Eating through your exercise

katiegm6

I have seen this phrase on a few threads. I gather it means getting to increase the amount of calories consumed because of the impact of exercise. My question is what are the pros and cons of this approach.? Will increasing my calories to reflect exercise slow my weight loss down. I know I need to have a deficit but I wonder if I am having too much of a deficit because of the exercise. I have only started tracking a week ago and when asked if I wanted to “earn” calories based on my exercise my instinct was to say no. I thought I would lose more weight if it said no. But now I am thinking i may not be eating enough.

I am a pretty active.69 year old Twice a week I walk 4 to 5 miles. I work out with a trainer for an hour twice a week. And I generally am on my feet a good part of every day.

I would love to hear what others have done in this situation

Thanks

gallicinvasion

MyFitnessPal is designed to give you A daily calorie target in order to achieve the deficit you chose (for example, if you told MFP during set-up that you want to lose 1 lb a week, your daily calorie target given is 500 less than the daily calories you need to maintain your weight).

Now, first let’s disregard your general activity during your regular day, because when you tell MFP that you are “lightly active” or “moderately active,” it adjusts your calorie target to account for that. Let’s instead address your purposeful exercise (your 4-5 mile walks and your 2 hrs with your trainer). That burns extra calories that MFP doesn’t know about. That means that instead of a 500 calorie deficit, you’ve increased it somewhat (maybe to 600, maybe to 1000, the exact number is unclear). That means if you eat at the calorie level MFP originally told you to, you will lose weight faster than you are expecting. This might be okay at the very beginning of your weight loss journey, or if you’re obese, but it’s not okay long-term because you’re not properly fueling your body. You might have issues sticking with your plan because you’re restricting your food too much.

This is why when you do purposeful exercise, you should log that exercise in MFP to get a calorie estimate of how much you burned. Then you should eat back a portion of those calories (in addition to your original target calories). I say eat back a portion (maybe start with 50% of the exercise calories) because most people find that MFP exercise calorie estimates are too high. You can try eating 50% of them for a while. If you lose at the right pace, keep doing that! If you lose too fast, try eating 75% of your exercise calories. If you lose too slow, try eating 25%.

Hope this helps!

middlehaitch

If you are using the MFP calculator, log and eat your exercise calories.
The exception being is is you have a linked activity device, then it adjusts your cals for you.

I have always eaten all my exercise calories from MFP and that works for me. Some find it over or under estimates and they adjust according to results.

Underfuelling by eating none means you may not be fulfilling your nutritional needs, may not be performing your exercises as well as you could, or suffer from daytime lethargy.

For your walking, 1/3 bodyweight x distance walked in miles will give you a good calorie estimate.

Your workout log through MFP ‘exercise’, ‘cardio’.

Cheers, h.

papayahed

I had this question as well. Currently MFP says I should be getting 1900 cal but it's usually more when exercise is added back. My problem is I usually eat between 1500 -1700 cals a day and I'm not at all hungry. Should I eat those extra calories for the heck of it? (I'm trying to lose 100+). I'm just as surprised as anybody that 1500 calories leaves me not wanting more.

gallicinvasion

papayahed wrote: »

I had this question as well. Currently MFP says I should be getting 1900 cal but it's usually more when exercise is added back. My problem is I usually eat between 1500 -1700 cals a day and I'm not at all hungry. Should I eat those extra calories for the heck of it? (I'm trying to lose 100+). I'm just as surprised as anybody that 1500 calories leaves me not wanting more.

at the beginning of your weight loss journey, there’s often a honeymoon period where you’re satisfied eating less (and motivated by the scale going down). As the rate of loss slows down and you get back in the daily groove of life (with ups and downs, social events and holidays), you’ll want to make sure you’re properly fueling your body and not missing out on life because you’re keeping to an unnecessarily low calorie count. You should use this one to practice eating close to your goal, to learn how to keep this habit for when yo reach your goal and switch to maintenance.

kshama2001

Unlike other sites which use TDEE calculators, 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 for them and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back. Others, however, are able to lose weight while eating 100% of their exercise calories.

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1

BasedGawd412

I do not eat my exercise calories. I limit my calories to 2000 a day. Sometimes I burn more calories than I eat and I'm still properly fueled for the day, not hungry.

This is what works for me.

sijomial

Pros (eating back).

• You are using the tool as designed (generally the sensible default option, sure you can drive in a nail with a wrench but why would you if you have a hammer in your toolbox?).
• You are practicing for maintaining once you get to goal weight when you MUST take exercise into account.
• You are learning a valuable life lesson around eating more when you do more and eating less when you do less.

Cons (ignoring exercise calorie burns)

• You are deliberately skewing your estimate. In mathematical terms that's simply daft if you are aiming for accuracy. (Would you deliberately not log some food eaten when you are trying to estimate your intake? Would you type in the wrong digits into a calculator and expect to get the right answer?)
• Possibly too rapid weight loss which has health implications.

"Will increasing my calories to reflect exercise slow my weight loss down. "
Yes - but that may not be a bad thing if you are losing too rapidly. It's far more important you lose and then maintain successfully as opposed to rushing the process and learning nothing apart from how to crash diet.

"I am a pretty active 69 year old."
Don't risk losing muscle mass through too rapid weight loss, it gets harder to regain it as we age.

"Twice a week I walk 4 to 5 miles. I work out with a trainer for an hour twice a week. "
That's not a huge calorie burn over the course of a week. What does your "work out" actually involve? (It changes how you would log it and potential significance of the calories.)
Personally I would log the walking as bodyweight in lbs X distance in miles X 0.3 (efficiency ratio) for a net calorie estimate that is more modest than MyFitnessPal's rather high estimate for normal walking.
(Alternatively if you have a regular routine and like a same every day goal use a TDEE calculator which includes an average of your weekly exercise in the goal given.)

"And I generally am on my feet a good part of every day."
That's not regarded as exercise and it should be accounted for in your Activity Setting. On your feet rules out Sedentary.

"I would love to hear what others have done in this situation"
Lost weight on schedule, maintained at goal weight successfully for years eating back a very high volume of exercise calories. I did invest some time in making my estimates reasonable though (reasonable is fine, perfectly accurate isn't required for purpose).

Pipsqueak1965

Would you describe me as lightly active or sedentary: I have a desk job 3 days per week. That involves a commute of about 9,000 paces. Apart from at work I tend to be on my feet a fair bit (tidying, walking to shops, up and down stairs - very rarely use car). I also go to gym 2-3 times a week (obviously this wouldn't be counted) and often go for a 5-6 mils walk in the countryside at the weekend.

sijomial

Pipsqueak1965 wrote: »

Would you describe me as lightly active or sedentary: I have a desk job 3 days per week. That involves a commute of about 9,000 paces. Apart from at work I tend to be on my feet a fair bit (tidying, walking to shops, up and down stairs - very rarely use car). I also go to gym 2-3 times a week (obviously this wouldn't be counted) and often go for a 5-6 mils walk in the countryside at the weekend.

@Pipsqueak1965
Sedentary means mostly seated and you clearly aren't.