Exercise calories

bozzasean

Regular runner here. Do I take off my calories used in running when my body is used to it ,if I do I can never eat enough food to record it especially after long runs.

Feel like I should just ignore them

batorkin

If your trying to lose weight, i'd eat back like 50-80% of your exercise calories. If you are trying to maintain, I'd eat back 100% to keep your energy high as possible.

I am actually having the same problem. Ironically made a post seconds before you did. Between biking and running, I have to eat ~3,500 calories a day and I've been having to help fill my calorie goals with things like ice cream and pizza. I am going to start swimming on days where I am too sore to run or bike too, which is going to increase it even further.

bozzasean

I run up to 3000 calories and it always shows I'm under and may be doing harm even if I'm full ! I've a bit of weight I want to shift so may just manually record 50% of my exercise

batorkin

bozzasean wrote: »

I run up to 3000 calories and it always shows I'm under and may be doing harm even if I'm full ! I've a bit of weight I want to shift so may just manually record 50% of my exercise

I don't think the apps are really designed for people like us that can burn crazy amounts of calories in a single exercise. If we are constantly full, chances are we are getting enough food. That's my logic anyway. I don't like going into the freezer at 10pm and eating a bucket of ice cream just because I need the most calorie dense & least filling foods to meet my calorie goals on certain days. I just go to bed and deal with the deficit.

I try to make up for it on other days though, during the weekends I will eat quite a bit while out. Yesterday, I ate an entire large 5 topping pizza and a massive 6x6 inch brownie in one sitting, but I also biked 108 miles that day (~4K calories burned).

AnnPT77

Folks getting high exercise calorie estimates: Be aware that many methods of estimating will give you gross calories for exercise (includes your basal metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR) calories).

For short-timespan exercise, this is a minor issue, because the numbers involved are small. For long (multi-hour) exercise, it can be fairly significant. There are formulas for estimating net walking/running calories (on level ground) that don't include BMR/RMR, that may be useful.

If I recall correctly (not being a runner), it's (0.63 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for running, and (0.3 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for walking. If it's not level ground, this may underestimate.

Another alternative, if your estimating method gives you gross calories, is to estimate your BMR/RMR for the time period, and back that out, which should get you closer.

Eventually, in weight maintenance, you will need to eat your actual exercise calories back - all of them - or you'll lose weight instead of maintaining. You can spread the exercise calories over several days to eat them back, if you prefer.

Even while losing weight, keep an eye on your loss rate: It's good to avoid losing too fast, to keep health risks minimal.

batorkin

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Folks getting high exercise calorie estimates: Be aware that many methods of estimating will give you gross calories for exercise (includes your basal metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR) calories).

For short-timespan exercise, this is a minor issue, because the numbers involved are small. For long (multi-hour) exercise, it can be fairly significant. There are formulas for estimating net walking/running calories (on level ground) that don't include BMR/RMR, that may be useful.

If I recall correctly (not being a runner), it's (0.63 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for running, and (0.3 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for walking. If it's not level ground, this may underestimate.

Another alternative, if your estimating method gives you gross calories, is to estimate your BMR/RMR for the time period, and back that out, which should get you closer.

Eventually, in weight maintenance, you will need to eat your actual exercise calories back - all of them - or you'll lose weight instead of maintaining. You can spread the exercise calories over several days to eat them back, if you prefer.

Even while losing weight, keep an eye on your loss rate: It's good to avoid losing too fast, to keep health risks minimal.

I don't think that's the problem in my case. I use a Garmin Forerunner 945 watch with HR monitoring/GPS/Elevation/etc. It has "active" and "inactive" calories that it adds up and gives a total. I would be pretty pissed if a $600 watch had such a big calculation flaw.

After a 108 mile bike ride yesterday, I was being told to eat 6,100 calories to maintain. I have no idea if that's accurate but there's very few people doing those kind of rides to compare with. I've just been weighing myself every day and adjusting accordingly based on weekly trend.

bozzasean

batorkin wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Folks getting high exercise calorie estimates: Be aware that many methods of estimating will give you gross calories for exercise (includes your basal metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR) calories).

For short-timespan exercise, this is a minor issue, because the numbers involved are small. For long (multi-hour) exercise, it can be fairly significant. There are formulas for estimating net walking/running calories (on level ground) that don't include BMR/RMR, that may be useful.

If I recall correctly (not being a runner), it's (0.63 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for running, and (0.3 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for walking. If it's not level ground, this may underestimate.

Another alternative, if your estimating method gives you gross calories, is to estimate your BMR/RMR for the time period, and back that out, which should get you closer.

Eventually, in weight maintenance, you will need to eat your actual exercise calories back - all of them - or you'll lose weight instead of maintaining. You can spread the exercise calories over several days to eat them back, if you prefer.

Even while losing weight, keep an eye on your loss rate: It's good to avoid losing too fast, to keep health risks minimal.

I don't think that's the problem in my case. I use a Garmin Forerunner 945 watch with HR monitoring/GPS/Elevation/etc. It has "active" and "inactive" calories that it adds up and gives a total. I would be pretty pissed if a $600 watch had such a big calculation flaw.

After a 108 mile bike ride yesterday, I was being told to eat 6,100 calories to maintain. I have no idea if that's accurate but there's very few people doing those kind of rides to compare with. I've just been weighing myself every day and adjusting accordingly based on weekly trend.

Likewise I use a Samsung 4g with hr using strava. It calculates according to hr , weight and loads on to here recommending I consume copious amounts after long training runs. Just a shame it adds in some dog walks etc too

batorkin

bozzasean wrote: »

batorkin wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Folks getting high exercise calorie estimates: Be aware that many methods of estimating will give you gross calories for exercise (includes your basal metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR) calories).

For short-timespan exercise, this is a minor issue, because the numbers involved are small. For long (multi-hour) exercise, it can be fairly significant. There are formulas for estimating net walking/running calories (on level ground) that don't include BMR/RMR, that may be useful.

If I recall correctly (not being a runner), it's (0.63 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for running, and (0.3 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for walking. If it's not level ground, this may underestimate.

Another alternative, if your estimating method gives you gross calories, is to estimate your BMR/RMR for the time period, and back that out, which should get you closer.

Eventually, in weight maintenance, you will need to eat your actual exercise calories back - all of them - or you'll lose weight instead of maintaining. You can spread the exercise calories over several days to eat them back, if you prefer.

Even while losing weight, keep an eye on your loss rate: It's good to avoid losing too fast, to keep health risks minimal.

I don't think that's the problem in my case. I use a Garmin Forerunner 945 watch with HR monitoring/GPS/Elevation/etc. It has "active" and "inactive" calories that it adds up and gives a total. I would be pretty pissed if a $600 watch had such a big calculation flaw.

After a 108 mile bike ride yesterday, I was being told to eat 6,100 calories to maintain. I have no idea if that's accurate but there's very few people doing those kind of rides to compare with. I've just been weighing myself every day and adjusting accordingly based on weekly trend.

Likewise I use a Samsung 4g with hr using strava. It calculates according to hr , weight and loads on to here recommending I consume copious amounts after long training runs. Just a shame it adds in some dog walks etc too

We just gonna have to find some non-filling high calorie snacks to munch on throughout the day.

sijomial

batorkin wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

Folks getting high exercise calorie estimates: Be aware that many methods of estimating will give you gross calories for exercise (includes your basal metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR) calories).

For short-timespan exercise, this is a minor issue, because the numbers involved are small. For long (multi-hour) exercise, it can be fairly significant. There are formulas for estimating net walking/running calories (on level ground) that don't include BMR/RMR, that may be useful.

If I recall correctly (not being a runner), it's (0.63 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for running, and (0.3 x bodyweight in pounds x distance in miles) for walking. If it's not level ground, this may underestimate.

Another alternative, if your estimating method gives you gross calories, is to estimate your BMR/RMR for the time period, and back that out, which should get you closer.

Eventually, in weight maintenance, you will need to eat your actual exercise calories back - all of them - or you'll lose weight instead of maintaining. You can spread the exercise calories over several days to eat them back, if you prefer.

Even while losing weight, keep an eye on your loss rate: It's good to avoid losing too fast, to keep health risks minimal.

I don't think that's the problem in my case. I use a Garmin Forerunner 945 watch with HR monitoring/GPS/Elevation/etc. It has "active" and "inactive" calories that it adds up and gives a total. I would be pretty pissed if a $600 watch had such a big calculation flaw.

After a 108 mile bike ride yesterday, I was being told to eat 6,100 calories to maintain. I have no idea if that's accurate but there's very few people doing those kind of rides to compare with. I've just been weighing myself every day and adjusting accordingly based on weekly trend.

@batorkin

My last Century ride using a power meter (which gives very accurate net calories burned) gave me 2,664 net cals for the ride.
Strava wasn't too far off in estimating my power (average was only 5w too high) but it gives a gross calorie estimate (3,805) which is of course quite a significant deviation from net cals for a multi hour ride.

Add my c. 2,500 maintenance calories and on that day my theoretical maintenance was very high at 5,164.
Without knowing your stats, amount of climbing, power output etc. it's hard to compare but if you are heavier, even worse aero than me or did more climbing then 6,100 is indeed in the realms of possible.

Before I added the power meter to my toy collection I found my Garmin estimates without measuring my power output entirely reasonable over many years.