Why eat the extra calories you burn?

ncbeachprincess

So I am new at this so I need some clarification here. MFP has mine set for 1200 calories, which I am usually able to do. Yesterday I burned a little over 500, and ate 42 of those. So in total, 1242 was my intake. I feel guilty for those additional 42 calories.

Why does MFP set you to eat the calories that you burn? To me this makes no sense at all. If I am still hungry and need to eat something additional, it does allow me those extra calories. My point is, I am burning calories to lose weight, I am not burning them to re-eat them. Can someone tell me if my thinking is correct or not? If not, please provide me clarification.

mostlypaleo

I don't usually eat off everything I burn but I do find that I feel fatigued if I don't replenish some of what I exercised off. Don't feel guilty about eating additional calories as 1200 is usually not enough to keep you energized and/or healthy if you are exercising.

Vailara

MFP works out how how many calories you burn in a day according the information you entered (age, weight, height, activity level, etc.). It then subtracts 500 calories a day for every pound a week you set it to lose (if you set it to lose 1/2 pound a week it will subtract 250 calories, for instance). That's your goal UNLESS that calculation gives a number under 1200, in which case your goal will be 1200 (because MFP sets that as a minimum.

Suppose you burn 1700 calories before exercise. You've set MFP to lose 1lb a week, so MFP subtracts 500 calories. Your goal is 1200. (1700 - 500 = 1200). Suppose you then do 200 calories of exercise. Instead of the 1700 calories you burn without exercise, you've now burnt 1900 calories. To keep the same deficit of 500 calories a day, your goal is now 1400 (1900 - 500 = 1400).

That's the way MFP is designed to work. If you eat back your exercise calories, you should have steady weight loss.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories you can end up with a bigger deficit than you intended (which will make the diet harder to stick to, amongst other things).

laserturkey

Actually, if you ate 1242 but burned 500, then your NET intake was 742, which is WAY TOO LOW! Eat those exercise calories!

aqua_zumba_fan

1200 is a low calorie intake and you really shouldn't go below that as a net amount. You'll lose weight eating 1200 and if you eat back burned calories your net amount is still 1200. I always eat back all my exercise calories and net 1200 and have been losing weight consistently that way. You need at least 1200 to function properly. Just try to eat healthy calories and especially protein to repair muscle after working out - you'll see that when you add a workout your protein goal increases as well as your calorie goal so if you don't eat back the calories you're also likely not eating enough protein.
Hope that makes some sense. Of course people have different opinions on here but that's mine and it's worked for me
Also sometimes I work with weekly calories rather than daily and can save some calories from exercise that way to have a treat at the weekend or for a special day (this is easy to do if you have the phone app.)

Gwen_B

Idk, I never do!

grrrlface

MFP works out how how many calories you burn in a day according the information you entered (age, weight, height, activity level, etc.). It then subtracts 500 calories a day for every pound a week you set it to lose (if you set it to lose 1/2 pound a week it will subtract 250 calories, for instance). That's your goal UNLESS that calculation gives a number under 1200, in which case your goal will be 1200 (because MFP sets that as a minimum.

Suppose you burn 1700 calories before exercise. You've set MFP to lose 1lb a week, so MFP subtracts 500 calories. Your goal is 1200. (1700 - 500 = 1200). Suppose you then do 200 calories of exercise. Instead of the 1700 calories you burn without exercise, you've now burnt 1900 calories. To keep the same deficit of 500 calories a day, your goal is now 1400 (1900 - 500 = 1400).

That's the way MFP is designed to work. If you eat back your exercise calories, you should have steady weight loss.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories you can end up with a bigger deficit than you intended (which will make the diet harder to stick to, amongst other things).

/end thread

GCLyds

You dont have to eat them all back but you should eat some back, or you are going to feel weak, tired and *****y, and then you are going to binge hard core. I ate most of mine back, and I got to goal weight.

However if you only exercise like once a week its not a big deal. If you work out everyday, you will burn out.

Stargrace2

My point is, I am burning calories to lose weight

You're not burning calories to lose weight. You're eating at a deficit to lose weight. You're exercising to not look horrible once the weight is off, and to try to keep some of your muscles from melting away during the process and to work on your metabolism.

You need a calorie deficit of -500 from your maintenance to lose weight at a healthy 1 lb a week. There are two ways you can do this calculation. If you figure out your -500 WITHOUT exercise, you would eat those back because it's going to give you an even greater deficit. and guess what, you NEED ENERGY to work out. If you calculate that -500 WITH exercise you would not eat the calories back, because they're already in the equation.

deksgrl

MFP calculates your estimated needs without exercise, so that you would lose weight if you did not exercise. When you do exercise, you need extra fuel for that.

sanndandi

MFP works out how how many calories you burn in a day according the information you entered (age, weight, height, activity level, etc.). It then subtracts 500 calories a day for every pound a week you set it to lose (if you set it to lose 1/2 pound a week it will subtract 250 calories, for instance). That's your goal UNLESS that calculation gives a number under 1200, in which case your goal will be 1200 (because MFP sets that as a minimum.

Suppose you burn 1700 calories before exercise. You've set MFP to lose 1lb a week, so MFP subtracts 500 calories. Your goal is 1200. (1700 - 500 = 1200). Suppose you then do 200 calories of exercise. Instead of the 1700 calories you burn without exercise, you've now burnt 1900 calories. To keep the same deficit of 500 calories a day, your goal is now 1400 (1900 - 500 = 1400).

That's the way MFP is designed to work. If you eat back your exercise calories, you should have steady weight loss.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories you can end up with a bigger deficit than you intended (which will make the diet harder to stick to, amongst other things).

Well Said!

sunlover89

Exercise isn't just to burn calories...
Exercise makes me feel good
Exercise balances my hormones
Exercise makes me fitter
Exercise makes me stronger
Exercise encourages me to be a healthier person so I make better choices.

I eat back exercise calories when I'm hungry, I don't eat them back when I'm not

ncbeachprincess

OK, this all makes sense now! Thanks everyone for your input!

toutmonpossible

So I am new at this so I need some clarification here. MFP has mine set for 1200 calories, which I am usually able to do. Yesterday I burned a little over 500, and ate 42 of those. So in total, 1242 was my intake. I feel guilty for those additional 42 calories.

Why does MFP set you to eat the calories that you burn? To me this makes no sense at all. If I am still hungry and need to eat something additional, it does allow me those extra calories. My point is, I am burning calories to lose weight, I am not burning them to re-eat them. Can someone tell me if my thinking is correct or not? If not, please provide me clarification.

I think your approach is the correct one. In addition, MFP may be estimating too many calories from exercise so if you ate all your exercise calories back you could end up offsetting any benefit from your calorie deficit. If you feel a little hungry, eat a little more. Monitor your weight by weighing at least once a week. See what works.

I think exercise is extremely important but I don't log it because I don't want to be fooled by MFP's numbers. As someone who's not overweight, I don't burn that many calories from exercise anyway. Instead, I focus on calories in my diet. Were I to lose a ridiculous amount of weight without trying -- which has never happened -- I'd eat more.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

NaomiJFoster

If you were doing this on your own, you'd eat fewer calories and do more exercise and that would be the end of it. But MFP already calculated the 'fewer calories' part for you. Your Calorie Goal on your little chart is already set at a calorie deficit of about 500 calories less than you'd probably normally eat. You could do just that, just eat to that calorie goal with no exercise at all, and you'd lose weight. If you then add exercise into it, you get to a point where your calorie intake is actually a bit too low. Whatever your official 'Calorie Goal' is, that's where you want to be at the end of the day, your Net Calories. It's basically like you're just eating at a slightly higher rate and burning those calories away, and ending up at a healthy level. You aren't actually eating anything 'back'.

Darby7371

You've already had good advice. Regardless, eat at least 1200 calories.

THEN ... if you are trying to GAIN muscle, eat at least 100+ more (high protein). If you don't work to gain muscle, you will simply be small ... but not toned. Also by building muscle your metabolism will increase ... you'll loose more fat, but need more calories to maintain the muscle.

Use mfp calories earned from exercise only as a guideline to eating ENOUGH (1200+100is) and as a guideline of what to stay UNDER to maintain the goal you inputted.

Also, consider going back to the goal setting and change it to reflect your newer activity level.

KenosFeoh

Actually, if you ate 1242 but burned 500, then your NET intake was 742, which is WAY TOO LOW! Eat those exercise calories!

That's what I was going to say.

Keep in mind that the lower your net intake, the more your metabolism slows down. You don't want to end up with such a slow metabolism that you can only eat about 900 calories per day to maintain your goal weight. That's one reason it is a good plan to only lower your calories a modest amount, just enough to start weight loss. Fat2fitradio.com recommends finding out what your maintenance calories would be at your goal weight and start eating that amount or no more than 100 calories below that right now. By the time you reach goal weight, you will already have the habits necessary to maintain it.

(p.s: my lack of progress is not due to lack of knowledge but lack of consistency; I still eat too much and move too little.)

NaomiJFoster

Stop. Just stop.

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

It it SAD that you would even think about those 42 calories. I know you are new and am not trying to be a jerk, but you are unknowingly being restrictive.

Exactly why I was questioning the whole formula...I was confused about the Net, etc. And no, it isn't sad in my opinion, it is me not knowing. But in my previous posting, I said "Thanks for the clarification", meaning that I understood how net works, food is fuel for exercise, etc.

I don't think that was directed at you, but at the other poster.

Via88

Yeah everyone here basically clarified. The way I do it to keep from getting confused is just look at what my calories are are then subtract myself. So if i eat 1200 and workout 200. I will know that I have a net of 1,000..and sometimes I will eat that additional 200 back or sometimes I don't. At that point, I would go with if you are hungry or not.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Stop. Just stop.

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

It it SAD that you would even think about those 42 calories. I know you are new and am not trying to be a jerk, but you are unknowingly being restrictive.

Exactly why I was questioning the whole formula...I was confused about the Net, etc. And no, it isn't sad in my opinion, it is me not knowing. But in my previous posting, I said "Thanks for the clarification", meaning that I understood how net works, food is fuel for exercise, etc.

I clicked reply and then answered a text, you will see my post was about 3 minutes after you post, I didn't see it. But am glad you got the clarification you needed.

The sad comment is specifically directed to the following:

So in total, 1242 was my intake. I feel guilty for those additional 42 calories.

GUILT over 42 calories?! :noway: That's not a healthy mindset and is sad. I get it was coming from a lack of understanding, but you'd have to consume about 3,500 OVER the total number of calories you burn through basic body functions like breathing (BMR) and any additional activity to gain a single pound.42 calories isn't ANYTHING in the long run -- it's just sad to me that anyone would have guilt about that.

ncbeachprincess

Actually, if you ate 1242 but burned 500, then your NET intake was 742, which is WAY TOO LOW! Eat those exercise calories!

That's what I was going to say.

Keep in mind that the lower your net intake, the more your metabolism slows down. You don't want to end up with such a slow metabolism that you can only eat about 900 calories per day to maintain your goal weight. That's one reason it is a good plan to only lower your calories a modest amount, just enough to start weight loss. Fat2fitradio.com recommends finding out what your maintenance calories would be at your goal weight and start eating that amount or no more than 100 calories below that right now. By the time you reach goal weight, you will already have the habits necessary to maintain it.

(p.s: my lack of progress is not due to lack of knowledge but lack of consistency; I still eat too much and move too little.)

I cant actually decrease my calorie intake by 100 per day or so many days, I would never lose weight, nor become disciplined enough to eat the right things. My calorie intake was over 4000 a day! That's a whole bunch for one person, but that was me. Fortunately, I love fruits and veggies, and so have just changed the way I cook or prepare them to make them healthier. I have cut out sugar, but not caffeine yet.

Despite my depriving myself yesterday, I didn't feel deprived. I was full after my meals, and felt great. I did have that late night hunger pain, ate a few bites of plain popcorn and I was fine.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Stop. Just stop.

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

It it SAD that you would even think about those 42 calories. I know you are new and am not trying to be a jerk, but you are unknowingly being restrictive.

Exactly why I was questioning the whole formula...I was confused about the Net, etc. And no, it isn't sad in my opinion, it is me not knowing. But in my previous posting, I said "Thanks for the clarification", meaning that I understood how net works, food is fuel for exercise, etc.

I don't think that was directed at you, but at the other poster.

It was directed at feeling GUILT over 42 calories and also anyone suggesting that somebody only eating 1,200 doesn't need to eat back exercise calories. Because both are nonsense and harmful.

:flowerforyou:

NaomiJFoster

Stop. Just stop.

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

It it SAD that you would even think about those 42 calories. I know you are new and am not trying to be a jerk, but you are unknowingly being restrictive.

Exactly why I was questioning the whole formula...I was confused about the Net, etc. And no, it isn't sad in my opinion, it is me not knowing. But in my previous posting, I said "Thanks for the clarification", meaning that I understood how net works, food is fuel for exercise, etc.

I don't think that was directed at you, but at the other poster.

It was directed at feeling GUILT over 42 calories and also anyone suggesting that somebody only eating 1,200 doesn't need to eat back exercise calories. Because both are nonsense and harmful.

:flowerforyou:

Ooops. Sorry.

thisismeraw

You've already had good advice. Regardless, eat at least 1200 calories.

THEN ... if you are trying to GAIN muscle, eat at least 100+ more (high protein). If you don't work to gain muscle, you will simply be small ... but not toned. Also by building muscle your metabolism will increase ... you'll loose more fat, but need more calories to maintain the muscle.

Use mfp calories earned from exercise only as a guideline to eating ENOUGH (1200+100is) and as a guideline of what to stay UNDER to maintain the goal you inputted.

Also, consider going back to the goal setting and change it to reflect your newer activity level.

Maybe I misread your post but eating 100 calories more (so 1300 calories a day) will not allow for muscle gain. In a calorie deficit, you lose muscle mass unless you have a small deficit, lift heavy and consume enough protein.

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Actually, if you ate 1242 but burned 500, then your NET intake was 742, which is WAY TOO LOW! Eat those exercise calories!

That's what I was going to say.

Keep in mind that the lower your net intake, the more your metabolism slows down. You don't want to end up with such a slow metabolism that you can only eat about 900 calories per day to maintain your goal weight. That's one reason it is a good plan to only lower your calories a modest amount, just enough to start weight loss. Fat2fitradio.com recommends finding out what your maintenance calories would be at your goal weight and start eating that amount or no more than 100 calories below that right now. By the time you reach goal weight, you will already have the habits necessary to maintain it.

(p.s: my lack of progress is not due to lack of knowledge but lack of consistency; I still eat too much and move too little.)

I cant actually decrease my calorie intake by 100 per day or so many days, I would never lose weight, nor become disciplined enough to eat the right things. My calorie intake was over 4000 a day! That's a whole bunch for one person, but that was me. Fortunately, I love fruits and veggies, and so have just changed the way I cook or prepare them to make them healthier. I have cut out sugar, but not caffeine yet.

Despite my depriving myself yesterday, I didn't feel deprived. I was full after my meals, and felt great. I did have that late night hunger pain, ate a few bites of plain popcorn and I was fine.

I really don't think you understand what this person was talking about.

The amount of calories you need to maintain your weight is probably 1,900-2,300 calories depending on size/how active you are. She is talking about decreasing 100 calories from that number, NOT 1,200 which is a lot lower than a lot of people around MFP eat anyway. For instance, I lose weight eating anywhere from 1,400-1,800 net calories per day - the lose is slower at 1,800 but it is a lot easier to sustain long term.

519harley

bump...this has the potential to get really good...

^^^ You were right!
RB, glad you're here. Sometimes these topics get brutal! Keep up the work you've been doing :flowerforyou:

brower47

I didn't read through the thread so forgive me if this has been said already.

If you are using MFP correctly, it has already given you a deficit to eat at to aid you in your weight loss goals. Eat back the extra calories you burned or else you run the risk of under eating and not getting the proper nutrition and energy requirements your body needs to run efficiently when undergoing weight loss.

With that said, keep in mind that most people underestimate the calories they eat and overestimate the calories they burn through exercise. So weigh and measure all your food, no guesstimating, and wear a HRM for calorie burn estimates. If you don't have a HRM, generally subtract about a third of the estimates MFP gives you.

ncbeachprincess

Just weighed, after breakfast and lost 2lbs since yesterday! No sugar intake really makes a difference!

ncbeachprincess

I didn't read through the thread so forgive me if this has been said already.

If you are using MFP correctly, it has already given you a deficit to eat at to aid you in your weight loss goals. Eat back the extra calories you burned or else you run the risk of under eating and not getting the proper nutrition and energy requirements your body needs to run efficiently when undergoing weight loss.

With that said, keep in mind that most people underestimate the calories they eat and overestimate the calories they burn through exercise. So weigh and measure all your food, no guesstimating, and wear a HRM for calorie burn estimates. If you don't have a HRM, generally subtract about a third of the estimates MFP gives you.

HRM? Heart rate monitor?

brower47

I didn't read through the thread so forgive me if this has been said already.

If you are using MFP correctly, it has already given you a deficit to eat at to aid you in your weight loss goals. Eat back the extra calories you burned or else you run the risk of under eating and not getting the proper nutrition and energy requirements your body needs to run efficiently when undergoing weight loss.

With that said, keep in mind that most people underestimate the calories they eat and overestimate the calories they burn through exercise. So weigh and measure all your food, no guesstimating, and wear a HRM for calorie burn estimates. If you don't have a HRM, generally subtract about a third of the estimates MFP gives you.

HRM? Heart rate monitor?

Yeah, heart rate monitor.