Don't add eat exercise calories
Replies
-
EbonyDahlia wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
A 300 calorie burn generally means I was working out pretty hard (that's ~ a 3.5-4 mile run for a non-obese female). I'm with Blitzia on this: I think the problem is with people over-estimating their burns (the 'intense yoga session' or 'I waddled around the grocery store for some extra minutes and my Fitbit says I burned a kazillion calories extra today' folks).2 -
2 people could weigh the same, same height etc, yet 1 could be all muscle and the other fat
The person that is fat would burn more doing the same exercise as the one that is healthy and all muscle
The best way is trial and error, start by doing what MFP says and then adjust as you go along1 -
2 people could weigh the same, same height etc, yet 1 could be all muscle and the other fat
The person that is fat would burn more doing the same exercise as the one that is healthy and all muscle
Not really true. A person with a higher muscle mass will have burn more calories as it does take more to maintain muscl than it does fat. But the difference is not a lot.The best way is trial and error, start by doing what MFP says and then adjust as you go along
Agreed. Keep at it for 4 weeks and gauge the results.
3 -
EbonyDahlia wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
I burn that some days, some days a little more, some a little less depending on the workout. My workouts are also at least moderate intensity. If they it's one of the harder days I can get more like 400+. I have always eaten them I have always lost as intended. But my logging is accurate and after two years I know I can do that. I would bonk pretty quickly if I didn't eat them, particularly now my net is quite low.
A 300 calorie discrepancy is a pretty large one. It suggests both looser logging and over-estimated burns.12 -
I only brought up TBL as they pushed CICO and I watched it for entertainment value, some of the contestants are just nuts, not to mention watching them torture the contestants better than watching say Emmerdale/Coronation Street etc, unless you enjoy watching those type of shows
I have no idea re other methods of losing weight, ie cutting carbs or eating loads of fat etc, only what I have seen/read
I wasn't talking about maintaining the muscle but doing the same exercise, if they both say ran a mile or say weight lifting, the person that is fit and healthy would have burned less calories than the person that is unhealthy and fat as the effort needed would be less, how much would depend on their fitness levels
You know what I mean, for some people maintenance may well be 1500/1700 provided they did no exercise, i.e. For me when I hit my goal weight, it is 2000, if I only did a little exercise, so if I did none and just sat all day watching tv then it would be close to 1700
Not to mention the numbers given on the packaging is not 100%0 -
i walk 10-15 miles a day if i didnt add 300-500 more to my 1200 id lose way to quickly and be unhealthy and robbed of deliciusness...even then thats not alot of calories for my activities but im happy here and have been for almost a year....bad advice is bad6
-
Looking only at calories ignores the metabolic effects of each calorie; the source of the calorie changes how you digest it and how you retrieve energy from it.0
-
2 people could weigh the same, same height etc, yet 1 could be all muscle and the other fat
The person that is fat would burn more doing the same exercise as the one that is healthy and all muscle
The best way is trial and error, start by doing what MFP says and then adjust as you go along
Incorrect. Muscle burns (nominally) more calories than fat does. A pound of muscle burns about 6 calories per day, a pound of fat burns about two calories per day. In either case the difference isn't enough to have any significant effect except in extreme outliers almost beyond the scope of rational discussion - and nobody is "all muscle" or "all fat".7 -
I am talking about doing the same exercise not maintaining
And regarding the nobody is all muscle/fat, thank you for stating the obvious, that is an extreme example to make it clearer0 -
I work out 5-6x a week, 60 minutes, and I have found the days that I eat the majority of my exercise calories, the more weight I seem to drop overnight (then it balances back up for the next few days, then trends slowly back down to the original drop). I'm at a 1.5 lb a week loss, I just bought a scale earlier this week so I left more calories for cushioning for the past month (will eat more now, yay!), but at a 750 calorie deficiet, the most I should leave in my exercise calories is 250 if I can't eat most of them. I have a fitbit blaze, and it's accurate for me.0
-
It is important to fuel your body according to your energy expenditure. It is common to overestimate a burn amount, machines are generous with the calories burned read out, it becomes a little trial and error finding that right refuel number. If you flippantly say don't refuel that's not sound advice. For example, if I've shoveled my driveway (800 feet long) mfp gives me a calorie burn of 900 calories, I cut it by half add that amount to my total. If I've hiked more than 5miles I might take the whole 600 if I'm feeling very hungry. Balance is important. 60lbs lost.4
-
FOR OP ONLY - I think it is, at present, good to not eat back her excercise calories.
I say this because she was not losing weight eating them back and now is losing weight not eating them back.
What this probably means is that her intake is actually greater than she thinks and so not eating them back compensates for this - which is fine.
It doesn't matter if your counting is inaccurate if you compensate for this in another way eg not eating back exercise calories.
Counting is just a tool, after all - so if using it this way works for OP, ie she loses at appropriate rate, then keep doing it like this.
However, it is not good blanket advice to just be applied willy nilly to everyone else.7 -
I would also add.. if you have not done so already get your Active Metabolic Test done if you are the member of a decent gym along with talking to a nutritionist. The two combined with a good app to track zones can also make a big difference. The nutritionist will give you a breakdown of fat/protein/carb which really helped me.0
-
I don't log my exercise or add back the calories. I try to eat 1,200 calories per day plus exercise to try to lose weight. Its fine if you want to remain the same weight, but if you want to lose you need to decrease calories and exercise to burn calories.gofaster01 wrote: »I wasn't loosing weight at first then I stopped adding my exercise calories to my goal calories. I still exercise but I don't add the extra calories to my intake and I lost 9 pounds.
0 -
I don't log my exercise or add back the calories. I try to eat 1,200 calories per day plus exercise to try to lose weight. Its fine if you want to remain the same weight, but if you want to lose you need to decrease calories and exercise to burn calories.gofaster01 wrote: »I wasn't loosing weight at first then I stopped adding my exercise calories to my goal calories. I still exercise but I don't add the extra calories to my intake and I lost 9 pounds.
The way MFP is set up your 1200 calories is to lose weight BEFORE exercise. Not eating those calories back at that amount means it's likely you're underfueling your body and causing more harm than good.
I lost 60+ pounds eating back 50-75% of what my Fitbit gave me.8 -
I don't log my exercise or add back the calories. I try to eat 1,200 calories per day plus exercise to try to lose weight. Its fine if you want to remain the same weight, but if you want to lose you need to decrease calories and exercise to burn calories.gofaster01 wrote: »I wasn't loosing weight at first then I stopped adding my exercise calories to my goal calories. I still exercise but I don't add the extra calories to my intake and I lost 9 pounds.
A calorie deficit is already built into your calorie goal if you're using MFP to calculate it. You wouldn't remain the same weight if your logging was accurate and you ate back your calories burned (providing the calories burned is also accurate). Exercise is also not necessary for weight loss. Worth noting that if you're on a 1200 calorie diet and not eating back any calories you are actually netting below the recommended guidelines for a woman and this could have short and long term health consequences.
As suggested by @paperpudding OP is likely overestimating food intake.
I eat almost all of my exercise calories daily, and I am losing 1lb per week and have been for the last 6 months.5 -
gofaster01 wrote: »I wasn't loosing weight at first then I stopped adding my exercise calories to my goal calories. I still exercise but I don't add the extra calories to my intake and I lost 9 pounds.
If I did this I might die, or get some sort of health issue. I'm 6' and MFP has me at a base of 1500 calories. I exercise roughly 2.5 hours per day between my hobbies.
The trick I've found for myself is that the calorie burns on MFP's calculator are usually over estimated, so I don't eat back all of the calories. Depends on the activity but I try to estimate what my "real" calorie burn was, and this seems to work for me.2 -
Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.0
-
newheavensearth wrote: »Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.
It's not double-dipping. If you log exercise in MFP, it will ask for the time you exercised so it can overwrite the same time frame on Fitbit. But it's actually best to let Fitbit handle your exercise, especially if you have a HR-based one.2 -
I don't log my exercise or add back the calories. I try to eat 1,200 calories per day plus exercise to try to lose weight. Its fine if you want to remain the same weight, but if you want to lose you need to decrease calories and exercise to burn calories.gofaster01 wrote: »I wasn't loosing weight at first then I stopped adding my exercise calories to my goal calories. I still exercise but I don't add the extra calories to my intake and I lost 9 pounds.
1200 + exercise is not your maintenance calories......no where near it unless you are elderly AND very petite. 1200 and zero exercise is the deficit. Adding exercise means increasing the deficit.
Exercise isn't a requirement for weight loss (after all some people aren't physically able). Exercise & weight loss are great if you can manage that.....but not fueling workouts means it's more likely your body is going to use existing lean muscle mass for fuel.
If you're interested an estimate for your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) or maintenance is here: http://scoobysworkshop.com/calorie-calculator/4 -
newheavensearth wrote: »Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.
Your Fitbit should theoretically give you a calorie adjustment based on your activity level in MFP if you have it synced, for example I have my MFP account set to Lightly Active and my tracker gives me a negative or postive adjustment based on my total steps for the day. So if I only did 5000 steps it might not give me any additional calories, if I did 10000 it will give me a positive calorie adjustment for the extra 5000 steps I did, if I did 3000 steps I would get a negative calorie adjustment and my calorie goal would be reduced for that day. So it's not really double dipping. It would be double dipping if you don't have it synced and already accounted for your steps in your activity level in MFP.
1 -
newheavensearth wrote: »Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.
It's not double-dipping. If you log exercise in MFP, it will ask for the time you exercised so it can overwrite the same time frame on Fitbit. But it's actually best to let Fitbit handle your exercise, especially if you have a HR-based one.
Yes I am using the HR model, so I feel that's pretty reliable. Thanks for the response!1 -
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »newheavensearth wrote: »Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.
Your Fitbit should theoretically give you a calorie adjustment based on your activity level in MFP if you have it synced, for example I have my MFP account set to Lightly Active and my tracker gives me a negative or postive adjustment based on my total steps for the day. So if I only did 5000 steps it might not give me any additional calories, if I did 10000 it will give me a positive calorie adjustment for the extra 5000 steps I did, if I did 3000 steps I would get a negative calorie adjustment and my calorie goal would be reduced for that day. So it's not really double dipping. It would be double dipping if you don't have it synced and already accounted for your steps in your activity level in MFP.
I sync it throughout the day to keep the calories correct and the step count current. Thank you!1 -
newheavensearth wrote: »newheavensearth wrote: »Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.
It's not double-dipping. If you log exercise in MFP, it will ask for the time you exercised so it can overwrite the same time frame on Fitbit. But it's actually best to let Fitbit handle your exercise, especially if you have a HR-based one.
Yes I am using the HR model, so I feel that's pretty reliable. Thanks for the response!
If it's for walking, your heart rate doesn't increase reliability of calorie estimates.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »newheavensearth wrote: »newheavensearth wrote: »Would this advice apply if I just let my Fitbit count steps only as a calorie burn and ate only 50 to 75% ofthat? Or should I log my actual exercise plus steps? I kinda view it as double dipping.
It's not double-dipping. If you log exercise in MFP, it will ask for the time you exercised so it can overwrite the same time frame on Fitbit. But it's actually best to let Fitbit handle your exercise, especially if you have a HR-based one.
Yes I am using the HR model, so I feel that's pretty reliable. Thanks for the response!
If it's for walking, your heart rate doesn't increase reliability of calorie estimates.
Likely more reliable than the MFP database though.0 -
EbonyDahlia wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
A 300 calorie burn generally means I was working out pretty hard (that's ~ a 3.5-4 mile run for a non-obese female). I'm with Blitzia on this: I think the problem is with people over-estimating their burns (the 'intense yoga session' or 'I waddled around the grocery store for some extra minutes and my Fitbit says I burned a kazillion calories extra today' folks).
It's a 2.5-3 mile run. for "a non-obese female" And 25-40 minutes isn't "working out pretty hard"
1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »EbonyDahlia wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
A 300 calorie burn generally means I was working out pretty hard (that's ~ a 3.5-4 mile run for a non-obese female). I'm with Blitzia on this: I think the problem is with people over-estimating their burns (the 'intense yoga session' or 'I waddled around the grocery store for some extra minutes and my Fitbit says I burned a kazillion calories extra today' folks).
It's a 2.5-3 mile run. for "a non-obese female" And 25-40 minutes isn't "working out pretty hard"
how do you know it's not...I can do a 3mile run fairly easy yes...but I couldn't 3 years ago...and I wasn't obese then I weighed the same I do now...4 -
stanmann571 wrote: »EbonyDahlia wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
A 300 calorie burn generally means I was working out pretty hard (that's ~ a 3.5-4 mile run for a non-obese female). I'm with Blitzia on this: I think the problem is with people over-estimating their burns (the 'intense yoga session' or 'I waddled around the grocery store for some extra minutes and my Fitbit says I burned a kazillion calories extra today' folks).
It's a 2.5-3 mile run. for "a non-obese female" And 25-40 minutes isn't "working out pretty hard"
how do you know it's not...I can do a 3mile run fairly easy yes...but I couldn't 3 years ago...and I wasn't obese then I weighed the same I do now...
If running 3 miles is working out pretty hard, then that's even more reason to eat those 300 calories.2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
When someone uses MFP and doesn't lose weight (over time) when eating back exercise calories, that means they are either underestimating Calories In and/or overestimating Calories Out.
MFP uses the NEAT method (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis), and as such this system is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns given by MFP to be inflated and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back.
My FitBit One is far less generous with calories than the MFP database and I comfortably eat 100% of the calories I earn from it back.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1
1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »EbonyDahlia wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »This is bad advice.
It's not bad advice. I have a target of 1450. I get an extra 300 a day on average for exercise. If I eat 1750 I don't lose weight. If I eat 1450 I do lose weight. It's quite ok NOT to eat your exercise calories unless you are working out really hard and eating very little and have a massive deficit.
A 300 calorie burn generally means I was working out pretty hard (that's ~ a 3.5-4 mile run for a non-obese female). I'm with Blitzia on this: I think the problem is with people over-estimating their burns (the 'intense yoga session' or 'I waddled around the grocery store for some extra minutes and my Fitbit says I burned a kazillion calories extra today' folks).
It's a 2.5-3 mile run. for "a non-obese female" And 25-40 minutes isn't "working out pretty hard"
I call that a short, easy run, and no reason to eat more. At eight miles running, I eat a little more that day. Between 200-300 calories more. This has not hurt my performance at all. Distance and pace have both been steadily increasing.
2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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