MFP and eating back exercise calories...

cwolfman13

This is a really oversimplified illustration of the formula...but let's assume two variables in your calorie needs...we'll call them A & B. Variable A is all of the calories required to keep you alive as well as calories necessary required for day to day activities like crawling out of bed, dropping a deuce, driving your car to work, cooking, cleaning, etc. Variable B is a really simple one...it's your exercise. C is is your weight loss cut and D is your weight loss (diet) calorie goal.

A + B - C = D (to lose X Lbs per week) This is pretty much how a TDEE calculator looks (and most people are accustomed to this approach whether they realize they're using the TDEE method or not)...your estimated exercise is included (B) unfront in the equation as part of your activity level. Now, here's how MFP looks if you set your profile up the way you're supposed to (without exercise)...

A - C = D. As you can see...your exercise (B) is currently unaccounted for and your calorie goal (D) only includes your calories necesary for life and daily living less your cut....so when you exercise, you have to add (B) to the back-end of the equation...thus you log your exercise and eat those calories back.

I'll use my own numbers to further illustrate...TDEE first with a 500 calorie deficit to lose 1 Lb per week:

A (2360) + B (450) - C (500) = D (2310)

or MFP

A (2360) - C (500) = D (1,860) + B (450) = (2,310)

As you can further see, the two methods are basically 6 of 1, half dozen of the other. The only difference is where I account for my estimated exercise. So, if it's "not working" don't just jump to the conclusion that it's the method...I see a lot of people do that and switch methods to "shake things up"...if you're doing it right, changing methods is completely meaningless. Most likely what is happening is a lack of dietary adherance, lack of consistency, and/or estimation error of intake or output...probably both.

mickisteen

I was just about to post a question related to this so thanks for the quick easy explanation. Given that I have an enormous amount of weight to lose >100 lbs, can you give me your opinion on not eating back my exercise calories as long as my total calories for the day is reasonable. In my case I'm eating about 1600 a day and exercising as I can.

TeaBea

Excellent post cwolfman!

cwolfman13

I was just about to post a question related to this so thanks for the quick easy explanation. Given that I have an enormous amount of weight to lose >100 lbs, can you give me your opinion on not eating back my exercise calories as long as my total calories for the day is reasonable. In my case I'm eating about 1600 a day and exercising as I can.

In general, individuals with more to lose can sustain larger deficits due to substantial fat stores. This must be done with caution, however. Large deficits also eat into LBM and chomp on you muscle. This reduces LBM which in turn, reduces your metabolism further. This really becomes a major issue with people who have very little to lose and/or with individuals who have had a lot to lose, but never dialed that deficit back.

Personally, I recommend anyone trying to lose more than 2 Lbs per week do so only under the watch of a medical professional who specializes. If you ate at a 2 Lb deficit with a lot to lose, it's likely you would lose more anyway, especially up front and then it would taper.

You also have to keep in mind that all of these calculators provide you with an estimate...basically a good starting point. From their, individuals need to make their own adjustments based on what is happening real time. It is also very common to underestimate calorie intake and overestimate burn which can really throw a monkey wrench into things...a lot of people who think it's "not working" and they're only eating 1000 calories per day or whatever are most likely substantially underestimating their intake.

mickisteen

Thanks cwolfman!

cwolfman13

^^^ welcome...I hope it helps clear things up for a whole lot of people that are confused...

cwolfman13

bump

SnicciFit

<snip From their, individuals need to make their own adjustments based on what is happening real time. <snip>

QFT

It's important for people to realize two things:

1) everyone is individual and what works for one person, may not for another
2) it's just an ESTIMATE

Great explanation wolfman! :drinker:

JNick77

The only problem I see with eating back exercise calories is that HRM's are not very accurate for the most part and are really only relevant for certain exercises. Your daily calorie goals are a bit of a swag, calories consumed from food is a bit of a swag, so calculating "burned" calories via an HRM is ahuge swag and is an unnecessary variable in my opinion. Not to mention the HRM doesn't account for the accelerated calorie "burn" over the next couple hours, so how do you accommodate for that? It seems simpler and more accurate to just calculate a basic TDEE and a deficit from there, eliminate some of the "guesstimating". Just my two cents...

Will_Thrust_For_Candy

Great topic!

The fact is that it is rarely the "method" that is flawed and rather adherence to diet and/or exercise.

Underestimating calories consumed and/or overestimating calories burned is usually the case when most people experince a "stall"or "plateau".

:drinker:

cwolfman13

The only problem I see with eating back exercise calories is that HRM's are not very accurate for the most part and are really only relevant for certain exercises. Your daily calorie goals are a bit of a swag, calories consumed from food is a bit of a swag, so calculating "burned" calories via an HRM is ahuge swag and is an unnecessary variable in my opinion. Not to mention the HRM doesn't account for the accelerated calorie "burn" over the next couple hours, so how do you accommodate for that? It seems simpler and more accurate to just calculate a basic TDEE and a deficit from there, eliminate some of the "guesstimating". Just my two cents...

I would agree...but I'd also say that if people really want to, and they really want to be honest with themselves, you can get fairly close on those estimations. Also, then it just comes back to real world results...no results, you're doing something wrong and better re-evalute. I think people mostly like to fool themselves into thinking they're getting these massive burns...especially when they use database numbers and use dubious estimates of level of effort...i.e."vigorous" simply because they were tired afterward.

In general I prefer the TDEE method if you have a pretty solid routine and everything is consistent. I found the MFP method to be very beneficial early on when I was very inconsistent and missed workouts, etc....had I gone straight with the TDEE method, my formula would have been often flawed. I'm currently using the MFP method again because I have a couple days a week where I have a pretty big burn and I kinda wanted to see roughly where I stood because I was having some major hungry on those days even though I was eating to what I thought was maintenance.

pavrg

The trap is when people start logging ridiculous stuff for their exercise, like walking the dog or cleaning the house, just as an excuse to eat a snack. If you're the type to do that, then you're better off using the TDEE method which will just add a blanket 200-300 calories to your BMR for being 'lightly active.'

If you're not working hard enough to be sweating or getting your hr to 170+ for 20-30 minutes (under 35 years old), then you're not exercising. Likewise, if you don't do that when you work out, then don't set your TDEE to "strenuous exercise" and it would probably be best to half the amount of moderate exercise you think you do in your TDEE estimate (e.g. if you bike 5 days a week, set it to 1-3 days a week).

It's one of those things that if your goal is to lose weight, it's better to under-estimate what you need to take in than to over-estimate. Your body will let you know if you need more food.

tallmansix

Like it, bumped for future reference, thanks wolfman

Pamstimelines

future reference for me too
Thanks!

togmo

Great post Wolfman. Very simply put but it is one of those things people seem to have so many problems figuring out.

I have always found the easiest thing is to set your own custom goals in MFP and use a better calculator elsewhere that includes your exercise (B) component rather than walking the dog as someone said and then adding that to my daily calorie allowance. Rather than eating a different amount of calories day to day based on how much exercise you do I just set my number and try and adhere to it - your weightloss will be the same week to week.

I use the calculator at scoobys (linked below) and pick the Mifflin-St. Jeor method since that suggests the lowest amount of calories and I use that number. This way if I slightly overeat on any given day I am probably still losing weight. The toughest thing is to figure out how much exercise you do, if you underestimate this though you will probably see bigger gains again but be careful not to underestimate everything by too much and be left hungry, especially be careful not to underestimate things too much if you endeavour to lose 20% or more but for me at only a 10% weight loss it shouldn't cause me any problems, it might see me losing closer to 15%. You should always ensure you eat above your BMR which for me is around 2000kcal.

My numbers based on my age, height and current weight out of the scoobys calculator for illustration purposes look like this:

A which includes my exercise B (TDEE) = 3067kcal
my calories based on my goals in step 6 (-10% weight loss) = 2760kcal

These numbers tell me that 3067kcal is technically meant to be the amount of calories I can eat every day without gaining or losing any weight based on my current age, height and weight (which shouldn't change, apart from getting a little older) and the amount of exercise I do. Eating 2760kcal a day should see me lose at minimum (because I have likely slightly underestimated my TDEE and the amount of exercise I do) 0.3kg per week, 1.1kg per month, 14.5kg per year. Of course for every kilogram I lose my starting weight changes and I would then require less food to maintain my current weight, i.e. my TDEE would drop. They suggest that you adjust your TDEE for every five or so kilograms you lose.

I hope I haven't confused anyone further. I am just suggesting that you look outside MFP for your numbers. Have some fun throwing your numbers in the calculator and see what it suggests. There are plenty of resources out there. If like me you want to set your MFP to that number minus your weight loss percent then go for it. For me at a 10% loss my number is 2760per day so that is simply what I set my custom goals in MFP too.

http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/

Project_Jodie

bump for later

Thanks

psuLemon

<snip From their, individuals need to make their own adjustments based on what is happening real time. <snip>

QFT

It's important for people to realize two things:

1) everyone is individual and what works for one person, may not for another
2) it's just an ESTIMATE

Great explanation wolfman! :drinker:

I would agree that things are estimates but there is one absolute for everyone... a calorie deficit will create weight loss. The variables come into play are: accuracy of tracking and calories burned, and medical variations (lower bmr's that the norm). The fact is if everyone was slightly different than there would be threads where there are 500+ post of women eating 1800+ calories to lose weight. In fact, I would suggest the outliers are the true variable and less common.

For the most part here are the areas I see people fail

1. Accuracy of tracking (no food scale)
2. Consistency of logging
3. Estimates on calories burned.
4. Aggressive weight loss goals
5. People not setting their calorie goals to their fitness goals.

Good post wolf. I hope this helps