To eat or not to eat exercise calories...

Kilsi_Kizmit

New to MFP. Connected my Fitbit and set myself to sedentary as I have an office job. Should I be eating the calories that my Fitbit kicks back to me? I'm afraid it will make me gain, but y'all who have been here longer than me would know better.

PAV8888

Not a debate item actually unless your weight trend over time indicates that you need to correct.

The automatic adjustment you see corrects the caloric expenditure level you self selected during MFP goal setup and makes it equal to what FitBit thought your caloric expenditure was based on the activity it detected.

Pretty much all of it should be edible while allowing you to meet your goals assuming your logging is accurate and correct, the detection correct, and you track close to the mean.

You try and track for a few weeks and adjust based on your actual weight trend over time

Nony_Mouse

What he said ^^

Lietchi

PS: having an office job, doesn't necessarily mean you're sedentary. You could still take a lot of steps at work, walk to and from work, do a lot of housework, etc.

I also have an office job, but I walk 6000 steps a day, at least, when I'm not working from home. So my activity tracker gives me hundreds of extra calories on those days and I do consume those.

dougii

I take a slightly different approach to this since calorie consumption and burn is highly speculative for the majority of us. I never eat back more than 50% of my exercise calories and some days don't eat back any of them. This has worked well and has kept me on track with my goals. Follow what works best for you. Watch the scale and your body and make changes as you deem appropriate.

jhanleybrown

Be aware most trackers over estimate cals burned, sometimes significantly. I eat back 100% of cals burned. I'm 80% of the way with what I had to lose. However, when I first started I lost a month as I was using bad cal estimates for exercise. There are very accurate formulas for cals used out there based on exercise type. They typically use different variables (walking running is usually weight and distance, cycling is power and time...). Most trackers, gym machines, MFP use an MET formula which seems to systematically over estimate by significant amounts (for running/walking +50%, cycling +100%).

The short version:
Eat them back but you have to have a reasonably good estimate. A lot of people use MET estimates from trackers then eat back half to adjust for the estimates being inflated. I eat back 100% but put some effort in to figure out most accurate estimate formulas for my main forms of exercise.

AnnPT77

I don't think it's true that most trackers overestimate calorie burn, whether for exercise or all-day TDEE. They can overestimate or underestimate; it's good to understand what they're best and worst at estimating; and one's own weight loss experience is ultimately the best guide to calorie needs.

My tracker (well-regarded brand, accurate enough for many people) dramatically underestimates my all-day TDEE, based on comparing more than a year of what the tracker estimates to nearly 5 years of logging with MFP. Like, it's several hundred calories too low, 25-30% low. (MFP estimates low by about that same amount, BTW, for my all-day calorie needs.)

I do one form of exercise that's well power-metered, by most accounts (Concept 2 rowing machine). My tracker estimates that exercise (at steady state) reasonably within an order of understandable error for these sorts of things, compared with the rowing machine. (The tracker does know my actual tested max heart rate, which is a major factor in this IMO.)

OP, if a person selects a very aggressive weight loss rate target in MFP for their current weight (say, more than half a percent of current weight weekly), and does a lot (hundreds of estimated calories) of activity above and beyond their MFP activity setting (daily life movement, plus exercise activity), it could be a health risk not to eat back a good-sized chunk of those exercise calories, to start.

At the opposite pole, someone targeting a quite-slow weight loss rate, and not being very active all beyond MFP's expectations, is probably going to be OK letting that extra activity increase their calorie deficit and potentially make them experience faster weight loss.

Anything in between is a judgement call, based on individual tolerance for health risks.

Personally, I'd suggest eating back at least half of any rationally estimated extra calories for the first 4-6 weeks, then assessing how your actual weight loss matches up with your weight loss goal. (Along the way, if you seem to be losing surprisingly fast, especially beyond the first 2 weeks, and simultaneously start to experience otherwise unexplained fatigue or weakness, eat more.)

After the 4-6 week trial period, if you're still losing riskily fast, eat more; if you could safely lose faster and are feeling great, eat a little less. Actual weight loss rate is what counts.

MikePTY

Lietchi wrote: »

PS: having an office job, doesn't necessarily mean you're sedentary. You could still take a lot of steps at work, walk to and from work, do a lot of housework, etc.

I also have an office job, but I walk 6000 steps a day, at least, when I'm not working from home. So my activity tracker gives me hundreds of extra calories on those days and I do consume those.

I wish MFP was a bit clearer on this. I have a desk job but easiqily fit lightly active (outside of exercise) because I am moving around enough during the day. A lot less people are sedentary than they think.

NorthCascades

It's amazing how this question generated nothing but good advice. 🙂

alteredsteve175

NorthCascades wrote: »

It's amazing how this question generated nothing but good advice. 🙂

A minor miracle on the intarwebz. Color me amazed!