Net calories vs total calories

fakehippie

Which do you guys go by? Net calories or total calories? According to MFP my total calories/day average over the past week has been 2,074 calories. But my net calories/day average has been 1,585 (because I exercise a lot). Which number matters more? Which do y'all go by? If someone were to ask you "how many calories do you eat in a day" which number would you answer with?

AnnPT77

I "go by" net calories, in the sense that I eat to that goal.

Right now, I have my goal calories set at 1850. On a non-exercise day, I target that, or close (+/-). On an exercise day, I estimate exercise with care, or what I think of as care (it's a bit of a black art, realistically, very estimate-y generally). I log those calories, and eat those, too.

For example, today I logged 625 exercise calories. I have my 1850 base goal, plus 625 exercise calories, that I can eat, for a total of 2475 calories. Right now, I've eaten what I logged as 2193 calories. I can eat another 282 calories, or hold some over for the future. I'll probably eat at least some of them. (If it matters, I'm in maintenance.)

I've been doing this same basic thing, though with different base calorie goals because of different weight management goals at one time or another, for 6 years now. It's worked fine, for me. I'm at a healthy weight, have been at a healthy weight for 5+ years now, after being obese for 3 decades or so before that.

When other people ask me how many calories I eat (which almost never happens, BTW), what I answer depends on the situation. If it's in MFP, I'd usually assume they know about net & gross, so I'd probably say "1850 net calories, which is usually 2100-2200 or so gross intake". If someone in my normal real life asks, I'd assume they don't have that context, so I'd probably say "I usually eat something in the lower half of the 2000s most days, but that's unusual for my (our) age/size, so one really can't generalize", or something like that.

fakehippie

AnnPT77 wrote: »

I "go by" net calories, in the sense that I eat to that goal.

Right now, I have my goal calories set at 1850. On a non-exercise day, I target that, or close (+/-). On an exercise day, I estimate exercise with care, or what I think of as care (it's a bit of a black art, realistically, very estimate-y generally). I log those calories, and eat those, too.

For example, today I logged 625 exercise calories. I have my 1850 base goal, plus 625 exercise calories, that I can eat, for a total of 2475 calories. Right now, I've eaten what I logged as 2193 calories. I can eat another 282 calories, or hold some over for the future. I'll probably eat at least some of them. (If it matters, I'm in maintenance.)

I've been doing this same basic thing, though with different base calorie goals because of different weight management goals at one time or another, for 6 years now. It's worked fine, for me. I'm at a healthy weight, have been at a healthy weight for 5+ years now, after being obese for 3 decades or so before that.

When other people ask me how many calories I eat (which almost never happens, BTW), what I answer depends on the situation. If it's in MFP, I'd usually assume they know about net & gross, so I'd probably say "1850 net calories, which is usually 2100-2200 or so gross intake". If someone in my normal real life asks, I'd assume they don't have that context, so I'd probably say "I usually eat something in the lower half of the 2000s most days, but that's unusual for my (our) age/size, so one really can't generalize", or something like that.

Okay thanks, this answer is helpful! I keep feeling guilty for logging so many calories even tho I'm burning them off. For example, my current calorie target is 1200, and today I ate around 1900 calories, but logged around 750 exercise calories, so according to MFP I was still below my limit. 1900 just sounds like so much tho! I wonder if it's even possible for me to lose weight that way! I've already lost a few pounds, so I guess whatever I'm doing is working, idk.

AnnPT77

fakehippie wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

I "go by" net calories, in the sense that I eat to that goal.

Right now, I have my goal calories set at 1850. On a non-exercise day, I target that, or close (+/-). On an exercise day, I estimate exercise with care, or what I think of as care (it's a bit of a black art, realistically, very estimate-y generally). I log those calories, and eat those, too.

For example, today I logged 625 exercise calories. I have my 1850 base goal, plus 625 exercise calories, that I can eat, for a total of 2475 calories. Right now, I've eaten what I logged as 2193 calories. I can eat another 282 calories, or hold some over for the future. I'll probably eat at least some of them. (If it matters, I'm in maintenance.)

I've been doing this same basic thing, though with different base calorie goals because of different weight management goals at one time or another, for 6 years now. It's worked fine, for me. I'm at a healthy weight, have been at a healthy weight for 5+ years now, after being obese for 3 decades or so before that.

When other people ask me how many calories I eat (which almost never happens, BTW), what I answer depends on the situation. If it's in MFP, I'd usually assume they know about net & gross, so I'd probably say "1850 net calories, which is usually 2100-2200 or so gross intake". If someone in my normal real life asks, I'd assume they don't have that context, so I'd probably say "I usually eat something in the lower half of the 2000s most days, but that's unusual for my (our) age/size, so one really can't generalize", or something like that.

Okay thanks, this answer is helpful! I keep feeling guilty for logging so many calories even tho I'm burning them off. For example, my current calorie target is 1200, and today I ate around 1900 calories, but logged around 750 exercise calories, so according to MFP I was still below my limit. 1900 just sounds like so much tho! I wonder if it's even possible for me to lose weight that way! I've already lost a few pounds, so I guess whatever I'm doing is working, idk.

I've been losing ultra-slowly (by intention) for months, on 1850 plus all exercise, which means eating 2100-2200 or more gross most days lately. I'm 5'5", 125 pounds +/-, female, 65 years old, sedentary outside of intentional exercise. I admit, I'm a mysteriously good li'l ol' calorie burner for some reason, but the idea that every woman needs to eat 1200 calories (or less!) to lose weight is a myth.

Start by believing what MFP (or some other decent research-based "calculator" (really estimator)) says. Follow the rules that go with its method (in MFP's case, logging & eating back exercise in addition to base calories, estimating the exercise consistently and carefully). Log eating carefully, consistently, reasonably meticulously. Stick with that routine for 4-6 weeks, then look at average weekly loss rate. (Premenopausal women should compare weights at the same relative point in at least two different monthly cycles.) Based on that experiential data, adjust base goal if necessary. That'll work.

Guilt is optional, burns no extra calories, feels icky. I don't believe in indulging in it. Weight loss (weight management, more broadly) is a science fair experiment, in my world.

Best wishes!

Lietchi

I 'go by' net calories as well: I eat to my MFP base calories goal on inactive days and I eat more on active days. In my case, that is based on how many calories my Garmin tells me I burn, since my weight trend has shown that to be accurate for me.

My gross calorie intake is between 1900 and 2000 calories on average, and I'm still losing weight slowly (I'm 5ft5 and weigh around 150lbs).
So your numbers don't sound particularly high to me. Guilt is a bad guide 😉 Better to look at your weight trend and see if it's working.

yirara

Based on how MFP works you should eat back your exercise calories. Say your goal is 1200, and you exercise for 700. If you don't eat them back you'd effectively only eat 500 calories that day. Which nobody can live on. However, exercise calories tend to be a bit inflated, depending on the exercise. You could for now only eat back half of them and see how it goes.

Btw, seeing that you are on 1200: what are your stats and rate of loss? MFP will always give you 1200 if your chosen rate is too high because that's the lowest kind of healthy amount of calories. It looks like you might have chosen a too high goal, and hence won't be losing it anyway.

sijomial

The answer to the question ""how many calories do you eat in a day"" is whatever the number I eat on that day or on average depending what people want to know.

But my eating goal is decided by my net calories.

Today is "big ride day" so my eating goal will be boosted by c. 2,000 calories from a four hour cycle. It would be absolutely daft for me to ignore them.
Today if I eat 4,000 calories I'll be in a c. 500 cal deficit.
If I don't exercise tomorrow (unlikely!) and eat c. 2,000 I'll be in the same 500 cal deficit.

Really don't understand why someone feels guilty about exercising and requiring more calories compared to not exercising. Calories are calories are calories - there's nothing special about exercise calories, just a perfectly normal energy requirement.

There is a skill in estimating them reasonably, just like logging food reasonably accurately is a skill, and often the database here isn't the best choice for a particular exercise - it's very poor for my main exercise of road cycling.

lemurcat2

MFP's approach is net cals.

What I do, instead, (another common approach) is to include my planned exercise (which is consistent and which I do) in my planned calories. So if I want to eat about 1500 net to lose 1 lb/week, I might figure out that I exercise for an average of 500 cals per day and then plan to eat 2000 cals/day. If you asked me what I ate or what my goal was, I'd say 2000, but that was based on aiming for 1500 net. (This is often called TDEE method.)

MFP will not include any exercise, will give you a goal of 1500, but then include the calories from the exercise of the day, which might mean you have 2300 on a heavy exercise day (long run day) and 1500 on a rest day, for example. What you say your calories are is up to you, but given the variability people often find it easier to explain as 2000 net.

I like eating about the same most days and not varying based on exercise that day unless I feel like I'm not hungry or need more, so I prefer the non net number (TDEE method) but it also includes the exercise, just upfront.