Still lose if eating less than set calories??

Needrs22

My calories for the day are 1200. I ran 4 miles this morning (466 kcal), so it shows a total of 1666 calories that I can eat. What if I don't eat that many calories? Will I still lose weight? Or, do I just make sure I hit the 1200 and not worry about the calories burned running??

grimendale

You definitely need to eat the extra 450 calories. You will still lose weight if you undereat, but more of what you burn will be lean body mass, and you put yourself at risk for metabolic problems and malnutrition. One day isn't going to hurt you, but if you make a habit of undereating over a long period of time, it can cause problems. MFP has already build a deficit into the calories it gives you (and if you are only eating 1200, I suspect you are already at a 1000 calorie deficit), so by not eating your exercise calories, you are increasing your deficit to problematic levels. You'll have more sucess, more energy and better health if you eat the amount recommended.

itsscottwilder

1200 is an estimate, 1666 is an estimate.

I would just shoot for being in the 1600 to 1700 cal area.

notnikkisixx

DEFINITELY do not under-eat!

I've made the mistake before and my weight-loss completely plateaued. I didn't start losing again until I started eating back my exercise calories. You may also want to re-think the 1200 calories as that is super low.

just_Jennie1

If you're hungry then eat.

If you're not then don't eat.

I don't prescribe to the "You have to eat back your exercise calories" thing like a lot of people do nor do I do cardio just so I can eat more. I don't know how accurate the calorie burn that a machine, HRM or MFP says so I could very well be over estimating and eating a lot more than I should. Not only that but I don't believe in stuffing myself for the sake of eating the calories that the computer says I should eat. If I am hungry I will eat regardless of how much I burned.

cwolfman13

Don't under eat. If it's a once in awhile kind of thing that you aren't getting your calories, that's one thing...when you're routinely netting very low calories though, you'll ultimately do a number on your metabolism and you will also burn off a lot of muscle in the process as well. 1200 net is already a big deficit from maintenance for most sedentary ladies...

3dogsrunning

Don't under eat. If it's a once in awhile kind of thing that you aren't getting your calories, that's one thing...when you're routinely netting very low calories though, you'll ultimately do a number on your metabolism and you will also burn off a lot of muscle in the process as well. 1200 net is already a big deficit from maintenance for most sedentary ladies...

This.

Will you still lose? Yes. The problem lies in the long term, more specifically maintaining.
I've done the low calorie intake and high cardio burns. I lost weight with no problem, but maintaining was a whole different story.
This is also especially important if you are looking to make gains in your running.


I'd also be willing to bet that you have yourself set for too high of a calorie deficit, which makes it even more important that you hit your calorie goals.

doctorsookie

If you're hungry then eat.

If you're not then don't eat.

I don't prescribe to the "You have to eat back your exercise calories" thing like a lot of people do nor do I do cardio just so I can eat more. I don't know how accurate the calorie burn that a machine, HRM or MFP says so I could very well be over estimating and eating a lot more than I should. Not only that but I don't believe in stuffing myself for the sake of eating the calories that the computer says I should eat. If I am hungry I will eat regardless of how much I burned.

This

Serah87

If you're hungry then eat.

If you're not then don't eat.

I don't prescribe to the "You have to eat back your exercise calories" thing like a lot of people do nor do I do cardio just so I can eat more. I don't know how accurate the calorie burn that a machine, HRM or MFP says so I could very well be over estimating and eating a lot more than I should. Not only that but I don't believe in stuffing myself for the sake of eating the calories that the computer says I should eat. If I am hungry I will eat regardless of how much I burned.

You haven't lost any weight. No friends. 100 years old. Giving weight loss advice....troll comes to mind. JS

3dogsrunning

If you're hungry then eat.

If you're not then don't eat.

I don't prescribe to the "You have to eat back your exercise calories" thing like a lot of people do nor do I do cardio just so I can eat more. I don't know how accurate the calorie burn that a machine, HRM or MFP says so I could very well be over estimating and eating a lot more than I should. Not only that but I don't believe in stuffing myself for the sake of eating the calories that the computer says I should eat. If I am hungry I will eat regardless of how much I burned.

Except that hunger isn't always a reliable indicator. Anorexics often don't report/experience hunger and they are literally starving. Some overweight people always feel hungry and they do not need to eat. Hormones affect hunger. Eating too little can affect your appetite.

glin23

If you're hungry then eat.

If you're not then don't eat.

I don't prescribe to the "You have to eat back your exercise calories" thing like a lot of people do nor do I do cardio just so I can eat more. I don't know how accurate the calorie burn that a machine, HRM or MFP says so I could very well be over estimating and eating a lot more than I should. Not only that but I don't believe in stuffing myself for the sake of eating the calories that the computer says I should eat. If I am hungry I will eat regardless of how much I burned.

This. Our bodies aren't as stupid as people think. While it's true that hungry isn't all ways the best indicator, I would say in many cases it is. Unless you are malnourished, anorexic, or in some other state of compromised health, you can listen to your body. That's what I did to lose most of my weight.