Will eating back exercise calories affect weight loss?

whiteberry17

Will eating back exercise calories affect weight loss?

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

Your calorie deficit is built in, if that's what you mean. MFP is set up so that if you eat back your exercise calories you'll still be in enough of a deficit to lose as much weight as you selected during start-up.

jwdieter

Yes, eating more (or less) will affect weight loss. But if you do it right, eating back exercise calories according to the MFP method will put your weight loss right on target.

cwolfman13

With MFP you aren't using exercise to create a calorie deficit...your calorie deficit is built into your calorie goal for weight loss. With MFP, unlike other calculators, you do NOT include exercise in your activity level...you will lose weight if you eat to that calorie goal without any exercise whatsoever (which I don't recommend). Exercise as an activity has to be accounted for somewhere...with MfP it is on the *kitten* end of the formula when you log it and get those calories back...with other calculators, some estimate is included up front in the equation as a part of your overall activity level.

Just make sure you're really taking the time to analyze your burns...I'd recommend comparing your burn to a few different sources and making some allowance for estimation error. The vast majority of people who say, "it just doesn't work me"...most of them are overestimating their burn and probably overestimating their overall consumption as well.

whiteberry17

Well today I did 1 level from the 30 day shred and then did 30 minutes of the elliptical. I ate about 1200 calories and have 200 left. My MFP calc says I have an extra 600 calories to eat. So to make my question more clear, will eating those 600 calories make my exercise go to waste?

mmm_drop

Eat the calories. Anything burned is like "extra" calories over what MFP already has your deficit set at.

GetSoda

eating always affects weight loss

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

You should eat at least most of them back.

SueInAz

It works as long as you aren't overestimating your calorie burns from exercise and/or underestimating your caloric intake from food. Any combination of these two will cause you to lose more slowly, if at all.

If you don't have a heart rate monitor, and can afford one, invest in one. You'll get a more accurate calorie burn than any other method. MFP's calorie burns for cardio don't take into account effort and other factors so it's easy to get too high a number.

Keep in mind that any calorie number is just an estimate, anyway. The burger you get at Wendy's on Monday may have more or less calories than the one you buy two weeks later because it will have slightly different amounts of mayo, etc. Some people using MFP eat back only half of their calorie "burns" to be safe.

Quieau

Well today I did 1 level from the 30 day shred and then did 30 minutes of the elliptical. I ate about 1200 calories and have 200 left. My MFP calc says I have an extra 600 calories to eat. So to make my question more clear, will eating those 600 calories make my exercise go to waste?

You're better to eat them. While on the one hand, not eating them creates a larger deficit (loss), you are so low already that you could end up affecting your metabolism if you do this on a regular and sustained basis. You could end up hurting your efforts more than helping them, in other words. Many say that when they eat a bit more (1500-1800ish), they lose faster and when they net less than 1,000 (like eating 1,000, exercising 600 and not eating them back, which nets only 400) they slow down the loss because 400 calories a day is no way to treat a body. It will rebel against your efforts if you net less than 1,000-1,200 on a sustained basis.

EvgeniZyntx

Two things

First MFP over calculates burns. 30 minutes on the elliptical is closer to 300 calories not 600.
Second, if you didn't eat them back your net would be 900. So yes, you would lose faster but you aren't really feeding yourself for the effort provided. You are likelier to have issues long term by under eating - not necessarily, but higher muscles loss, hunger, tiredness, aptitude to binge are are all signs of under eating.

Exercise for fitness, feed your efforts reasonably.

luke_1987

If you don't eat at least some of the extra calories your body will just hold on to what it has, primarily fat molecules. If you eat some of the extra calories your body will be more willing to not hold on to the fat and will allow the muscles to develop. I earned back around 1200 calories today due to football. A relative is on here and she goes by the goal of eating back around 2/3 of 'extra calories' she had stayed the same weight for 2 weeks without doing this, did this for a week and lost 3lb. So if you have have 600 'extra' eat at least 400. Hope this helps

Quieau

The calorie burn will vary for each of us depending on our weight, height and age (which MFP knows and uses to calculate). Also, each individual is different so two 50 year old men with the same weight and height can burn at different rates. I have an MFP friend who kept losing and didn't know why. He compared the MFP numbers to his HRM and found that MFP was UNDERestimating his burn, not overestimating it. So he found where the unwanted loss was coming from because his rate of burn is so much faster than what MFP predicted.

I have found MFP to be about exactly right for mine, after doing a lot of comparisons and seeing my expected results. My burn is a lot higher than my friends' for the same activities because I am taller and rounder than most of them.

It's really about YOU and what your body does with what you feed it. Your mileage may vary, and you have to just see what works best for you. Juggling macros makes all the difference, too.

Siansonea

If you don't eat at least some of the extra calories your body will just hold on to what it has, primarily fat molecules. If you eat some of the extra calories your body will be more willing to not hold on to the fat and will allow the muscles to develop. I earned back around 1200 calories today due to football. A relative is on here and she goes by the goal of eating back around 2/3 of 'extra calories' she had stayed the same weight for 2 weeks without doing this, did this for a week and lost 3lb. So if you have have 600 'extra' eat at least 400. Hope this helps

Bullchips. This is junk "science". If depriving our bodies of calories caused people to gain weight, then why are famine victims so skinny? Your body doesn't "hold onto" fat "molecules" (they're CELLS, by the way, molecules are groups of atoms) just because you didn't have enough Doritos today.

Siansonea

Will eating back exercise calories affect weight loss?

Eating calories affects weight loss. The more you eat, the slower you lose. Starvation mode and "slow metabolism" are largely mythical phenomena, designed for people in denial to rationalize their desire to eat more food. Some people work out for the sole purpose of eating more food. Personally I think that's a lot of effort for very little reward.

Log your food accurately, and log your exercise as accurately as possible. Keep your total caloric intake less than your total caloric expenditure for a sustained period of time, and you'll lose weight.

californiabella

So to make my question more clear, will eating those 600 calories make my exercise go to waste?

I used to think that way too-- that eating back my exercise calories would be a waste. it isn't though. you're doing your body a favor by becoming more fit and at the same time by eating back those calories you're refueling your body. "diet and exercise" doesn't mean to "eat less food than your body needs to function AND exercise"... Basically, just eat back those calories. your body will thank you for it and you'll have energy to sustain you to complete your workouts through the week.

starrycarina

Bullchips. This is junk "science". If depriving our bodies of calories caused people to gain weight, then why are famine victims so skinny? Your body doesn't "hold onto" fat "molecules" (they're CELLS, by the way, molecules are groups of atoms) just because you didn't have enough Doritos today.

ABSOLUTELY.

I mean, the same can be said for gastric bypass surgery / weight loss surgery people. (Almost had it myself but decided to go at it on my own) I mean, you're barely eating and you lose. There's no "Your body is holding onto the weight" stuff. You LOSE. Pure and simple because you're not eating much.

SoLongAndThanksForAllTheFish

Well today I did 1 level from the 30 day shred and then did 30 minutes of the elliptical. I ate about 1200 calories and have 200 left. My MFP calc says I have an extra 600 calories to eat. So to make my question more clear, will eating those 600 calories make my exercise go to waste?

If you are correct on your entries for your measurements, activity levels and portion sizes, and you have a very good idea of your exercise calories burnt, and your weight loss is set at -.5 to 2lbs a week and thats what you want, eat 800 more calories (600+200 left) and it wont reduce your loss. If you are like most people and fine tuning your numbers still, eat at least 600 calories (600*2/3=400+200 left). After a week, check how much you lost, and change your figures and exercise calories burnt accordingly. Repeat until you are relatively reliable with results. You can ignore all the other pros and cons people bring up and just do this

barbalari

If you don't eat at least some of the extra calories your body will just hold on to what it has, primarily fat molecules. If you eat some of the extra calories your body will be more willing to not hold on to the fat and will allow the muscles to develop. I earned back around 1200 calories today due to football. A relative is on here and she goes by the goal of eating back around 2/3 of 'extra calories' she had stayed the same weight for 2 weeks without doing this, did this for a week and lost 3lb. So if you have have 600 'extra' eat at least 400. Hope this helps

Bullchips. This is junk "science". If depriving our bodies of calories caused people to gain weight, then why are famine victims so skinny? Your body doesn't "hold onto" fat "molecules" (they're CELLS, by the way, molecules are groups of atoms) just because you didn't have enough Doritos today.

What an utterly pompous and sarcastic response....be nice, it won't cost you anything!

thesophierose

Nope, naturally its about calories and eating under maintenance. If you are hungry, eat. If not, don't. But MFP is set for you to eat back calories, unless you specifically change your goals or use TDEE than you don't eat back calories.

Siansonea

If you don't eat at least some of the extra calories your body will just hold on to what it has, primarily fat molecules. If you eat some of the extra calories your body will be more willing to not hold on to the fat and will allow the muscles to develop. I earned back around 1200 calories today due to football. A relative is on here and she goes by the goal of eating back around 2/3 of 'extra calories' she had stayed the same weight for 2 weeks without doing this, did this for a week and lost 3lb. So if you have have 600 'extra' eat at least 400. Hope this helps

Bullchips. This is junk "science". If depriving our bodies of calories caused people to gain weight, then why are famine victims so skinny? Your body doesn't "hold onto" fat "molecules" (they're CELLS, by the way, molecules are groups of atoms) just because you didn't have enough Doritos today.

What an utterly pompous and sarcastic response....be nice, it won't cost you anything!

How about "no"? :drinker:

barbalari

If you don't eat at least some of the extra calories your body will just hold on to what it has, primarily fat molecules. If you eat some of the extra calories your body will be more willing to not hold on to the fat and will allow the muscles to develop. I earned back around 1200 calories today due to football. A relative is on here and she goes by the goal of eating back around 2/3 of 'extra calories' she had stayed the same weight for 2 weeks without doing this, did this for a week and lost 3lb. So if you have have 600 'extra' eat at least 400. Hope this helps

Bullchips. This is junk "science". If depriving our bodies of calories caused people to gain weight, then why are famine victims so skinny? Your body doesn't "hold onto" fat "molecules" (they're CELLS, by the way, molecules are groups of atoms) just because you didn't have enough Doritos today.

What an utterly pompous and sarcastic response....be nice, it won't cost you anything!

How about "no"? :drinker:

How about "grow up"? :laugh:

Achrya

If you don't eat at least some of the extra calories your body will just hold on to what it has, primarily fat molecules. If you eat some of the extra calories your body will be more willing to not hold on to the fat and will allow the muscles to develop. I earned back around 1200 calories today due to football. A relative is on here and she goes by the goal of eating back around 2/3 of 'extra calories' she had stayed the same weight for 2 weeks without doing this, did this for a week and lost 3lb. So if you have have 600 'extra' eat at least 400. Hope this helps

Bullchips. This is junk "science". If depriving our bodies of calories caused people to gain weight, then why are famine victims so skinny? Your body doesn't "hold onto" fat "molecules" (they're CELLS, by the way, molecules are groups of atoms) just because you didn't have enough Doritos today.

What an utterly pompous and sarcastic response....be nice, it won't cost you anything!

In, for the inevitable 'mean people' thread.

Failing2Thrive

I eat them if I am having a hungry day :-)

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

My friend list is yelling at me for not telling you that your calorie burn is likely inaccurate. I usually only burn about 350 calories for an hour of walking on the treadmill at a pretty steep incline and a pretty fast pace. It's unlikely you burned 600 calories doing the 30DS and half an hour on the elliptical.


So there you go, Dave, happy now? (the answer is no, Dave is never happy) :flowerforyou:

lynn_glenmont

Two things

First MFP over calculates burns. 30 minutes on the elliptical is closer to 300 calories not 600.
Second, if you didn't eat them back your net would be 900. So yes, you would lose faster but you aren't really feeding yourself for the effort provided. You are likelier to have issues long term by under eating - not necessarily, but higher muscles loss, hunger, tiredness, aptitude to binge are are all signs of under eating.

Exercise for fitness, feed your efforts reasonably.

I think you're misreading the OP's second post. She said she still is 200 calories under her basic 1200 calorie goal (gross), but MFP says she's 600 below, so she must be counting 400 calories for the 30 minutes on the elliptical PLUS 30 minutes shred.

bajoyba

I ate my exercise calories. It's worked out pretty well.

Ralphone

u can eat the 600 and still be ok have used mfp for almost 2 years and have lost 60 lbson days i run i get about 1200 cals i alway i mean always eat them and have lost the whole way was to 258 at 200 now have beeen as low as 195 its ok to the 600 cals

DavPul

My friend list is yelling at me for not telling you that your calorie burn is likely inaccurate. I usually only burn about 350 calories for an hour of walking on the treadmill at a pretty steep incline and a pretty fast pace. It's unlikely you burned 600 calories doing the 30DS and half an hour on the elliptical.


So there you go, Dave, happy now? (the answer is no, Dave is never happy) :flowerforyou:

THIS IS MY HAPPY FACE