For weight loss, do you eat back the calories you've burned?

average2aphrodite

I've heard mixed answers before and was wondering what the general consensus is.

mtaratoot

No.

And yes.

If I am trying to lose weight (fat), I want to eat fewer calories than I burn. If I burn 2000 calories a day and want to lose a half pound a week, I want to eat no more than 1750 calories per day. I don't want to eat back all 2000.

That said, if my daily goal is 1750 calories (so that I am in a 250 calorie per day deficit), but I do EXTRA activities that burn an extra 250 calories (or 500 or 1000), then I want to increase my intake to no more than 2000 (or 2250 or 2750) on that day to still have a 250 calorie deficit.

No. Eat fewer calories than you burn to lose weight.

Yes. If your goal is set using MFP's method and you do intentional exercise, eat the extra calories you burned during exercise to maintain your deficit.

AnnPT77

I ate every carefully-estimated delicious exercise calorie all through losing from class 1 obese to a healthy weight, and in nearly 8 years of maintaining a healthy weight since loss. Exercise calories taste the best, so people who don't eat them are missing out.

Seriously: There underlying idea is that there are two general ways to handle calorie counting:

1. TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) method: Use a calculator (or tracker) to get a calorie estimate for how many calories it would take to maintain our current weight, including the contribution of just being alive (basal metabolic rate (BMR) or resting metabolic rate (RMR)), daily life activity (job, home chores, etc.), and planned intentional exercise. Cut some calories from that to trigger weight loss. Eat the same number of calories every day.

2. MFP method: Get an estimate from MFP to lose weight at a certain rate (as designated in our MFP profile), setting our MFP activity level based on daily life activity (job, home chores, etc.) but NOT including intentional exercise. Behind the scenes, MFP uses our estimated BMR/RMR, our activity level, and our requested loss rate to estimate a calorie goal that will trigger weight loss. When we exercise, we log the exercise - or sync a fitness tracker - and eat at least a fair fraction of those calories, too. That means eating more on exercise days, less on non-exercise days (although it's fine to bank some of the exercise calories for a few days if we wish).

Correctly applied, both methods include intentional exercise. TDEE method averages it in to daily goal, MFP method gives a daily goal without exercise then we log it separately. The concepts are similar, it's just the accounting method that's different. The numbers should work out pretty close, as an average over a period of time.

Either method has pros and cons, and different people may prefer one or the other. Either one can work.

If someone sets up for a relatively moderate (slow) weight loss rate, and doesn't do very much exercise, they may rationally decide to let the exercise calories make them lose weight a little faster. Since the calorie deficit stays moderate, they probably won't lose weigh unhealthfully fast, risk nutritional deficiencies (because of too few calories), or find this process unsustainable (because of appetite or fatigue).

If someone sets up for an aggressive, very fast weight loss rate (like 2 pounds or 1 kg per week), then does a big bunch of exercise on top of that, and doesn't eat back any exercise calories, that increases health risks and makes it more probable that the process will be too hard to stick with long enough to lose a meaningful total amount of weight.

In between those two extremes, whether to let exercise calories speed up weight loss is a matter of how much a person likes to risk their health or make the process harder to stick with.

People who argue about this sometimes don't understand that there are two different methods. Some of them also seem to think that fast loss - as fast as possible - is a good idea. (I don't think that.)

kshama2001

average2aphrodite wrote: »

I've heard mixed answers before and was wondering what the general consensus is.

You're probably getting mixed answers because people are thinking of the TDEE method, in which exercise is already included, and/or not understanding that MFP uses the NEAT method.

Unlike other sites which use TDEE calculators, MFP uses the NEAT method (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis), and as such this system is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns given by MFP to be inflated for them and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back. Others are able to lose weight while eating 100% of their exercise calories.

https://support.myfitnesspal.com/hc/en-us/articles/360032625391-How-does-MyFitnessPal-calculate-my-initial-goals-

Hobartlemagne

I did that when I lost a bunch of weight 6 years ago, and I'm presently doing it successfully.
An important thing to consider: your food-calorie measurement may not be accurate, and your exercise-calorie measurement may not be accurate. Keep a big enough margin to cover that.

AnnPT77

Hobartlemagne wrote: »

I did that when I lost a bunch of weight 6 years ago, and I'm presently doing it successfully.
An important thing to consider: your food-calorie measurement may not be accurate, and your exercise-calorie measurement may not be accurate. Keep a big enough margin to cover that.

I can't quite get on board with "it might be inaccurate, so intentionally make it inaccurate to compensate".

I get that many people will err low on food calories, err high on exercise calories . . . but still.

Running that 4-6 weeks experiment, then adjusting calories, will compensate to some extent for systematic estimating errors. Personally, I prefer that approach.

tomcustombuilder

You can eat back your exercise calories then in a month review your progress or lack of it. If you’ve met your goal then you’re on the right track and if you’ve fallen short of your goal then the data you’ve input is flawed because of one of the reasons below or a combination of reasons

- incorrect daily activity choice
- Inaccurate weekly calorie counting/tracking
- Incorrect food/drink choices in MFP data base (they are crowdsourced so may be inaccurate)
- overestimating exercise calories burned

Also understand that food labels can be off as much as 20% regarding their calorie content.

neanderthin

I don't count calories and eat until I just feel full and if my exercise caused me to be more hungry, which sometimes does happen, then I generally will eat more to feel full or satiated, but not always. I suspect if your counting calories this vagueness is transferable to that discipline as well.

AnnPT77

tomcustombuilder wrote: »

You can eat back your exercise calories then in a month review your progress or lack of it. If you’ve met your goal then you’re on the right track and if you’ve fallen short of your goal then the data you’ve input is flawed because of one of the reasons below or a combination of reasons

- incorrect daily activity choice
- Inaccurate weekly calorie counting/tracking
- Incorrect food/drink choices in MFP data base (they are crowdsourced so may be inaccurate)
- overestimating exercise calories burned

Also understand that food labels can be off as much as 20% regarding their calorie content.

Good advice from Tom.

I'd add one possibility to his list: You may not be average in your calorie needs, and the calorie calculators spit out statistical averages for superficially similar people. You're an individual, and individuals can vary from average, high or low. This is a possibility with lower odds than what he listed, but it's possible.

Run the multi-week experiment, then adjust based on personal average weekly results, as he suggests.