How many calories do you gain per day through exercise?

Options
24

Replies

  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    Curious why everyone is so concerned with figuring out the different contributors to the TDEE?
  • ahoy_m8
    ahoy_m8 Posts: 3,053 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    Not concerned. Just saw a comment that I didn't understand. I'm sure it's a misunderstanding on my part.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Curious why everyone is so concerned with figuring out the different contributors to the TDEE?

    Me too. :smile:
    Also curious about the fascination people have with calculations/calculators in general once they have real data from a period of logging.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Options
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Curious why everyone is so concerned with figuring out the different contributors to the TDEE?

    It's actually pretty nice to know. I know some active people who NEVER exercise but can eat more than people who exercise because they're just so active all the time.

    There's a lot of emphasis on exercise on MFP but really, activity is what matters the most. If you're on your feet for 5 hours, you'll still burn more calories than if you jog for 30 minutes.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Curious why everyone is so concerned with figuring out the different contributors to the TDEE?

    It's actually pretty nice to know. I know some active people who NEVER exercise but can eat more than people who exercise because they're just so active all the time.

    There's a lot of emphasis on exercise on MFP but really, activity is what matters the most. If you're on your feet for 5 hours, you'll still burn more calories than if you jog for 30 minutes.

    It depends what you mean by "matters most". If you mean for weight loss then for many (most?) people yes because they don't really exercise much anyway (i.e. under 500 cals per day), but if you mean for optimal health then no, vigorous exercise wins every time for the added health benefits.
  • WinoGelato
    WinoGelato Posts: 13,454 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    Curious why everyone is so concerned with figuring out the different contributors to the TDEE?

    It's actually pretty nice to know. I know some active people who NEVER exercise but can eat more than people who exercise because they're just so active all the time.

    There's a lot of emphasis on exercise on MFP but really, activity is what matters the most. If you're on your feet for 5 hours, you'll still burn more calories than if you jog for 30 minutes.

    No I get that - and I'm one of those people who has a pretty high TDEE because my NEAT is high from daily activity more so than rigorous exercise. I was just confused why people were trying to pinpoint the specific number from non-exercise activity and looking at the multipliers. I actually thought the OP asked the question, but I see now it was just a point that was raised in response to someone else's post.
  • MiniMansell1964
    MiniMansell1964 Posts: 188 Member
    Options
    my daily exercise comes in around 800cal. its 5600cal per week on average used through exercise. mostly cycling
  • idabest777
    idabest777 Posts: 97 Member
    Options
    I normally run 10km a few times a week and 5km the other days. I count it as 500cals for the 10km and 250 for the 5km, not sure how accurate that is, but it's usually what i assume.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    Options
    I have a pretty high variance on exercise calories. A lifting session I estimate is 80-100 cals. I don't bother eating that back, it's my cushion for the days were I don't stay 'in bounds'.

    Running burns about 80 cals per mile at my weight. I always run at least 3 miles, long runs have gotten up to 15 miles. Those I eat back or there'd be some serious crashing and burning eventually, LOL.
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    Options
    I understand that exercise is more important during maintenance than it is during loss. Is this true?
  • MiniMansell1964
    MiniMansell1964 Posts: 188 Member
    Options
    what makes you say that?

    Exercise keeps you fit. burns calories and is fun.

    if you exercise during loss you will not only lose some weight but gain fitness at the same time
  • ahoy_m8
    ahoy_m8 Posts: 3,053 Member
    Options
    zyxst wrote: »
    For me, purposeful exercise is doing a workout video for 30-60 minutes every other day depending on how much time I have.

    Me not being a lump is me pacing back and forth while watching movies/tv shows online instead of sitting on my butt. It's about 10 hours a day at a slow walk, something like 2 mph, though I expect to be told I have exercise bulimia because only a crazy person would pace around for 10 hours instead of sitting around.

    My BMR is 1250ish between the info from MFP and Fitbit. If I didn't do my walking all day, I'd be stuck with 1400 - 1500ish calories a day to eat and I would probably go back to be morbidly obese.

    ETA: My Fitbit walking goal is 30k steps and 10 miles. I hit them every day.
    Ah! That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    Options
    shredcamps wrote: »
    what makes you say that?

    Exercise keeps you fit. burns calories and is fun.

    if you exercise during loss you will not only lose some weight but gain fitness at the same time

    First I said "more" important meaning I don't think it's not important during loss :).

    Secondly I've heard this (I am researching now) because your RMR slows naturally after a deficit so making sure you exercise while in maintenance becomes a little more important. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
  • MiniMansell1964
    MiniMansell1964 Posts: 188 Member
    Options
    Your BMR/RMR does not change after a deficit, its simple the amount of calories you would require to survive if you where in a coma and all your body had to do was stay warm, digest, pump blook etc.

    What does change though is that as you lose weight your BMR drops, but thats because there is simply less of you.
    Your Calorie use during exercise changes as well, a 200lbs person needs more calories to cycle 1 hr than a 140lbs man does.
    As you lose weight your needs drop. this gives the belief that once at your target weight you need to exercise more to maintain because you need less calories its easy for people to over eat and start to gain weight again.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Options
    zyxst wrote: »
    For me, purposeful exercise is doing a workout video for 30-60 minutes every other day depending on how much time I have.

    Me not being a lump is me pacing back and forth while watching movies/tv shows online instead of sitting on my butt. It's about 10 hours a day at a slow walk, something like 2 mph, though I expect to be told I have exercise bulimia because only a crazy person would pace around for 10 hours instead of sitting around.

    My BMR is 1250ish between the info from MFP and Fitbit. If I didn't do my walking all day, I'd be stuck with 1400 - 1500ish calories a day to eat and I would probably go back to be morbidly obese.

    ETA: My Fitbit walking goal is 30k steps and 10 miles. I hit them every day.

    I got a $100 stationary bike for that reason - better workout than just pacing/jogging in place.. but it's true that my legs start hurting after 1.5 hour typically.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    shredcamps wrote: »
    a 200lbs person needs more calories to cycle 1 hr than a 140lbs man does.

    On flat ground, weight isn't very important on a bike. Your enemies on the flat are air resistance, rolling resistance in your tires, and, to a much lesser extent, friction in the hub. Weight is important when you accelerate and stop, but to cruise along on flat ground you're not fighting gravity or inertia. (*)

    If the 140 and 200 pound cyclists ride up the same hill at the same speed together, the heavier cyclist will burn more calories, by about 35 %. But if the heavier cyclist accepts a slower pace up the hill, the two of them can burn the same number of calories.

    The most accurate way to determine how many calories you've burned on a bike involves measuring the amount of torque you apply, and the rate you apply it. You don't need to know the rider's weight (or the bike's), or gender or age or anything else.

    Bikes are a special case in the exercise world.

    * Note: Heavy people usually have heavier legs so there's some additional energy requirement even on flat ground, simply to turn your legs in circles. Also, your speed isn't perfectly constant, it fluctuates, so there are small and constant accelerations and decelerations.
  • MiniMansell1964
    MiniMansell1964 Posts: 188 Member
    Options
    shredcamps wrote: »
    a 200lbs person needs more calories to cycle 1 hr than a 140lbs man does.

    But if the heavier cyclist accepts a slower pace up the hill, the two of them can burn the same number of calories.

    .


    thats incorrect. basic physics. it takes the same energy to raise a mass slowly as it does to raise the same mass quickly.

    it will always take more calories to raise 200lbs 100ft than it will to raise 140lbs 100ft no matter what speed it is raised at.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,136 Member
    Options
    Francl27 wrote: »
    zyxst wrote: »
    For me, purposeful exercise is doing a workout video for 30-60 minutes every other day depending on how much time I have.

    Me not being a lump is me pacing back and forth while watching movies/tv shows online instead of sitting on my butt. It's about 10 hours a day at a slow walk, something like 2 mph, though I expect to be told I have exercise bulimia because only a crazy person would pace around for 10 hours instead of sitting around.

    My BMR is 1250ish between the info from MFP and Fitbit. If I didn't do my walking all day, I'd be stuck with 1400 - 1500ish calories a day to eat and I would probably go back to be morbidly obese.

    ETA: My Fitbit walking goal is 30k steps and 10 miles. I hit them every day.

    I got a $100 stationary bike for that reason - better workout than just pacing/jogging in place.. but it's true that my legs start hurting after 1.5 hour typically.

    Money and space are issues for me. Walking costs nothing.
  • tomteboda
    tomteboda Posts: 2,171 Member
    Options
    I gain about 400 calories a day between 70 monies of walking and my normal daily activity. I average 14500 steps a day.

    My maintenance is about 2000 calories at 165 lbs ( 5 ft 8 in, scoliosis shrinking from 6' 1") with that activity.