To eat the burned calories or not?!

abakaska

floridamatty wrote: »

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.

THANK YOU! no worries everyone has an opinion, I have mine on certain things

DancingMoosie

Do you input your age and weight on the treadmill before you begin? If so, the calorie burn may be fairly accurate--it is for me when I compare it to runningahead and other calorie calculators. I've never used a HR monitor, but just using the machines estimates and runningahead estimates for my runs and logging them here, I lost weight. I never found the calories to be over-inflated. It will give you different burns for different ages and weights. I burn far less at 113 than my friend at 150 doing the same exercise, and the treadmill reflects this.

miriams76

I get a bit confused by it. MFP tells me my allowance is 1234 (or something like that) calories per day. I burn on average about 500-700 calories a day (two JM workouts and 1+ hours of dancing). I usually end up eating about 1450. Is the recommendation such that you should NET the recommended amount i.e the deficit is built in? My net is probably around 700- 800 on average. I have noticed that losses do slow down when I start tracking food again and weight loss is faster if I stop tracking what I eat for a while - could it be because I'm not eating enough? I don't feel hungry so feel a bit uncomfortable eating more to get to a higher calorie goal.

obscuremusicreference

miriams76 wrote: »

I get a bit confused by it. MFP tells me my allowance is 1234 (or something like that) calories per day. I burn on average about 500-700 calories a day (two JM workouts and 1+ hours of dancing). I usually end up eating about 1450. Is the recommendation such that you should NET the recommended amount i.e the deficit is built in? My net is probably around 700- 800 on average. I have noticed that losses do slow down when I start tracking food again and weight loss is faster if I stop tracking what I eat for a while - could it be because I'm not eating enough? I don't feel hungry so feel a bit uncomfortable eating more to get to a higher calorie goal.

Sounds like you eat back half of your exercise calories. You're fine, because MFP overestimates burns.

But if you don't track your food, how do you know what you're eating? It's very easy to forget a snack or higher-cal condiment.

TimothyFish

floridamatty wrote: »

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.

Part of the reason people think calories burned is overestimated is that the portion of TDEE that would be burned during that time anyway isn't taken out. I am 6'5" 241 lbs, so I'm burning about 125 calories per hour during my normal activities. If instead of normal activities I go for a bicycle ride and burn 1000 calories in an hour, I should really only add 875 calories burned to the log. Other than that, I don't see a reason for calorie burn estimates to be off. I wonder if we might be even more sedentary than what the term sedentary implies rather than calorie burn estimates being wrong.

candacefausset

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).

^^^This. My sister can walk for 60 minutes and burn near 350 calories. I weigh about 60 lbs less than her and can walk at the same rate for the same time and only burn about 230. While in most cases calorie burn on machines is inaccurate, it may not be as highly inaccurate as many are claiming. That being said, it is still wise even with a heart monitor to always assume your burn is being overestimated and your intake is being underestimated.

candacefausset

miriams76 wrote: »

I get a bit confused by it. MFP tells me my allowance is 1234 (or something like that) calories per day. I burn on average about 500-700 calories a day (two JM workouts and 1+ hours of dancing). I usually end up eating about 1450. Is the recommendation such that you should NET the recommended amount i.e the deficit is built in? My net is probably around 700- 800 on average. I have noticed that losses do slow down when I start tracking food again and weight loss is faster if I stop tracking what I eat for a while - could it be because I'm not eating enough? I don't feel hungry so feel a bit uncomfortable eating more to get to a higher calorie goal.

MFP gives you a calorie goal with a built in deficit based on your stats. For instance, I am 5' 6", weigh approximately 207 pounds and want to lose about 2 pounds a week. I am fairly sedentary and try to work out for 20 minutes five times a week. With that information, MFP configures how many calories my body would need to maintain it's current weight just based on my height, weight and activity level for my normal day to day activities (home, work and social life). My body needs approximately 2100 calories to maintain. Therefore my deficit if I eat my allotted 1200 a day is 900. At the end of the week, without any exercise my deficit would be 6300. It takes approximately 3500 calories deficit to burn a pound of fat off. So a little under 2 pounds a week is my weight loss projected without exercise. Any exercise I do puts my deficit in further. If I walk enough to burn 300 calories extra in a day then my deficit hits 1100 that day. I can opt to eat those calories back because they are basically extra money in the calorie bank. Or I can (without torturing myself) not use them and burn closer to the full 2 pounds. Like I said before, I eat a portion of them back if I feel the need to due to hunger or being tired but it isn't necessary. That being said if I was doing very extensive and strenuous exercise, I would probably almost always eat a good portion of them back because I wouldn't want my body to suffer horribly.

ashley92188

According to my hrm I burned 1,000 calories tonight. 40mins on the treadmill and 30 on the bike. My max heart rate was 202.
It's not that hard to burn calories. I don't really pay attention to wat the machines say tho. The heart rate always matches my watch the calories burned r always way less so I just go by wat my watch says.
And no I don't eat back my calories.

ashley92188

floridamatty wrote: »

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.

That's wat they love to do on here. Shoot people down. Her post asked a question about eating back calories, not to criticize for how many calories she's burning during a workout smh.

marcebaquera

If u get hungry, eat a salad ..u can eat a big bowl of salad, wish. It would only be like 100/150 calories ...dont eat a heavy meal.... thats what i do..

angelinhell

I go to the gym 6 times a week but only do 30 mins and burn around 300 cals according to the elliptical machine. When I put the same into mfp it usually over estimates calories burnt by about 1/3 so I eat back most of my calories some days and others only a few, depending how hungry I am. I and trying to get out of the habit or eating for the sake of it but in general I struggle to stick to 1200 a day. I have lost 10lbs in 21 days so far x

Sued0nim

abakaska wrote: »

iam doing 5% incline at 3.5 on a treadmill 90mins

abakaska wrote: »

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...

Hell yes

eat back half

it's about lifestyle changes not deprivation

your burn is too high which is why I said half though, I haven't read the thread but assume, knowing MFP, that that has been covered and I'm just repeating stuff

michelle_816

I almost always eat back my exercise calories. To be frank, I often work out so I can eat more. I enjoy food, a lot! That's what got me to MFP first. I ate too much food! It's all about learning to eat the foods you enjoy and know you will encounter in your life in moderation!

Definitely eat back some of them, if not most! It won't slow down your weight loss significantly. I lost close to 30 lbs on MFP eating back most of my exercise calories!