Added Exercise Calories

brooklynfc

I guess everyone has opinions on certain areas of weightloss and they differ according to programs, so I'm sure I will get some different answers on this.

I've set my calorie intake to lose 2# a week and that puts me at about 1876 in calories. When I entered my goals into myfitnesspal, I did NOT put in any exercise. I do however exercise on a regular basis. I average about 4 days a week for about 3-4 hours a week. Yoga and cardio equipment with some weights.

When I track my exercise, the program adds the calories I burned to my food tracker, which usually moves me up to about 2200 calories (on average). In this first month, I have lost about 7#s. Just under the 8# mark for losing 2# a week. I'm happy with it. However, I noticed that I am slowing down. Which I know can be normal. It is taking about a week and a half to lose 2# now. I was just wondering if I NEEDED to eat those exercise calories it adds to my intake or if I can use them, if only I "need" to?

I'm getting differing thoughts on this. On one side, they say I need to eat the calories I've earned through exercise because the 1876 calorie intake is based purely on what my body needs for my daily function and anything over that, I need additional calories. On the other hand, I was told that 1800 calories is more than enough to eat on a daily basis for any one person (no matter the size, moreso for some who needs to lose weight) and I shouldn't worry about eating them in full or at all.

Any thoughts on this?

branflakes1980

The 1876 that MFP has given you already has the deficit that you need in order to lose the 2 lbs per week. You should plan on eating atleast 75% of them back. Good luck!

TeaBea

I guess everyone has opinions on certain areas of weightloss and they differ according to programs, so I'm sure I will get some different answers on this.

I've set my calorie intake to lose 2# a week and that puts me at about 1876 in calories. When I entered my goals into myfitnesspal, I did NOT put in any exercise. I do however exercise on a regular basis. I average about 4 days a week for about 3-4 hours a week. Yoga and cardio equipment with some weights.

When I track my exercise, the program adds the calories I burned to my food tracker, which usually moves me up to about 2200 calories (on average). In this first month, I have lost about 7#s. Just under the 8# mark for losing 2# a week. I'm happy with it. However, I noticed that I am slowing down. Which I know can be normal. It is taking about a week and a half to lose 2# now. I was just wondering if I NEEDED to eat those exercise calories it adds to my intake or if I can use them, if only I "need" to?

I'm getting differing thoughts on this. On one side, they say I need to eat the calories I've earned through exercise because the 1876 calorie intake is based purely on what my body needs for my daily function and anything over that, I need additional calories. On the other hand, I was told that 1800 calories is more than enough to eat on a daily basis for any one person (no matter the size, moreso for some who needs to lose weight) and I shouldn't worry about eating them in full or at all.

Any thoughts on this?

The closer you get to goal the more important it will be to eat back a portion of exercise calories. "A portion" because MFP numbers are guesstimates (and tend to be generous). As you get closer to goal, your body has fewer resources to draw on.

The purpose of eating calories back is to maintain the SAME deficit you had when MFP calculated your daily intake. Too large a deficit can lead to muscle+fat loss....as opposed to mainly fat loss.

This chart is a good
Pounds per week goal
75+ lbs to lose 2 lb range
Between 40 - 75 lbs to lose 1.5 lb range
Between 25-40 lbs to lose 1 lb range
Between 15-25 lbs to lose 1 -.50 lb range
Less than 15 lbs to lose 0.5 lbs range

zoeysasha37

Personally, I would play around with it and see what works best for you.

There is people that swear by eating their calories back, in part or a whole.
I tried eating mine back, and stopped losing. So now, I don't. Unless I'm truly hungry, then of coarse I'll eat an extra snack. But in general, I do not eat mine back and have had much success. I weighed about 202 (I refused to get on scale after that so I don't know how much heavier I was) and now I weigh 135.so for me, it worked by not eating them.

With that said, everyone is different and what works for me, may not work for you. So play around with it and figure out what works best for you.

branflakes1980

I found this very helpful. Hope it helps you as well.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf

cwolfman13

- MFP gives you a calorie goal that already includes the deficit from your theoretical maintenance. You are not trying to create a calorie deficit with exercise using MFP...it's all built into your diet.

- If you set up your profile as per the MFP method then exercise is NOT included in your activity level...just your day to day stuff.

- You have to account for exercise activity somewhere...some calculators do it up front in your activity level...MFP accounts for that activity after you do it and log it. Exercise activity increases your body's calorie requirements....thus you can eat more and achieve the same goals.

Here's how the math looks using my numbers:

My non-exercise maintenance calories are right around 2350...those are my basal calories plus my day to day stuff...working, cleaning, cooking, driving, etc. All that stuff burns calories and your basal calories represent the largest portion of your calorie requirements. Your basal calories are just those calories you "burn" being alive...your heart pumping...lungs bringing in oxygen, etc.

To lose 1 Lb per week I need roughly 500 calorie deficit...so MFP gives me a goal of 2,350 - 500 = 1850. Now I decide to exercise because it's really good for me...but that activity is unaccounted for with the MFP method...so I log it and let's say I burn a solid 400 calories with a good workout. MFP now give me a calorie goal of 1,850 + 400 = 2,250...but I still have that 500 calorie deficit because my maintenance number would also have to be increased by those same 400 calories...so 2,350 + 400 = 2,750 and 2,750 - 2,250 = 500 calorie deficit still.

The reason you get conflicting information is that people don't understand the method you are using...the vast majority of nutritionists, dietitians, and online calculators use the TDEE method which includes some estimate of your exercise in your activity level...thus you would be "double dipping" if you ate them back.

Also keep in mind that people tend to underestimate their intake and overestimate their burn. When you're doing this particular method, precision is paramount.

I would also say that the importance of eating back those calories also depends on the kind of exercise you are doing. For example, if you are just going for a walk or something you aren't substantially breaking down the body...so it would be less important.

If you're like me and follow a power lifting routine and then on top of that, log around 80 miles plus weekly on a bike then you are substantially breaking down the body...not accounting for that activity would be extremely counterproductive to my fitness efforts and fitness goals, not to mention I would not have the appropriate energy and nutrients to aid in recovery and repair of my body.

Lastly, the leaner you are, the more important properly accounting for your exercise activity becomes. When you have a lot of BF to lose you can sustain much larger deficits without too many ill effects...as you lean out though, extremely large deficits can be counterproductive and result in a variety of malnutrition issues as well as a substantial loss of muscle mass.

brooklynfc

Okay. I hear what you guys are saying and to my surprise, you all seem to be in the same ballpark.

I am having a lot of trouble with getting "real" calories burned for my exercise. I'm doing 100milesin100days at my work and I track through the American Heart Association. They let me count my yoga and other things towards my miles.

When I do 30 mins. on the recumbent bike, I can do about 6 miles. When I enter that into the AHA site I have to put it as vigorous to make the mileage come out to 6 miles for 30 mins. However, when I put in 30 min. on a stationary bike in MFP at vigrorous, its says I've burned 700 calories. I'm a big girl, but just the way I feel when I'm done, I don't feel at all like 700 calories is accurate. So I usually just log it as 30 mins. at a light pace for 400 calories.

I have been eating every bit of my calories given and burned. I'm losing still but just more slowly. So maybe I need to examine my exercise more and REALLY focus on being as accurate as possible with food calories.

I do the bike and yoga for exercise right now. I was trying to jog in intervals with walking on the treadmill to try and get a quick cardio in at lunch. I do like a very slow jog at intervals, but I needed to stop and switch up not only to keep my body guessing, but for the benefit of my knees and back to recover a bit. So the switch could be part of it as well.

Thank you for your answers! They are very helpful.

lesteidel

I eat the exercise calories back if I am hungry.

If I'm not hungry, I rarely eat them back

brooklynfc

I eat the exercise calories back if I am hungry.

If I'm not hungry, I rarely eat them back

Excellent point. Listen to my body and see if I really need to eat them or if I'm okay.

TeaBea

I eat the exercise calories back if I am hungry.

If I'm not hungry, I rarely eat them back

Hunger really isn't a good indicator of adequate nutrition. You could be "full" on a high water intake, a high fiber diet, or from hormonal issues. Lack of hunger really doesn't tell your body that you are eating adequate protein and fats.

I eat 100% back (or as close as I can figure) ....because I am over 50 and need to keep as much muscle mass as possible. I also have my activity level set to sedentary.....this is conservative for me.

Other people eat a smaller portion because they still have a long way to go. Very obese people can keep muscle mass while eating at a fairly big deficit.

It's not a one-size fits all.....there are lots of factors to consider, but everyone can benefit by learning "why" MFP adds them back in the first place.

lesteidel

I understand that, but she and I are close in age and size judging by her profile.

I was also simply stating what I did.

But if you are young, healthy, and trying to lose a significant amount of calories, not eating back all of your exercise calories is probably not going to affect you other than speeding up weight loss.

Once you start exercising heavily, your body WILL protest and start telling you it needs those calories back.

I am just not a fan of forcing myself to eat if I am not hungry, especially while trying to lose weight.

brooklynfc

I think you are both right. I need to listen to my body basically. Hunger isn't always the way your body tells you to fuel. I should look for other factors to see if I'm eating the right amount either way. Fatigue, changes to my skin, hair, etc.

I am obese if we want to be politically correct. Probably more along the lines of morbidly obese if you want to be medically correct. So it probably would not kill me to not eat those calories. And there have been days where I have left some because I just didn't want them or have a need for them.

I definitely will take these thoughts and see how they work for me.