Eating back calories burnt on long hike.
Options
Replies
-
paigereillymcguire wrote: »Hey, so I've been sticking to (or trying to) eating 1250 calories per day and I've been seeing really good results.
This Saturday I'm planning a 10.5 mile hike around Kinder Scout in the Peak District. Using my own online calculations and MFP it says I'll burn around 2500-3500 calories from the hike. Should I eat around 3000 calories that day leaving me with calories still left over or should I still eat less, Maybe around 2000?
I'm not sure if MFP is exaggerating calories brunt as that seems a lot and don't want to waste a good day eating it all back.
Thanks.
I am also eating around 1200 per day ( I am 5'4" at 138 lbs) while trying to lose weight. I generally eat back half to 3/4 of my normal exercise calories. I exercise almost every day, so I really eat around 1300-1400 cals. When I've done all day strenuous activities (hiking, etc) and I can't eat a real meal (for example, take a lunch break) I will have Gatorade and water on hand and pick at a protein bar along the way. I tend not to feel hungry when I'm on the go like that, but when I eat some of the protein bar after a couple of hours, I definitely notice a difference in my energy. Better to pack a couple of healthy, energy laden snacks even if you end up not eating them.
Absolutely. I can go a good stretch just on water, but when hunger hits me, I am neither happy nor pleasant to be around.
If I am out "doing stuff", and I get hungry, I gotta eat. 0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »paigereillymcguire wrote: »Hey, so I've been sticking to (or trying to) eating 1250 calories per day and I've been seeing really good results.
This Saturday I'm planning a 10.5 mile hike around Kinder Scout in the Peak District. Using my own online calculations and MFP it says I'll burn around 2500-3500 calories from the hike. Should I eat around 3000 calories that day leaving me with calories still left over or should I still eat less, Maybe around 2000?
I'm not sure if MFP is exaggerating calories brunt as that seems a lot and don't want to waste a good day eating it all back.
Thanks.
10.5 miles? You'll burn around 1050 calories walking that, so I think 2500-3000 might be high. The calories burned estimates are often quite high, but I would certainly plan to eat more than usual that day.
She's not walking it...she's hiking it. BIG difference. My calorie burns on hikes are much high than on an equivalent run (rough terrain, lots of lateral movement, more muscle work needed to balance, elevation gain, etc...plus the pack she'll carry. She's adding a significant elevation change...over 2,000 feet which is the equivalent of adding at least a couple of miles to it.
I don't know what she'll burn, but it is certainly higher than 100 cal /mile.
No one actually reads anymore, apparently.
. . . you were the one arguing that her calorie burn sounded high based on what an average person would burn walking . . .
I was never arguing at all.0 -
MoiAussi93 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »paigereillymcguire wrote: »Hey, so I've been sticking to (or trying to) eating 1250 calories per day and I've been seeing really good results.
This Saturday I'm planning a 10.5 mile hike around Kinder Scout in the Peak District. Using my own online calculations and MFP it says I'll burn around 2500-3500 calories from the hike. Should I eat around 3000 calories that day leaving me with calories still left over or should I still eat less, Maybe around 2000?
I'm not sure if MFP is exaggerating calories brunt as that seems a lot and don't want to waste a good day eating it all back.
Thanks.
10.5 miles? You'll burn around 1050 calories walking that, so I think 2500-3000 might be high. The calories burned estimates are often quite high, but I would certainly plan to eat more than usual that day.
She's not walking it...she's hiking it. BIG difference. My calorie burns on hikes are much high than on an equivalent run (rough terrain, lots of lateral movement, more muscle work needed to balance, elevation gain, etc...plus the pack she'll carry. She's adding a significant elevation change...over 2,000 feet which is the equivalent of adding at least a couple of miles to it.
I don't know what she'll burn, but it is certainly higher than 100 cal /mile.
I totally agree with this. Hiking is my main exercise having logged over 1000 miles in the past year. MapMyHike gives me anywhere from 1300-2000 calories depending on many different factors as stated by @MoiAussi93. At first I was skeptical of those burns and still am to a point, I don't eat all of those back. However, after a particularly long hike if I want to eat some extra I will. I have lost 62 pounds and am at maintenance so I guess it's all working. As @NorthCascades said, snack along the way to keep your energy level up and you won't feel so famished at the end.
I lost my FitBit One so have been using MapMyHike. Anyone have any idea why it is far more generous with exercise calories that MFP's 'Hiking, cross country'? (They are both UnderArmour products now.) There's not a whole lot of elevation on these walks; probably less than 15 flights of stairs.0 -
paigereillymcguire wrote: »Took me around 3 reads and a calculator but I think I get it haha.
I only weight myself once every 2 weeks so I wouldn't get an accurate reading from it anyway. It's not my first hike my all means but it's the first time I've been counting my calories on MFP and not just eating large amounts because I can.
Sorry, wrote it on my phone and didn't take the time to clean it up
0 -
I am also eating around 1200 per day ( I am 5'4" at 138 lbs) while trying to lose weight. I generally eat back half to 3/4 of my normal exercise calories. I exercise almost every day, so I really eat around 1300-1400 cals. When I've done all day strenuous activities (hiking, etc) and I can't eat a real meal (for example, take a lunch break) I will have Gatorade and water on hand and pick at a protein bar along the way. I tend not to feel hungry when I'm on the go like that, but when I eat some of the protein bar after a couple of hours, I definitely notice a difference in my energy. Better to pack a couple of healthy, energy laden snacks even if you end up not eating them.
This probably isn't what you meant, but since we're talking about hiking specifically (and because the weather is getting nice in the northern hemisphere where most people live - so hiking is starting to be more attractive) I'd like to take a moment to say that if you plan ahead, you can eat a nice meal when you hike.
I took Beth on her first backpacking trip a few years ago. We did the Chelan Lakeshore Trail, about 20 miles of rolling hills, we planned to spend 3 days on the trail but finished in 2. Before I picked her up for the adventure, I stopped at our favorite Indian restaurant and got two carry-out meals. They went into Nalgeen bottles, rode in a cooler, and then got whisked into my backpack. After several hours on the trail, nothing could have been more delicious.
They make freeze dried stuff that you pour hot water into. They also make lightweight pans, so you can have pancakes for breakfast. We take this snowshoeing and skiing, and have hot chocolate in the mountains. The equipment is cheap and safe and doesn't weigh much, the food is much better than Cliff Bars, and in a pinch this is great for safety (lets you melt snow or boil water, keeps you warm).4 -
Mountain House biscuits and gravy, also beef stroganoff. Yummy!1
-
A guy from the local hiking forum swears by PackItGourmet.
I like their smoothies but prefer this stuff (especially the chili mac). A bonus is if you're allowed to have fires, you can burn the empty bag.
1 -
Hiking burns a ton of calories. It's great exercise. Enjoy your hike! and allow yourself the extra food. Don't make it "oh my gosh I HAVE to eat this much or I'll die!!!" but absolutely plan on eating at LEAST half back , and I'd actually be lenient for the next day as well. I get delayed hunger (the next day) after hiking.
The above. You'll burn more calories with just the elevation change. I would plan to eat back at least 50% of that 2500-3500 est. And take extra food (macro-rich) because a nutrition drop on that kind of hike is miserable but also dangerous.0 -
Allow yourself 50% of the calories to eat back, but prepare for 100%. You don't want to be up there without enough fuel.
I'm jealous of your hike. Kinder Scout is on my bucket list (along with the 3 peaks). The only trouble is, I'll end up singing The Manchester Rambler the whole way (it's stuck in my head already)1 -
Definitely make sure you fuel that sucker properly. Lots of easy to carry snacks in your pack.
Often I will leave some of my hike calories in reserve for the following day, because I am generally hungrier than usual then.1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »paigereillymcguire wrote: »Hey, so I've been sticking to (or trying to) eating 1250 calories per day and I've been seeing really good results.
This Saturday I'm planning a 10.5 mile hike around Kinder Scout in the Peak District. Using my own online calculations and MFP it says I'll burn around 2500-3500 calories from the hike. Should I eat around 3000 calories that day leaving me with calories still left over or should I still eat less, Maybe around 2000?
I'm not sure if MFP is exaggerating calories brunt as that seems a lot and don't want to waste a good day eating it all back.
Thanks.
10.5 miles? You'll burn around 1050 calories walking that, so I think 2500-3000 might be high. The calories burned estimates are often quite high, but I would certainly plan to eat more than usual that day.
She's not walking it...she's hiking it. BIG difference. My calorie burns on hikes are much high than on an equivalent run (rough terrain, lots of lateral movement, more muscle work needed to balance, elevation gain, etc...plus the pack she'll carry. She's adding a significant elevation change...over 2,000 feet which is the equivalent of adding at least a couple of miles to it.
I don't know what she'll burn, but it is certainly higher than 100 cal /mile.
I totally agree with this. Hiking is my main exercise having logged over 1000 miles in the past year. MapMyHike gives me anywhere from 1300-2000 calories depending on many different factors as stated by @MoiAussi93. At first I was skeptical of those burns and still am to a point, I don't eat all of those back. However, after a particularly long hike if I want to eat some extra I will. I have lost 62 pounds and am at maintenance so I guess it's all working. As @NorthCascades said, snack along the way to keep your energy level up and you won't feel so famished at the end.
I lost my FitBit One so have been using MapMyHike. Anyone have any idea why it is far more generous with exercise calories that MFP's 'Hiking, cross country'? (They are both UnderArmour products now.) There's not a whole lot of elevation on these walks; probably less than 15 flights of stairs.
I'm not sure why that would be, that's why I've always been skeptical of the burns.0 -
fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »MoiAussi93 wrote: »fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »paigereillymcguire wrote: »Hey, so I've been sticking to (or trying to) eating 1250 calories per day and I've been seeing really good results.
This Saturday I'm planning a 10.5 mile hike around Kinder Scout in the Peak District. Using my own online calculations and MFP it says I'll burn around 2500-3500 calories from the hike. Should I eat around 3000 calories that day leaving me with calories still left over or should I still eat less, Maybe around 2000?
I'm not sure if MFP is exaggerating calories brunt as that seems a lot and don't want to waste a good day eating it all back.
Thanks.
10.5 miles? You'll burn around 1050 calories walking that, so I think 2500-3000 might be high. The calories burned estimates are often quite high, but I would certainly plan to eat more than usual that day.
She's not walking it...she's hiking it. BIG difference. My calorie burns on hikes are much high than on an equivalent run (rough terrain, lots of lateral movement, more muscle work needed to balance, elevation gain, etc...plus the pack she'll carry. She's adding a significant elevation change...over 2,000 feet which is the equivalent of adding at least a couple of miles to it.
I don't know what she'll burn, but it is certainly higher than 100 cal /mile.
No one actually reads anymore, apparently.
. . . you were the one arguing that her calorie burn sounded high based on what an average person would burn walking . . .
I was never arguing at all.
"Argument" in the sense of "advancing a position." If that wasn't the POV you were seeking to communicate, I apologize.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions