Calories

marcuszmikly17

Is it necessary to eat back the calories you burn off if you're trying to lose weight?

harper16

Yes. You should be logging your exercise separately, and eating back those calories.

L1zardQueen

Yes, here’s an explanation.

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p1

knightmagic

i don't eat back calories because exercise can be tough to adjust for accurately. Even Fitbit/Apple watches have been shown to not be as accurate as they try to be. Any of the fitness people i like to follow talk about the bonus calories from working out help get you to your goal faster. I'd say track your food at a deficit and then monitor your real hunger. I've lost 60lbs so far in the last 8 months and added 20lbs of muscle. If i can do that you can do it too!

janejellyroll

knightmagic wrote: »

i don't eat back calories because exercise can be tough to adjust for accurately. Even Fitbit/Apple watches have been shown to not be as accurate as they try to be. Any of the fitness people i like to follow talk about the bonus calories from working out help get you to your goal faster. I'd say track your food at a deficit and then monitor your real hunger. I've lost 60lbs so far in the last 8 months and added 20lbs of muscle. If i can do that you can do it too!

Any "fitness people" who recommend active people should "get to their goal faster" by ignoring the calorie requirements of exercise are being incredibly irresponsible. I promise you that these "fitness people," if successful, are taking *their* calorie needs into account when determining how much to eat.

Even a less than fully accurate calorie burn estimate from a Fitbit/Apple Watch is more accurate than assuming a burn of zero, which is what you're doing when you don't eat back any calories at all.

ccrdragon

Even if the calorie burns for the exercises are off, you can start by eating 1/2 of the estimate and see which way you weight goes. If i tgoes down faster than you expect, eat more of the calories back. If it's not going down as fast as you expect, eat fewer of the calories back.

knightmagic wrote: »

i don't eat back calories because exercise can be tough to adjust for accurately. Even Fitbit/Apple watches have been shown to not be as accurate as they try to be. Any of the fitness people i like to follow talk about the bonus calories from working out help get you to your goal faster. I'd say track your food at a deficit and then monitor your real hunger. I've lost 60lbs so far in the last 8 months and added 20lbs of muscle. If i can do that you can do it too!

I don't know who is telling you this, but it is an extremely unlikely scenario. In the best of conditions, eating at a surplus (even a small surplus) and working out (with heavy weights in a very structured program) religiously for 2-3 hours a day, the average male can expect to add 1 to 2 lbs of muscle per month. It is not physiologically possible to add 20 lbs of muscle while running a steep calorie deficit under normal circumstances.

L1zardQueen

knightmagic wrote: »

i don't eat back calories because exercise can be tough to adjust for accurately. Even Fitbit/Apple watches have been shown to not be as accurate as they try to be. Any of the fitness people i like to follow talk about the bonus calories from working out help get you to your goal faster. I'd say track your food at a deficit and then monitor your real hunger. I've lost 60lbs so far in the last 8 months and added 20lbs of muscle. If i can do that you can do it too!

How do you know you added 20 pounds of muscle? It is hard to add muscle when eating a deficit.

sijomial

marcuszmikly17 wrote: »

Is it necessary to eat back the calories you burn off if you're trying to lose weight?

Just like you will have to account for your exercise calories when you get to goal weight, learn the skill now and lose at a sensible rate rather than the fastest possible rate.