is designed for you to eat back burned calories, but that estimation is a difficult thing and you need to make some kind of an allowance for that inherent error.
  • JAT74
    JAT74 Posts: 1,081 Member
    edited January 2015
    When I used a heart rate monitor walking at a moderate pace I burned an average of 300 calories in an hour so 700 in 90 mins is definitely overinflated.
  • acarmon55
    acarmon55 Posts: 135 Member
    Most of the time I don't eat back my calories from my treadmill. I have the same problem that it over inflates the amount of calorie burn. I usually subtract at least 200 calories from the treadmill amount that it tells me and I don't log the 10 min trainer videos I do at all. The reason I don't eat the calories back is because I am not hungry though. Listen to your body and if you are hungry and are exercising, then eat some back to fuel the exercise. I agree with cwolfman13 that 500 net calories isn't much left.
  • I guess walking uphill doesn't count on a treadmill? ?
  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    I sometimes eat back half, sometimes none at all. I rarely eat all of them back. I feel MFP overestimates. That's just my personal feeling from having been un-lazy enough a few times to calculate energy expenditure myself and comparing that to MFP's calculations.

    Personally, though, if I were you, I'd eat them back for a couple of weeks. See what your weight does. If you don't start losing, then you can start reducing how many you can eat back until you arrive at an approximate for you.
  • blossomingbutterfly
    blossomingbutterfly Posts: 743 Member
    700 for what you are doing sounds like an overestimation for sure, just as everyone else has said.

    I eat back exercise calories if I'm hungry. If I'm not, I don't. If I do eat any back, I eat half back and not the whole amount since equipment tends to overestimate.
  • lemonlionheart
    lemonlionheart Posts: 580 Member
    abakaska wrote: »
    I guess walking uphill doesn't count on a treadmill? ?

    Oh it definitely counts! :) It just might not be burning 700 calories. I use a heart rate monitor during workouts and burn about 750 calories in 90 minutes going as hard as I can on the elliptical, though I weigh less than you. Personally, I eat back some of my exercise calories if I'm hungry, but often don't since I use a weekly average and figure I might need those extra cals on the weekend for a few glasses of wine and a nice meal!

    If I were you I would log half those machine calories as they sound pretty high, and eat them or not depending on your hunger and your plans throughout the week.
  • MildredBarhopper
    MildredBarhopper Posts: 99 Member
    I always, always eat them back...I couldn't imagine not, haha. Technically, through the week it looks like I don't eat all of them, but that's because I save calories for the weekend so by the end of the week, I will have eaten all of them back.
  • kellicci
    kellicci Posts: 409 Member
    I agree with the others 700 calories for a long walk has to be an over- estimation. There are lots of calorie calculators out there and I just did one that gave me 300 as an estimation for your calories burned for that activity.

    I also think 1200 calories seems low for someone of your current height and weight. I would consider eating some of them back occasionally. Maybe 200-300 but not every time. I find that mixing up both my eating and my workouts helps me lose.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    1 - The way this tool is designed is that you get a calorie goal as per your stats and the activity level you told this calculator along with your desired rate of loss...this calculator calculates a calorie goal that is a deficit from your maintenance level of calories WITHOUT exercise...meaning, you just eat to that goal (consistently and accurately) and you will lose weight. Exercise is an activity that needs to be accounted for though...with MFP, you do that on the *kitten* end of the calculation when you log it and get those calories to eat back. Other calculators include such an estimate upfront in your calculation...so you are in fact eating those calories, but they're just already included in your initial goal.

    2 - Does 1200 - 700 = 500 net calories per day even sound remotely healthy or good for you? You're giving your body very little to work with to perform your other daily functions, not to mention the mere act of existing and your heart pumping, lungs working, etc.

    3 - It is likely that your burn is inflated...I don't know anybody who burns 700 calories walking for 90 minutes...my guess would be more like 400 or so tops.

    5 - This tool is designed for you to eat back burned calories, but that estimation is a difficult thing and you need to make some kind of an allowance for that inherent error.

    ^ listen to this guy OP
  • higgins8283801
    higgins8283801 Posts: 844 Member
    abakaska wrote: »
    I guess walking uphill doesn't count on a treadmill? ?

    It counts but it isn't going to burn 700. If you can, invest in a chest strap heart rate monitor, they are still estimates but they're a little more realistic burns.



  • oncem0re
    oncem0re Posts: 213 Member
    I eat some of mine back, just like everyone else here says, in case of miscalculations atleast I have some buffer for what I already ate or didn't count. I'm also not hungry afterwards, I drink my glass of water and go straight to bed. I work out at night!
  • candacefausset
    candacefausset Posts: 297 Member
    I only eat them back if I feel I need to. If I feel super hungry or unusually tired, I will eat them back. Or if I just want an extra snack I will use some of them too. But honestly, you are eating 1200 calories a day. That is a deficit of 800 calories a day for most average lightly active people. You are going to lose weight that way. Those 700 extra calories you burned are going to take a lot more out of your body and are in a surplus of your current deficit so while you don't have to eat them back it is certainly ok if you do. No matter what, you are still going to have your original deficit. I would say if you are burning that much extra you should try to eat back some of them to avoid losing too much weight too fast. I eat back about 2/3 of my exercise calories on average and I am still losing well.
  • McBoffin
    McBoffin Posts: 76 Member
    All of the comments about the OPs burn are fair - it might be an overestimate but the one piece of the puzzle that's missing is that burn depends on all sorts of factors and simple physics says that the most important one is weight.

    If person A weighs twice what person B weighs then person A's burn will be roughly double person B's for the same exercise (assuming we're talking exercise that involves moving the whole body like walking).
  • floridamatty
    floridamatty Posts: 93 Member
    I am 6ft tall, weigh 261lbs and I walked at 3.5mph on a 15 incline in 50 mins and burned 1000 calories today wearing a heart rate moniter.

    I hear everybody saying the machine is over estimating her 700 calories for 90 minutes, yet nobody has said how they know this, not one person has asked what treadmill she is using was she wearing a heart rate moniter or anything.

    Way to shoot someone down people.
  • McBoffin wrote: »
    All of the comments about the OPs burn are fair - it might be an overestimate but the one piece of the puzzle that's missing is that burn depends on all sorts of factors and simple physics says that the most important one is weight.

    If person A weighs twice what person B weighs then person A's burn will be roughly double person B's for the same exercise (assuming we're talking exercise that involves moving the whole body like walking).

    Agreed. Thank you. At the end of the day that number gets me to the gym the next day, wether or not it's 700 cal or 400
  • floridamatty
    floridamatty Posts: 93 Member
    abakaska wrote: »
    McBoffin wrote: »
    All of the comments about the OPs burn are fair - it might be an overestimate but the one piece of the puzzle that's missing is that burn depends on all sorts of factors and simple physics says that the most important one is weight.

    If person A weighs twice what person B weighs then person A's burn will be roughly double person B's for the same exercise (assuming we're talking exercise that involves moving the whole body like walking).

    Agreed. Thank you. At the end of the day that number gets me to the gym the next day, wether or not it's 700 cal or 400

    well said!!
This discussion has been closed.