Exercise and increased calorie allowances

saintlmm7689

Do you have to eat more then your daily caloric goal if you exercise?

janejellyroll

If your calorie goal comes from MFP, it's given to you with the expectation that you will eat back the calories burnt from exercise. Why? Well, MFP assumes you will use the amount of energy indicated by the activity level you chose when setting up your goals. If you use MORE energy than that, then it's wise to eat more to ensure you fuel your body properly.

If you got your calorie goal somewhere other than MFP, it may already be taking your exercise into account (depending on how it was calculated).

saintlmm7689

I got my calorie goal from MFP. But I believe the amount of calories they report I am burning from the exercise I do is not accurate. Therefore I am concerned if I eat my daily allowance plus what I burn according to their numbers I will be eating to much. Make sense?

Lietchi

Depending on the type of exercise, it may be possible to check if the number seems accurate or not. If the number is exagerated, it would be wise to not eat all those calories back, but eat a lower number back instead.
Choose a method (for example eat back 50% of exercise calories) and then check your weight trend over the next month. If you're losing at the intended rate, don't change anything. If you're losing faster, eat back a higher percentage. If you're losing slower, eat back a lower percentage.

saintlmm7689

Thank you so much that makes perfect sense. Really appreciate it.

mpkpbk2015

I have found eating back the gained calories from exercising to be detrimental because it's not always accurate. So I don't do it anymore. I exercise still but I don't add any extra calories. I have been on my weight journey to lose 100 pounds for a little over 2 years and have lost 98 of my 100 pounds.

cwolfman13

Think of it like a car...calories are literally fuel...does it require more fuel to drive 500 miles to grandma's house or around the block to the grocery store.

FitAgainBy55

You should eat as many of the back as possible, and here is my long term justification. Once you reach your goal weight and want to maintain, it really doesn't make math since to ignore those calories.

Consider this scenario:
You are burning 500 calories per day with exercise, maintaining your weight but ignoring those calories. Suddenly you are injured (or subject to house arrest due to power outages ). What then ? Do you have to reduce 500 calories from your intake to compensate ?

janejellyroll

saintlmm7689 wrote: »

I got my calorie goal from MFP. But I believe the amount of calories they report I am burning from the exercise I do is not accurate. Therefore I am concerned if I eat my daily allowance plus what I burn according to their numbers I will be eating to much. Make sense?

Some people begin with eating back just a portion to account for this (say, 50-75%). If you do this, you can then always adjust to eat more or less after a few weeks gives you time to access the trend.

FitAgainBy55

Here's the other reason to eat back exercise calories. If you are ramping up exercise, which you should be, then as you get more fit, you do more. As you do more you get to actually eat MORE as you lose. WITHOUT this approach, you will be eating less and less as you lose weight. I like to use the graph to show my progress and how I consistently lost weight while eating MORE. If you eat fewer and fewer calories as you lose your body may attempt to adapt and you might end up burning fewer calories at rest than normal.

TeaBea

mpkpbk2015 wrote: »

I have found eating back the gained calories from exercising to be detrimental because it's not always accurate. So I don't do it anymore. I exercise still but I don't add any extra calories. I have been on my weight journey to lose 100 pounds for a little over 2 years and have lost 98 of my 100 pounds.

So zero is a more accurate calorie burn estimate for you?

OP - there are a lot of factors to consider. Blanket advice (like above) is not appropriate for everyone.

If you are careful to measure your calories in, eating calories back will essentially get you back to the deficit you signed up for, But not everyone will be good at logging and measuring. Also, you will learn what a good number is or you.

If you chose an aggressive weekly weight loss goal, piling on added deficit by not eating calories back is a bad idea. This becomes more important the closer you get to goal. When you get closer to goal you are more at risk for muscle loss. Keep a moderate deficit, or it's kind of like working out to lose muscle.

saintlmm7689

Thank you TeaBea

33gail33

Since my movement and intentional exercise is similar every week I averaged it out for a couple of weeks and then adjusted my daily calories to be consistent. It makes it easier for me to meal plan with say 1500 calories allotted per day, than 1300 on non exercise day, and 1700 on exercise days. I don't exercise intensely enough that it affects my hunger enough that I need to eat much more on those days (generally alternating days).

spiriteagle99

To some extent it also depends on what exercise you are doing. If you are only burning 50 calories from a session, then eating or not eating isn't going to make much difference. When I run 12 miles and burn 1000 calories, if I don't eat them back, I'd be in a serious deficit that is going to make me very hungry. Do it often and I would lose weight for a while, but then I'd start losing muscle, hair, etc. Odds are really good that I'd be miserable as well, so much more likely to give up on dieting altogether.

Many people on MFP eat back half to 3/4 of their exercise calories. I eat 100%. Over the past several years, I've learned that I burn more than the average 60+ year old. It takes a little time to figure out whether you burn more or less than the numbers would indicate.

saintlmm7689

Very helpful. Thanks.

sijomial

What precisely is your exercise as I didn't see it mentioned?

The method of tracking and eating back exercise calories is good and sensible but the database here is just one option for how to make your estimates reasonable. It has some flaws for sure!

For one of my exercises (strength training) the database here is perfectly reasonable, for my outdoor cycling it's a very poor choice so I overwrite the suggested cals with my own more accurate numbers.

Quote
"But I believe the amount of calories they report I am burning from the exercise I do is not accurate"
- based on what comparison or expectation?

conniewilkins56

I am 69 and I have lost over 100 lbs in the last 18 months...I swim a lot and I eat back 25% of the calories MFP suggests...this is just enough more fuel to keep me going with no ill effects...on rest days I try to eat a little less!

FitAgainBy55

I just want to point out something here that many people don't know -- your RMR is not an absolute. Your body will make subtle adaptations when faced with a long term deficit. Just because you can maintain your weight (or rate of weight loss) at a particular calorie intake level doesn't mean that you have identified your absolute TDEE or RMR.

So, by ignoring exercise calories (or a high percentage of them) you are just cheating yourself out of calories you might be able to sustain and possible forcing your body to adapt to a calorie intake well below (with some limits, of course) your potential.

AnnPT77

FitAgainBy55 wrote: »

I just want to point out something here that many people don't know -- your RMR is not an absolute. Your body will make subtle adaptations when faced with a long term deficit. Just because you can maintain your weight (or rate of weight loss) at a particular calorie intake level doesn't mean that you have identified your absolute TDEE or RMR.

So, by ignoring exercise calories (or a high percentage of them) you are just cheating yourself out of calories you might be able to sustain and possible forcing your body to adapt to a calorie intake well below (with some limits, of course) your potential.

Exactly.

Especially with a substantial intake deficit to start, adding significant exercise, then eating zero back to fuel the exercise . . . that's training your body to limp along on minimums, cutting corners all along the way (hair growth, fingernails, energy level, muscle repair, immune system . . . . if you're lucky, and it's not something worse**).

Figuring out the most one can eat and still lose weight at a sensible rate is a better path toward thriving long-term good health and performance (in daily life as well as exercise).

P.S. If a person hasn't been in a lab, hooked up to machines that measure it, your "BMR/RMR" is only an estimate, anyway, not even a momentarily accurate absolute BMR/RMR; and TDEE changes every day. Happily, "close enough" and "on average" works for most of us, in practice.

** Relevant here related to risks, even if the number "1200" doesn't apply:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10761904/under-1200-for-weight-loss/p1

saintlmm7689

To answer the question about what exercise. I logged in a 24 minute elliptical session and then MFP said that i burned 395 calories. My machine itself says about 110. That is why i was concerned that when the exercise calories allotted are not correct i could be setting myself up to not lose or even gain if I eat all the inaccurate calories burned.

ninerbuff

For me, 75%-80% seems to be my sweet spot.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

sijomial

saintlmm7689 wrote: »

To answer the question about what exercise. I logged in a 24 minute elliptical session and then MFP said that i burned 395 calories. My machine itself says about 110. That is why i was concerned that when the exercise calories allotted are not correct i could be setting myself up to not lose or even gain if I eat all the inaccurate calories burned.

Although not all ellipticals can be trusted it at least has some idea of the effort you put it - you can overwrite the 395 that the database suggested by your machine's estimate of 110. It will at least be proportionate and sounds entirely reasonable.

That's a far superior method to completely ignoring your exercise.