To eat your burned calories or not? That is the question.

lpenn007

Should you eat the calories you have burned exercising?

CraigShift

If you want to lose , what I have found out is if I don't eat them back, I lose some weight, but it is nice to have that buffer if you want to say " Splurge" a bit.
As they say weight lose = calorie in vs calorie out

SexyKatherine73

I choose not too, as I'm not hungry, But if I was I would only eat enough for a snack, so it would only be 200 calories. it could be as simple as eating an apple.

TimothyFish

I don't eat all back, but I do eat some.

deannahaeck

Same some but not all

jeannettemancini

Nope. Research shows people under report calories and over report exercise. So I figure if I "ate them back" I'd be over.

48801

I never saw the point in eating your calories back (For those that disagree, please give knowledge). I understand wanting your heart to be healthy, however eating your calories back seems to be, counterproductive.

mom2ava07

I eat about half back, which only ends up being roughly 160 calories extra that I consume on an average day. So far, it seems to be working.

Kalikel

I base how much I eat on how hungry I am. When hungrier, I eat more. When less hungry, I eat less.

It's not really a decision that I wrestle with on a Shakespearean level.

BabyWeight821

I try not to but tend to eat them back often. I don't see too much of a point for being so strict, just for me personally. Because when I eat back calories I still lose weight at the same pace as when I don't eat them back--I see and feel no difference. But that's just me and body and that's how my body works. I lost 20 pounds a few years ago by eating back my exercise calories on a regular basis and kept all the weight off, it wasn't until my pregnancy when I put 20 pounds on. It worked for me the first time so I'll try it again this time. Honestly it doesn't make sense but my body responds well to me doing it so I might as well continue since I know it works. But with that said my food choices are healthier when I am active so it's not like I'm eating junk and when I work out I lift weights and do calisthenics to build muscle and muscle burns more calories even when resting than fat does. Generally speaking it is all about calories in vs calories burned though but everyone is different.

bajoyba

48801 wrote: »

I never saw the point in eating your calories back (For those that disagree, please give knowledge). I understand wanting your heart to be healthy, however eating your calories back seems to be, counterproductive.

If you use the calorie goal that MFP sets for you, eating your exercise calories back is not counterproductive. The calorie goal that you're assigned already includes the necessary deficit for weight loss. As long as you have entered your stats and activity level appropriately, you can just eat that calorie goal every day and lose weight.

When you log exercise here on MFP, it's assumed that you're logging an activity that you haven't already accounted for as part of your normal daily activity level. In that case, you're burning more calories than you normally would and creating an even larger calorie deficit than you would normally have. So if you account for those burned calories correctly and eat them back, your net calories should be the same as they would be if you ate your normal calorie goal and did not exercise.

However, many people overestimate their calorie burns or don't know how to account for exercise correctly, so they end up eating more calories than they burned during extra activity and actually create a smaller deficit.

So realistically, it's most beneficial to eat a portion (many people suggest 50-75%) of your exercise calories back.

BWBTrish

I eat about 1/4 back.
The reason i eat them back is that when my body does all the work of a training it needs more nutrition.
And 1200+ calories is not enough nutrition for a working body.

So i try to hit my goals/macros by eating 1/4 back

Now i dont eat them all back for the reason that the burned calorie amount is most of the time overestimated.
So 25% is pretty save way to go for me. And i feel good and comfortable with it.
And seems to work perfect for me too.
Lost 60 pounds in 90 days.

But i think it is personal for everybody.
This is how it works for me

Jruzer

I eat 100%. If I don't I'm exhausted and my training suffers. I'm careful with estimating exercise calories and generally try to underestimate.

This is how the tool is designed to be used, as others have said.

TimothyFish

48801 wrote: »

I never saw the point in eating your calories back (For those that disagree, please give knowledge). I understand wanting your heart to be healthy, however eating your calories back seems to be, counterproductive.

According to every calorie burn estimator I can find, I burn between 1000 and 2500 calories when I exercise. My current calorie goal is 1600. If I were able to put in that much exercise (which I don't think is possible) on 1600 calories a day, I would be losing more than 5 lbs every week. I'm not convinced that I should be losing weight that quickly.

sweetteadrinker2

I'll eat them back if I'm hungry enough. Most days I'm not all that hungry. If I'm ravenous, theyre going back in my mouth.

unlikelyathlete

I don't, because I'm looking for a certain deficit from calories eaten, and a certain burn from exercise, and I've found that if I add it in according to their parameters, it mixes me up. So I don't enter my exercise in on here, but i keep track of it elsewhere. Helps me to keep those somewhat separate, and I'll tweak them a little if I'm not getting the results i want. But, to each their own.

lemurcat12

Depends on what your calorie goal is and how you set it.

If your calorie goal is from MFP and based on a 2 lb loss goal per week and you make a serious effort to log accurately and think you do, then yes you should eat some back.

I do TDEE method, so no need.

lemurcat12

48801 wrote: »

I never saw the point in eating your calories back (For those that disagree, please give knowledge).

You have a calorie goal based on some number of calories cut per week based on a loss amount that seems reasonable to you. If you decided (based on the information about safe loss goals) that 2 lbs/week would be a good thing to aim for (also it's the max MFP permits), would you decide that there was no point in eating all of your calories, that you should just eat 500 less per day if possible? I hope not, as that's not really a healthy approach.

If you think your logging is accurate and you are already at the 2 lb loss goal, that's essentially what you are doing in exercising vigorously and not eating the calories back (or at least some of them).

On the other hand, if you ask for a 1 lb/week loss (and have a decent amount to lose), and want to exercise for some additional loss within what would be a reasonable weekly goal, than sure, that's great.

I understand wanting your heart to be healthy, however eating your calories back seems to be, counterproductive.

This is no different than saying eating 1500 is counterproductive if you could eat 1000. Eating the smallest number of calories you can manage is not the most "productive" or thing to aim for, and it's not healthy to think it's the ideal, IMO. Nor is it ideal to try and lose as many pounds per week as possible until you just can't take it anymore--seems like a set up for burnout, and goes against the general medical advice that 1-2 lbs or 1% of overall weight is the healthy amount to aim for.

Mr_Knight

Before making that decision, make sure you're accurately estimating your burn number.