Goal vs Net Calories

Strudders67

Hi everyone. My calorie goal is 1200 but I normally eat a bit above this, which is fine as I am slowly losing weight. I'm just happy tracking what I eat and ensuring that, generally, I'm eating sensibly. I exercise 4-5 days a week and eat some of those calories back.

Today, exercise meant that my daily goal was increased to 1551. I ate 1420 which I thought was fine. My Food page shows that I could eat another 131 calories if I wanted. However, on my Home page (which I don’t normally look at), it shows Food 1420 – Exercise 351 = 1069 NET. And that set off alarm bells in my head.

Having started some of the reading posts on the Community Forum over the last few days, I'm now terrified of regularly eating below 1200 because it could kill me or cause my hair to fall out.

Yesterday my Daily Goal, after quite a lot of exercise, was 2099 but I only ate 1417 (despite a large lunch and dinner plus nuts for snacks). When I deduct the 899 exercise from what I ate, my net figure would have been 518.

Should I be aiming for my net calories to be above 1200 or the amount I’ve actually eaten?

I’m a 5’2 143# Female and not ready to die just yet.

Ready2Rock206

You won't die from one day under your calories. I promise. What did you do to burn 899 calories? That's a heck of a lot of exercise. Unless you're gung ho going hardcore for hours in the gym I'd guess that's a little inflated too (possibly a lot inflated) and I wouldn't worry too much about it. Now if you are hardcore training for hours you really should eat enough to sustain that.

Strudders67

70 mins on the cross trainer (elliptical), 20 mins on a stationary bike and 20 mins weights. I just put times in to MFP and it spews numbers back at me. Admittedly I don't normally spend quite that long in the gym (I was watching a TV programme and stayed until the end), but looking back over the last few weeks, my net figures are regularly below 1200. As I said, I don't normally look at the Home page and it was pure chance that I did today. I've just been focusing on how many calories I've eaten, making sure I eat some of my exercise calories and trying not to let my fat, carbs or protein show a big red number.

SusanMFindlay

A lot of the entries for exercise burns in the MFP database are a little optimistic. It's usually recommended to eat back 50-75% of the extra calories is says you burn. This means that MFP showing net 1100 calories is usually fine because MFP overestimating exercise calorie burn by 100 calories is common. But the net calories of 518 is too low. That said, if you want to eat back your calories the next day instead, that's fine. (I'm often hungrier the day after working out than the day of.)

kk_inprogress

One day won't kill you, but you're smart to recognize this. You want to be over 1200 NET, so if your burns are high, you have to eat some of that back.

Also, what the user above said about MFP overestimating calories is true. I usually eat back at 50% and am your same height and previously same weight.

TimothyFish

You aren't eating below 1,200. You said you ate 1,420. The 1,200 limit comes from research outside of MFP that doesn't even consider how MFP calculates net. The Net figure is a MFP specific thing. Don't try to mix the two or you'll just confuse yourself.

kk_inprogress

TimothyFish wrote: »

You aren't eating below 1,200. You said you ate 1,420. The 1,200 limit comes from research outside of MFP that doesn't even consider how MFP calculates net. The Net figure is a MFP specific thing. Don't try to mix the two or you'll just confuse yourself.

It's still important to pay attention to net calories because if you're burning a significant amount and not eating it back, you're not going to be properly fueling workouts, or able to sustain your health. A net of 500 some calories is NOT healthy.

subcounter

Strudders67 wrote: »

Hi everyone. My calorie goal is 1200 but I normally eat a bit above this, which is fine as I am slowly losing weight. I'm just happy tracking what I eat and ensuring that, generally, I'm eating sensibly. I exercise 4-5 days a week and eat some of those calories back.

Today, exercise meant that my daily goal was increased to 1551. I ate 1420 which I thought was fine. My Food page shows that I could eat another 131 calories if I wanted. However, on my Home page (which I don’t normally look at), it shows Food 1420 – Exercise 351 = 1069 NET. And that set off alarm bells in my head.

Having started some of the reading posts on the Community Forum over the last few days, I'm now terrified of regularly eating below 1200 because it could kill me or cause my hair to fall out.

Yesterday my Daily Goal, after quite a lot of exercise, was 2099 but I only ate 1417 (despite a large lunch and dinner plus nuts for snacks). When I deduct the 899 exercise from what I ate, my net figure would have been 518.

Should I be aiming for my net calories to be above 1200 or the amount I’ve actually eaten?

I’m a 5’2 143# Female and not ready to die just yet.

I wouldn't panic too quickly. MFP and even HR monitors can highly overestimate calorie burns. Don't underestimate your calorie burns either "70 mins on the cross trainer (elliptical), 20 mins on a stationary bike and 20 mins weights" does sound lot more than 200 calories extra. (I would say at least 500)
The most important thing to check right now is your weight loss per week. See if you are around 1lb/week or whatever your goal is, and increase the calories a little bit if you're losing too fast.

Strudders67

Thanks everyone. 1200 is goal and TDEE says 1472 is maintenance so I'm not beating myself up if I eat 1300, even on days where I don't exercise but I really don't want to be eating far too little. I'll make sure I eat 1200 + around 75% of whatever exercise calories I've supposedly earned. Thanks again.

Francl27

Your exercise was probably 500-600 calorie tops, depending on the intensity, so I wouldn't worry too much.

Also, if you don't weigh your food, you're probably eating a bit more than you think... You're losing weight slowly, so that would make sense. Just keep doing what you're doing IMO.

I highly doubt that your TDEE with your stats is only 1430 though, unless you're completely sedentary.

TimothyFish

kk_inprogress wrote: »

TimothyFish wrote: »

You aren't eating below 1,200. You said you ate 1,420. The 1,200 limit comes from research outside of MFP that doesn't even consider how MFP calculates net. The Net figure is a MFP specific thing. Don't try to mix the two or you'll just confuse yourself.

It's still important to pay attention to net calories because if you're burning a significant amount and not eating it back, you're not going to be properly fueling workouts, or able to sustain your health. A net of 500 some calories is NOT healthy.

How so? Suppose a person has an average NEAT of 1,500 calories. Using MFP they are on a 1,200 calorie diet. One day they burn 700 calories with exercise. Putting them at 500 calories MFP Net. Their TDEE for that day is 2,200 calories, giving them a calorie deficit for that day of 1,000 calories. It probably isn't a good idea for such a small person to have an ongoing deficit that large, but it is hardly something to be concerned about for a day or two.

MrsCauleyflower

I am confused by the net calories...I am still figuring out how to use watching my calories to loose weight. My daily goal right now is 1,400. If eat that much but have say 180 net calories at the end of the day does that mean I can or should eat a total of 1,580 and still loose weight?

I have been choosing to still eat 1,400 and ignore the net. I also did not exercise yesterday beyond running around work (I am a school librarian) and walking back and forth between two classrooms for 20 minutes at lunch for a supervision, my Fitbit seems to have been generous with the calorie burn. I had a good net amount yesterday.

annacole94

MrsCauleyflower wrote: »

I am confused by the net calories...I am still figuring out how to use watching my calories to loose weight. My daily goal right now is 1,400. If eat that much but have say 180 net calories at the end of the day does that mean I can or should eat a total of 1,580 and still loose weight?

I have been choosing to still eat 1,400 and ignore the net. I also did not exercise yesterday beyond running around work (I am a school librarian) and walking back and forth between two classrooms for 20 minutes at lunch for a supervision, my Fitbit seems to have been generous with the calorie burn. I had a good net amount yesterday.

So depending how you set your MFP, it assumes you exercise very little (3,500 steps or less on sedentary). Then it tells you to lose your desired amount, you should eat 1400 calories.

If you move more, you can eat more and still lose at that rate - that's the net. It's saying "you burned 500 calories more than expected, so if you eat 500 more calories, you'll still have a net deficit".

the challenge is that machines and MFP tend to way overestimate calories burned, so sometimes if you eat it all back you don't lose weight because it messed up the anticipated deficit. Generally, if you've got some bonus exercise calories, try eating half of them back and refine from there. Steps do add up - I can hit up to two hours of walking in a busy day, even with my desk job.

MrsCauleyflower

annacole94 wrote: »

MrsCauleyflower wrote: »

I am confused by the net calories...I am still figuring out how to use watching my calories to loose weight. My daily goal right now is 1,400. If eat that much but have say 180 net calories at the end of the day does that mean I can or should eat a total of 1,580 and still loose weight?

I have been choosing to still eat 1,400 and ignore the net. I also did not exercise yesterday beyond running around work (I am a school librarian) and walking back and forth between two classrooms for 20 minutes at lunch for a supervision, my Fitbit seems to have been generous with the calorie burn. I had a good net amount yesterday.

So depending how you set your MFP, it assumes you exercise very little (3,500 steps or less on sedentary). Then it tells you to lose your desired amount, you should eat 1400 calories.

If you move more, you can eat more and still lose at that rate - that's the net. It's saying "you burned 500 calories more than expected, so if you eat 500 more calories, you'll still have a net deficit".

the challenge is that machines and MFP tend to way overestimate calories burned, so sometimes if you eat it all back you don't lose weight because it messed up the anticipated deficit. Generally, if you've got some bonus exercise calories, try eating half of them back and refine from there. Steps do add up - I can hit up to two hours of walking in a busy day, even with my desk job.

Thanks, that helps explain a lot. When I initially set up I was very inactive but have been making it a priority to increase my activity level. Eventually I guess I'll have to adjust that. I am hoping to get in the habit of using the treadmill at least 5 days a week.

annacole94

I have it set at sedentary to give me proper incentive to keep moving! So I start my day with 1,300 calories to eat, but if I get going I can usually earn 200-400 calories by walking through my day. For me, I've eaten back most of the exercise calories given and been losing my average 1 lb/week since the new year.

medic2038

MrsCauleyflower wrote: »

I am confused by the net calories...I am still figuring out how to use watching my calories to loose weight. My daily goal right now is 1,400. If eat that much but have say 180 net calories at the end of the day does that mean I can or should eat a total of 1,580 and still loose weight?

I have been choosing to still eat 1,400 and ignore the net. I also did not exercise yesterday beyond running around work (I am a school librarian) and walking back and forth between two classrooms for 20 minutes at lunch for a supervision, my Fitbit seems to have been generous with the calorie burn. I had a good net amount yesterday.

That's pretty much what I do, most calorie estimators are somewhat generous. I keep to within my calorie goals +/- 50-75 usually. I've really never "ate back" any exercise calories. I don't particularly like steady state cardio so I just don't do it.

Unfortunately most people DO tend to overestimate their activity (and by quite a lot). Why complicate things more than they need to.

Strudders67

Per comments in response to my initial query, I took a look at what the cross trainer showed at the end of my workout today and compared it to MFP. 26 mins at a moderate-high intensity burned 192 calories, according to the machine. MFP gave me 253 calories for that workout. So, on top of my 1200 calories for the day, I ate a further 190 (I also did some weight training and had a brisk walk to get to the gym in the first place) which seemed a realistic amount to eat back. Net, I've still only had around 1200 calories.