"Eat back half your exercise calories"
Replies
-
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »But if you've done several bits of exercise during the day and logged them in full, you're going to have to remember how many calories to leave uneaten at the end of the day. So if I burned 100cal walking and 50 gardening and 150 at the gym and 75 cycling to the shops, and I log all that in full but only intend to eat half of them back, I have to be carrying in my head that I have to leave my calories in the green by 183 at the end of the day, and then if I log another 50 calories I have to remember to leave 208 uneaten now, and it just seems very complicated to me.
If you're having problems remembering how much to eat back and don't mind the reports not reflecting the actual amount of calories burned, then when you enter the exercise, only input half the length of time exercised.0 -
I_Will_End_You wrote: »I just manually change the amount of calories MFP tells me I've burned to less.
This makes sense and I don't know why I didn't think of it, as I do that when using the Wii (as mfp's generic cals-per- minute estimate rarely matches the Wii's number).
Thanks for the responses, everyone. So it sounds like some people are doing the above, whereas others are leaving the calories in the green at the end of the day. I don't personally like that method because, apart from being complicated (I'm an engineer, we don't do mental arithmetic unnecessarily, and especially not when we've got software to do it for us!) it messes up the net calories record, and since I work to a weekly net average that would be no good for me.
One thing that concerns me is that "don't eat all your exercise calories" can so easily spill over into "don't log exercise, it defeats the purpose" and that is one short step to chronic undereating. I hope this thread helps some people to grasp the difference between mfp's NEAT estimates and TDEE estimates, and how important it is to eat back exercise on mfp's allowances, as otherwise you will not eat enough. When you are on an allowance of 1200-1500, it is not unhealthy at all to exercise in order to eat more - that's how the system works. Undereating, lack of exercise - that's what's unhealthy.
Another thing that I want to emphasise is that not everyone is using TDEE estimates or needs to - just using myfitnesspal's basic numbers can work well, as long as you err on the generous side with food estimates and on the cautious side with exercise. TDEE would not work for me as I am very inconsistent with exercise (0cal one day, 600 the next) and the motivation to move is helpful to me. For people like me, it works well.
The KEY is, when you stop losing as you expect, know and accept it's because the system has weaknesses and you're going to have to adjust your estimates. Don't blame it on CICO, CICO does not let you down. Luckily as an engineer I'm not losing faith in conservation of energy any time soon!4 -
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »
...Thanks for the responses, everyone... One thing that concerns me is that "don't eat all your exercise calories" can so easily spill over into "don't log exercise, it defeats the purpose" and that is one short step to chronic undereating. I hope this thread helps some people to grasp the difference between mfp's NEAT estimates and TDEE estimates, and how important it is to eat back exercise on mfp's allowances, as otherwise you will not eat enough.
When you are on an allowance of 1200-1500, it is not unhealthy at all to exercise in order to eat more - that's how the system works. Undereating, lack of exercise - that's what's unhealthy.
Another thing that I want to emphasise is that not everyone is using TDEE estimates or needs to - just using myfitnesspal's basic numbers can work well, as long as you err on the generous side with food estimates and on the cautious side with exercise. TDEE would not work for me as I am very inconsistent with exercise (0cal one day, 600 the next) and the motivation to move is helpful to me. For people like me, it works well.
The KEY is, when you stop losing as you expect, know and accept it's because the system has weaknesses and you're going to have to adjust your estimates. Don't blame it on CICO, CICO does not let you down. Luckily as an engineer I'm not losing faith in conservation of energy any time soon!
Thank you for bringing up these things. I do not think that I am using MFP as efficiently as I need to. I am one of the people on the <1500 calorie range needed for losing 0.5-1 pound a week. This thread has helped me realize that I need to pinpoint my NEAT number (instead of monitoring my TDEE) more exactly and monitor my exercise and eat back my exercise calories.
I only have 250-500 calorie a day deficit and have been on plateau at a stable weight for a long time. But I am 10 pounds from my goal and find the effort monumental to crack down to eat little enough because I get intense cravings. I'm hoping to exercise off another 250 average calories a day and allow my body to burn off some more fat. (I am at 25 BMI, sometimes hovering down into high normal BMI, and I would love to get down to 22-23 BMI.) I'm not sure how to record exercise calories yet but will try to record only 1/2 of the total calories burned to see if that works.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Well, I would not eat my calories back since I think it defeats the purpose of using exercise as a tool to increase caloric deficit - but who am I to dictate this approach to everyone? I would still advise eating half rather then eating back all of them, just in case that there would be an overestimation... let's not forget that the goal here is to maintain a deficit! This is one reason why I am planning to get a fitness watch ASAP to help me understand my body better
Also... I prefer to enter as my calorie goal my TDEE since that way I see the calories needed to maintain. The calories left (the green number) then represents my deficit, which motivates me a lot more. I think it makes more sense and helps me understand my body better; just make sure your recalculate your TDEE for every 5lbs lost and also be sure to have a sensible tool to calculate your body fat % to ensure best possible accuracy. P.S. I also take my measurements!
All in all, just make sure that whatever you're doing is working and that you're losing on the scale! It's all about making it work for you. We can all share our experiences and motivate each other no matter what. I'm sure there are people that don't eat them back, some people that eat them all back or only half back, and all of those people could still lose weight!
If you are using the MFP method, which uses a NEAT estimate, exercise is excluded. Your calorie goal is set at a deficit such that even if you do no exercise at all, you should lose weight. That is why if you do exercise, you should eat back at least a portion of those calories, to avoid having too large of a deficit which can result in loss of lean muscle, as well as other potential adverse effects.
Calculating your goal from your TDEE has exercise calories factored in, so no, you wouldn't necessarily eat back the exercise adjustment. Most people using the TDEE method log the exercise activity and the duration but manually adjust to 1 calorie when it is logged.
You are conflating two different methods - so please don't suggest that eating back exercise calories defeats the purpose.
Your TDEE doesn't include your workouts... it includes your level of daily activities. For example, are you doing a desk job or do you work standing up and moving all day long. Your BMR is what your body needs just to function (breathing, digesting, etc).
You are incorrect. @WinoGelato is correct.
This.
If you chose sedentary for TDEE, then there are no workouts included. But if you workout then you are not sedentary.
Generally TDEE is calculated by the following multipliers
Little or No Exercise: TDEE = 1.2 x BMR
Light Exercise/Sports 1 to 3 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.375 x BMR
Moderate Exercise, Sports 3 to 5 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.55 x BMR
Heavy Exercise, Sports 6 to 7 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.725 x BMR
Very heavy exercise (e.g., physical job; training 2x/day): TDEE = 1.9 x BMR
See this is why I thought that I had done this by picking out my TDEE when I signed up on MFP. I didn't know about NEAT. Unless I am more active than I NORMALLY am I don't adjust and add in or eat back any regular exercise calories burned because I already figured them in. If I counted again I would double dip and eat too much. Otherwise, if my exercise frequency increased on a regular basis I would go in and readjust my activity level for MFP calculations.
Edited typos
@DebSozo - MFP descriptions are different. They do not describe exercise, but daily activity. It does not account for exercise until you add it.
0 -
@DebSozo I will be in exactly the same boat when I get closer to my goal, and I know I will need to increase my activity and make it a regular part of my life as I do not plan to eat 1200 calories a day for the rest of my life!2
-
Huh, I have always been told you shouldn't eat back your exercise calories at all. Shows what I know, lol.
When it comes to the formula that MFP uses, you are supposed to eat them back (or at least a portion of them). There are other formulas that people use like the TDEE method where people don't add in their exercise calories since they are already added to the calorie goal.
Oh, you're right. I guess I'm doing a weird mishmash of the two - tracking with MFP but using the TDEE method of not eating them back. Oh well! You learn something new every day.
@_sacar
You did set your goal with a TDEE calculator then I hope?
By the way TDEE calculators include your exercise calories so if you are using that method you are eating back exercise calories, just an average not a variable amount.
yeah, no, I wasn't. I am reworking all of this now. I really had no idea.
So my TDEE is about 1850 with my workouts. So...to lose weight, what should I be eating? I know these are silly questions but I am so lost now!
Until now, I was eating 1200/day and working out, not eating back my calories. With that in mind, the TDEE worksheet I was using had me at 1850/day.
0 -
Huh, I have always been told you shouldn't eat back your exercise calories at all. Shows what I know, lol.
When it comes to the formula that MFP uses, you are supposed to eat them back (or at least a portion of them). There are other formulas that people use like the TDEE method where people don't add in their exercise calories since they are already added to the calorie goal.
Oh, you're right. I guess I'm doing a weird mishmash of the two - tracking with MFP but using the TDEE method of not eating them back. Oh well! You learn something new every day.
@_sacar
You did set your goal with a TDEE calculator then I hope?
By the way TDEE calculators include your exercise calories so if you are using that method you are eating back exercise calories, just an average not a variable amount.
yeah, no, I wasn't. I am reworking all of this now. I really had no idea.
So my TDEE is about 1850 with my workouts. So...to lose weight, what should I be eating? I know these are silly questions but I am so lost now!
Until now, I was eating 1200/day and working out, not eating back my calories. With that in mind, the TDEE worksheet I was using had me at 1850/day.
I think you subtract 500 calories from TDEE of 1850 to get 1 pound loss a week. 500x7= 3,500 calories to lose a pound, etc.1 -
You can't set MFP to lose 2 pounds a week on 1850 or you would only be eating 850 calories a day. I think their default is 1200 for females.0
-
Huh, I have always been told you shouldn't eat back your exercise calories at all. Shows what I know, lol.
When it comes to the formula that MFP uses, you are supposed to eat them back (or at least a portion of them). There are other formulas that people use like the TDEE method where people don't add in their exercise calories since they are already added to the calorie goal.
Oh, you're right. I guess I'm doing a weird mishmash of the two - tracking with MFP but using the TDEE method of not eating them back. Oh well! You learn something new every day.
@_sacar
You did set your goal with a TDEE calculator then I hope?
By the way TDEE calculators include your exercise calories so if you are using that method you are eating back exercise calories, just an average not a variable amount.
yeah, no, I wasn't. I am reworking all of this now. I really had no idea.
So my TDEE is about 1850 with my workouts. So...to lose weight, what should I be eating? I know these are silly questions but I am so lost now!
Until now, I was eating 1200/day and working out, not eating back my calories. With that in mind, the TDEE worksheet I was using had me at 1850/day.
I think you subtract 500 calories from TDEE of 1850 to get 1 pound loss a week. 500x7= 3,500 calories to lose a pound, etc.
Haha yeah I am a mess. I have a coworker with experience in the whole TDEE thing and he's sitting with me now to help me work it out. It sucks though, I was having great success with my screwed up method lol!0 -
I like the TDEE method actually. But to really tighten up I may have to switch to NEAT and eat back calories from exercise recorded.0
-
When I used MFP religiously and logged every drink, meal, or exercise for EXACTLY that many minutes (no rounding), I found I lost exactly as much weight as it told me I would. I was thrilled! I am unsure how accurate calories burned from exercise are accurate for all MFP users, but mine certainly appear to be.2
-
3dogsrunning wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Well, I would not eat my calories back since I think it defeats the purpose of using exercise as a tool to increase caloric deficit - but who am I to dictate this approach to everyone? I would still advise eating half rather then eating back all of them, just in case that there would be an overestimation... let's not forget that the goal here is to maintain a deficit! This is one reason why I am planning to get a fitness watch ASAP to help me understand my body better
Also... I prefer to enter as my calorie goal my TDEE since that way I see the calories needed to maintain. The calories left (the green number) then represents my deficit, which motivates me a lot more. I think it makes more sense and helps me understand my body better; just make sure your recalculate your TDEE for every 5lbs lost and also be sure to have a sensible tool to calculate your body fat % to ensure best possible accuracy. P.S. I also take my measurements!
All in all, just make sure that whatever you're doing is working and that you're losing on the scale! It's all about making it work for you. We can all share our experiences and motivate each other no matter what. I'm sure there are people that don't eat them back, some people that eat them all back or only half back, and all of those people could still lose weight!
If you are using the MFP method, which uses a NEAT estimate, exercise is excluded. Your calorie goal is set at a deficit such that even if you do no exercise at all, you should lose weight. That is why if you do exercise, you should eat back at least a portion of those calories, to avoid having too large of a deficit which can result in loss of lean muscle, as well as other potential adverse effects.
Calculating your goal from your TDEE has exercise calories factored in, so no, you wouldn't necessarily eat back the exercise adjustment. Most people using the TDEE method log the exercise activity and the duration but manually adjust to 1 calorie when it is logged.
You are conflating two different methods - so please don't suggest that eating back exercise calories defeats the purpose.
Your TDEE doesn't include your workouts... it includes your level of daily activities. For example, are you doing a desk job or do you work standing up and moving all day long. Your BMR is what your body needs just to function (breathing, digesting, etc).
You are incorrect. @WinoGelato is correct.
This.
If you chose sedentary for TDEE, then there are no workouts included. But if you workout then you are not sedentary.
Generally TDEE is calculated by the following multipliers
Little or No Exercise: TDEE = 1.2 x BMR
Light Exercise/Sports 1 to 3 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.375 x BMR
Moderate Exercise, Sports 3 to 5 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.55 x BMR
Heavy Exercise, Sports 6 to 7 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.725 x BMR
Very heavy exercise (e.g., physical job; training 2x/day): TDEE = 1.9 x BMR
See this is why I thought that I had done this by picking out my TDEE when I signed up on MFP. I didn't know about NEAT. Unless I am more active than I NORMALLY am I don't adjust and add in or eat back any regular exercise calories burned because I already figured them in. If I counted again I would double dip and eat too much. Otherwise, if my exercise frequency increased on a regular basis I would go in and readjust my activity level for MFP calculations.
Edited typos
@DebSozo - MFP descriptions are different. They do not describe exercise, but daily activity. It does not account for exercise until you add it.
Thanks. I am newish to the MFP process. I guess I had taken my previous weight loss methods and translated them here on a new formula without realizing it.0 -
jkal1979, a sedentary lifestyle is basically described as a lifestyle in which there isn't any exercise that is not required by basic day to day life such as going to the bathroom, walking around the house, making food. I could see where counting that as activities could wind up making you lose less in the long run.0
-
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »@DebSozo I will be in exactly the same boat when I get closer to my goal, and I know I will need to increase my activity and make it a regular part of my life as I do not plan to eat 1200 calories a day for the rest of my life!
That would be horrible!0 -
I like the TDEE method actually. But to really tighten up I may have to switch to NEAT and eat back calories from exercise recorded.
I use a calculator spreadsheet daily with the TDEE method. I feel like it's super customized and that's why I like it. As it turns out, with my lifestyle, I wasn't too far off the way I was doing it anyway.
If you want the worksheet I can try to send it to you.0 -
I like the TDEE method actually. But to really tighten up I may have to switch to NEAT and eat back calories from exercise recorded.
I use a calculator spreadsheet daily with the TDEE method. I feel like it's super customized and that's why I like it. As it turns out, with my lifestyle, I wasn't too far off the way I was doing it anyway.
If you want the worksheet I can try to send it to you.
Oh yes please! I love the method and would like the spreadsheet!0 -
Do you have a link or is it an app?0
-
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »@DebSozo I will be in exactly the same boat when I get closer to my goal, and I know I will need to increase my activity and make it a regular part of my life as I do not plan to eat 1200 calories a day for the rest of my life!
That would be horrible!
Exactly. I eat 1200cal 3-4 days a week at the moment, so I know exactly what it's like - it's fine for low calorie weekdays when I know a hearty meal is coming soon, but forever? I couldn't do it. I'm going to need to get serious about exercise if I want to maintain.0 -
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »CattOfTheGarage wrote: »@DebSozo I will be in exactly the same boat when I get closer to my goal, and I know I will need to increase my activity and make it a regular part of my life as I do not plan to eat 1200 calories a day for the rest of my life!
That would be horrible!
Exactly. I eat 1200cal 3-4 days a week at the moment, so I know exactly what it's like - it's fine for low calorie weekdays when I know a hearty meal is coming soon, but forever? I couldn't do it. I'm going to need to get serious about exercise if I want to maintain.
So true. I am working on coming to terms with workouts being a part of my life forever. Oddly, it's difficult to buy into for me! lol
1 -
@DebSozoDo you have a link or is it an app?
I wonder if @_sacar is using one of @heybales spreadsheets:
Weight Loss Calculator MFP (I use this one a bunch)
Just my TDEE and Deficit Please
0 -
No, it's not those...I'll try to get it uploaded somewhere so you guys can see it.1
-
This is the best I can do. I don't think the formulas and stuff carry over to Google Sheets.0
-
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »But if you've done several bits of exercise during the day and logged them in full, you're going to have to remember how many calories to leave uneaten at the end of the day. So if I burned 100cal walking and 50 gardening and 150 at the gym and 75 cycling to the shops, and I log all that in full but only intend to eat half of them back, I have to be carrying in my head that I have to leave my calories in the green by 183 at the end of the day, and then if I log another 50 calories I have to remember to leave 208 uneaten now, and it just seems very complicated to me.
Everytime you log something just divide it by two and enter that for calories. If you go for 20 minute walk and it says 100 calories...Log 50...Lift weights for 225...Log 113...etc. Then at the end of the day you have your closed system goal1 -
KaylahDemi wrote: »When I used MFP religiously and logged every drink, meal, or exercise for EXACTLY that many minutes (no rounding), I found I lost exactly as much weight as it told me I would. I was thrilled! I am unsure how accurate calories burned from exercise are accurate for all MFP users, but mine certainly appear to be.
It also depends on the workouts, intensity, and length of time.
Exercise with a very exact intensity is much better (ran 6.5 mph) compared to none (elliptical).
MFP could easily do this better for people not using an activity tracker.
Because the idea of eating more when you do more to keep the same deficit is great - but you must only eat the more calories burned over and above what you were planning on burning anyway.
And that is what MFP estimated based on BMR x activity level you selected (say 1.25 Sedentary) = daily calories burned.
If that is estimated at say 100 cal an hour already, and you do a slow walk burning say 200/hr - then you only burned 100 more than planned, which is what your eating level is based on.
But by current MFP method - you are given that whole 200/hr - and that is probably very accurate for total calorie burn, but not what you burned above and beyond.
That is exactly why some must divide given calories by 2 for better estimate - low intensity exercise. Or they are doing an exercise less intensity than the study that provided the calorie burn.
Well - if all you did was walking for great lengths of time for workouts - you could easily wipe out a deficit because of that bad method. And for some, that difference is bigger, especially when down to last few pounds.
But if your workouts are say 800/hr because of intensity, then you still burned 700 above and beyond, and with an intense workout, probably some repair beyond the time of the workout - so the extra 100 is still used.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »Generally TDEE is calculated by the following multipliers
Little or No Exercise: TDEE = 1.2 x BMR
Light Exercise/Sports 1 to 3 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.375 x BMR
Moderate Exercise, Sports 3 to 5 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.55 x BMR
Heavy Exercise, Sports 6 to 7 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.725 x BMR
Very heavy exercise (e.g., physical job; training 2x/day): TDEE = 1.9 x BMR
I've never been comfortable with this because there's so much room to get things wrong. The descriptions are vague (really: how do you know if you're heavy or very heavy exercise? flip a coin). The numbers are set in stone based on the number of times you exercise (whether it's sport or not) not how long you spend doing it or what intensity. Worse, it assumes you do basically the same exercise every week.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »Generally TDEE is calculated by the following multipliers
Little or No Exercise: TDEE = 1.2 x BMR
Light Exercise/Sports 1 to 3 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.375 x BMR
Moderate Exercise, Sports 3 to 5 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.55 x BMR
Heavy Exercise, Sports 6 to 7 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.725 x BMR
Very heavy exercise (e.g., physical job; training 2x/day): TDEE = 1.9 x BMR
I've never been comfortable with this because there's so much room to get things wrong. The descriptions are vague (really: how do you know if you're heavy or very heavy exercise? flip a coin). The numbers are set in stone based on the number of times you exercise (whether it's sport or not) not how long you spend doing it or what intensity. Worse, it assumes you do basically the same exercise every week.
Exactly.
Is walking 3 x weekly the same as running the same as lifting 3 x weekly?
True, if that's only 20 min or 60 min total, that difference in the scheme of things is minor and doesn't matter as much. But what about those doing 5 x weekly workouts of some sort?
Even the charts that improve this somewhat by saying hours a week - same problem.
And what about a mail carrier doing 3 hrs weekly weight lifting compared to desk jockey compared to mom of 2 kids that all happen to have the same BMR? That's not even touched on - they obviously don't burn the same amount daily.
it's no wonder that the formula there based on the 1919 study by Harris (who did the BMR formula too) has been improved on several times (just like the BMR has been improved by say Mifflin that MFP uses).
MFP changed it's NON-exercise activity factors couple years ago based on new research showing that we do burn more than that time back then - surprisingly yes.
I think many that start using activity tracker, before they even get inspired to move more - discover the fact they are higher than even MFP's sedentary at 1.25.1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »Generally TDEE is calculated by the following multipliers
Little or No Exercise: TDEE = 1.2 x BMR
Light Exercise/Sports 1 to 3 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.375 x BMR
Moderate Exercise, Sports 3 to 5 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.55 x BMR
Heavy Exercise, Sports 6 to 7 Times Per Week: TDEE = 1.725 x BMR
Very heavy exercise (e.g., physical job; training 2x/day): TDEE = 1.9 x BMR
I've never been comfortable with this because there's so much room to get things wrong. The descriptions are vague (really: how do you know if you're heavy or very heavy exercise? flip a coin). The numbers are set in stone based on the number of times you exercise (whether it's sport or not) not how long you spend doing it or what intensity. Worse, it assumes you do basically the same exercise every week.
Exactly.
Is walking 3 x weekly the same as running the same as lifting 3 x weekly?
True, if that's only 20 min or 60 min total, that difference in the scheme of things is minor and doesn't matter as much. But what about those doing 5 x weekly workouts of some sort?
Even the charts that improve this somewhat by saying hours a week - same problem.
And what about a mail carrier doing 3 hrs weekly weight lifting compared to desk jockey compared to mom of 2 kids that all happen to have the same BMR? That's not even touched on - they obviously don't burn the same amount daily.
it's no wonder that the formula there based on the 1919 study by Harris (who did the BMR formula too) has been improved on several times (just like the BMR has been improved by say Mifflin that MFP uses).
MFP changed it's NON-exercise activity factors couple years ago based on new research showing that we do burn more than that time back then - surprisingly yes.
I think many that start using activity tracker, before they even get inspired to move more - discover the fact they are higher than even MFP's sedentary at 1.25.
Frankly, weight lifting really should be tracked with the strength training tracking and not the cardio tracking. Not only will it not add extra calories (that are probably over-estimated), but you can only track the weight and reps. on the strength training side.0 -
Exactly.
Is walking 3 x weekly the same as running the same as lifting 3 x weekly?
True, if that's only 20 min or 60 min total, that difference in the scheme of things is minor and doesn't matter as much. But what about those doing 5 x weekly workouts of some sort?
I work a desk job. Used to commute by bike until the company moved a couple towns away, now I drive.
But I bike every day after work, I run once a week, I do a long bike ride on one weekend day and go hiking the other, and lift weights every other day. Plus I go for a walk on my lunch breaks. My Tuesday bike ride is a hill repeat workout but some days I take it pretty easy and coast a lot.
I have no idea where that puts me on the TDEE scale, I feel it's very subjective. I could be anywhere from moderate to very heavy on that scale, we're talking a difference of about 650 kCal per day. I've never been comfortable with that.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »Frankly, weight lifting really should be tracked with the strength training tracking and not the cardio tracking. Not only will it not add extra calories (that are probably over-estimated), but you can only track the weight and reps. on the strength training side.
But you do burn extra calories lifting, not at same rate as cardio for sure - but you do burn more than resting.
Again - if total time doing it is 60 min weekly, with pink dumbbells - then inaccuracy isn't that great.
If 45 min x 5 weekly - then that matters, and even that lowish rate being logged should count.
The database entry is based on studies, and indeed if you don't match what was being done in the study - could be off.
But what amount off, 30% off for just that 45 min x 5 weekly isn't going to amount to much.
But that inaccuracy is better than not counting it I'd suggest.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions