WHY does this site suggest that you eat your exercise calori

Options
boobee32
boobee32 Posts: 450 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Isn't that kind of defeating the purpose of the exercise? I am not exercising so I can eat more, I am trying to burn off what I have already eaten. Someone enlighten me on this please.
«1

Replies

  • JustAmy
    JustAmy Posts: 291
    Options
    here are all the answers:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/23912-links-in-mfp-you-want-to-read-again-and-again :bigsmile:

    best of luck!
  • ladybug1620
    ladybug1620 Posts: 1,136 Member
    Options
    It's simple math. Let's say your goal is 1200 calories a day. You need to have 1200 calories a day to avoid "starvation mode." If you do no exercise at all, then you should be eating 1200 or so calories. If you DO exercise, you are burning calories and thus subtracting from your 1200. If you burn 200 calories in exercising, then you have only had 1000 calories for the day (1200-200=1000). You need to maintain at least 1200 calories, and if your total for the day ends up less than 1200, the site will say you aren't eating enough.
  • Panda86
    Panda86 Posts: 873
    Options
    On your main page, click the Goals link. It explains it all right there.
  • KarenBorter
    KarenBorter Posts: 1,157 Member
    Options
    Yeah this really is the question for the ages ... but calories are energy and if you burn energy you need to replace energy (calories). The more you eat of your allotted calories the faster you will lose, if you starve yourself your body will want to hold on to every last calorie you have consumed and you won't lose, you will become frustrated and will want to quit. I see so many people with base calorie allotments of 1200-1500 and they exercise and burn 1000+ but they are only eating 900 calories .. .sure they are going to lose weight but they are losing muscle not fat ... it won't last long and they will stop losing weight. Do what the site says, it really works.

    I have been here since the beginning of September and have been listening to the site (and my body) and have lost 13.8lbs thus far.
  • briteyes
    briteyes Posts: 435 Member
    Options
    I see what you're saying. There are two different ways to create a calorie deficit which equates to weight loss over time...

    You can eat less calories or you can burn more calories
    Or you can do a combination of the two.

    This site calculates the lowest NET calories that you need in order to lose weight effectively and healthily. For example, I need 1600 calories to maintain my current weight, but I want to lose weight, so I am allowed a minimum of 1200 calories a day. At the end of the day I need to have eaten no more or less than 1200 calories. If I eat less than 1200 calories, I'm starving myself. If I eat more than 1200 calories, well, I just won't lose weight as quickly.

    If I eat my 1200 calories, and then exercise and burn 200 calories, I have a NET of 1000 calories, which is not enough calories for me, and I'm essentially starving myself, especially if I do this regularlry. I need to eat back those 200 calories to get back up to 1200, which is still 400 below my maintanence calories.

    Now, I could choose to eat 1600 calories and exercise to burn 400 calories, still putting me at my Net goal of 1200.

    It's all in the way you look at it...

    Hope this makes sense.
  • lilRicki
    lilRicki Posts: 4,555 Member
    Options
    yeah but when most people read "eat back calories" it doesn't mean eat as much crap as you can to get your caloric intake up...i have a hard time reaching my max after i work out, because i work out at night...so i try and eat high fibre, high protein and tons of veggies, if i'm under my calorie goal at the end of the night, i don't worry about it...i'm still healthy and i'm not starving
  • camille45
    camille45 Posts: 106 Member
    Options
    because when u excercise you burn off some calories and you may end up getting too little. you dont want to be too calorie defiecient. that would defeat the purpose because then your body will start storing everything you eat and the weight wont come off. Eat the calories that you are allowed. Sometimes i find that i have to go and find something to eat because a lot of times i too come under my calories. Its funny how once you start watching your food intake that you realize you need to eat more, but of the right things of course.
  • jdsouthernbelle
    jdsouthernbelle Posts: 274
    Options
    yeah but when most people read "eat back calories" it doesn't mean eat as much crap as you can to get your caloric intake up...i have a hard time reaching my max after i work out, because i work out at night...so i try and eat high fibre, high protein and tons of veggies, if i'm under my calorie goal at the end of the night, i don't worry about it...i'm still healthy and i'm not starving

    I agree.....I workout at night too....so I eat lunch as my big meal of the day and plan the rest accordingly. I don't eat back my exercise calories and I am not starving or putting my body into "starvation mode" either. I think it is a personal choice whether you do or don't eat back those calories. It works for some and others it doesn't......me well I am one it doesn't work for.
  • boobee32
    boobee32 Posts: 450 Member
    Options
    well..in response to all of the posts from people who responded....if I am supposed to have 1200 calories to lose 1 lb a week, and if i exercise and dont eat those calories back, doesnt it make sense that I will lose more than 1 lb a week.? I have a hard time believing that my body is going to go into starvation mode at 1200 calories, or even 1000. Hmmmm...this just goes against everything I have ever known, been told, read etc about calories in and calories out with exercise. I think I will just have to see what works best for me. Thank you everyone for your imput.
  • heathersmilez
    heathersmilez Posts: 2,579 Member
    Options
    Simple, to avoid starvation mode and YES eventually your body will go into starvation mode if you net less than 1200 calories over a long period of time. How long? Google it.

    The minimum 1200 calories recommended for women is NET so if you only eat 1200 and burn 300 your body is undernourished (with only 900 calories to use) and overtime your metabolism will slow and your body goes into self preservation mode.
  • heathersmilez
    heathersmilez Posts: 2,579 Member
    Options
    It's simple math. Let's say your goal is 1200 calories a day. You need to have 1200 calories a day to avoid "starvation mode." If you do no exercise at all, then you should be eating 1200 or so calories. If you DO exercise, you are burning calories and thus subtracting from your 1200. If you burn 200 calories in exercising, then you have only had 1000 calories for the day (1200-200=1000). You need to maintain at least 1200 calories, and if your total for the day ends up less than 1200, the site will say you aren't eating enough.

    You said it first, great! I get tired of seeing this question posted every other day so I responded in a blur and should have read yours first.
  • briteyes
    briteyes Posts: 435 Member
    Options
    how does it go against what you've always known? growing up I've always known that to lose a lb a week, I need to create a calorie deficit of 500 calories, one way or another, from my calories needed to maintain. That's all MFP is doing - it's calculating the calories you need to have to lose weight = for some reason it only wants me to create a 400 calorie deficit, so i do see your point. it can be frustrating to want to lose weight more quickly and maybe i will need to do so if i can, but for me the amount of calories i get on this diet seem just right. if i don't workout i'm bummed because i'm usually out of calories. granted, i don't live on fruits and veggies alone, so some of my foods are more calorie rich - i eat what i like to eat, w/ portion control.
  • jimmydeanbakker
    jimmydeanbakker Posts: 333
    Options
    If you don't eat those extra calories you earned, your body may go into starvation mode. A lot of times when you quit losing weight, your body has gone into starvation mode. I burned approximately 2200 calories a day without doing anything at all. As long as I eat fewer calories than that 2200 that I burned naturally, I'm going to lose weight. Now, the calorie calculator has me on 1330 calories a day. Basically, if I do no exercise at all, I will still lose weight. When I do exercises, it gives me more calories to consume because that 2200 calories increases to over 3000 calories that I've burned, and my body won't survive off only 1330. Therefore, I consume the calories that I burned off during exercise, and I still drop weight. If I don't eat those calories, I will feel weak, and my body won't have enough fuel to burn off the fat.
  • bmr5770
    bmr5770 Posts: 13
    Options
    I've been following MFP for two months now and have lost ~21 lbs (set to lose 2lbs/week). Just doing what MFP says, I'm pretty much right on target. Previously, I've cut calories and exercised and while I would lose 10lbs or so doing that, I would hit a plateau and flat out stop losing.

    I've hit my first goal while dieting only and I start adding in exercise next week, which means I'll be eating exercise calories this time around. I know it does sound and even feel a bit odd to eat more to continue losing, but remember that w/o the exercise, you are already feeding your body less than it needs (forcing it to take from storage(fat)). If you use even more calories, you'll pull from fat even quicker but also start pulling from that same muscle you're trying to build up/get into shape.

    If you only do this for a couple of days, no big deal and your body won't really care. If it continues though, your body will think you aren't able to get enough food so it will do several things (from what I understand): Slow you down (metabolism), put as much as it can to fat, and make energy by burning off muscle. That's why I've failed in the past - you hit that wall and your own body won't let you through. So if you continue to eat below a certain threshold you won't gain muscle and you won't lose fat.
  • jimmydeanbakker
    jimmydeanbakker Posts: 333
    Options
    I have been in starvation mode before because I didn't get enough calories, and I started to get pudgy around the middle. If you don't get enough calories, your metabolism will slow down, and you won't lose weight. I'm not saying you won't lose weight, but you may run into a wall at some point, and have a problem meeting your weight-loss goal. If that happens, look at readjusting your calories.
  • xoalyssaox
    xoalyssaox Posts: 320
    Options
    LOL WOW I finally get it. Thanks!!
    I see what you're saying. There are two different ways to create a calorie deficit which equates to weight loss over time...

    You can eat less calories or you can burn more calories
    Or you can do a combination of the two.

    This site calculates the lowest NET calories that you need in order to lose weight effectively and healthily. For example, I need 1600 calories to maintain my current weight, but I want to lose weight, so I am allowed a minimum of 1200 calories a day. At the end of the day I need to have eaten no more or less than 1200 calories. If I eat less than 1200 calories, I'm starving myself. If I eat more than 1200 calories, well, I just won't lose weight as quickly.

    If I eat my 1200 calories, and then exercise and burn 200 calories, I have a NET of 1000 calories, which is not enough calories for me, and I'm essentially starving myself, especially if I do this regularlry. I need to eat back those 200 calories to get back up to 1200, which is still 400 below my maintanence calories.

    Now, I could choose to eat 1600 calories and exercise to burn 400 calories, still putting me at my Net goal of 1200.

    It's all in the way you look at it...

    Hope this makes sense.
  • WhiskeyBravo
    WhiskeyBravo Posts: 92
    Options
    Think about Michael Phelps when he stated that he eats about 10,000 calories per day....but then again he swims some 8 hours a day; there is no way he could sustain swimming that much regularly on a 1200-1500 calories diet...I think of it like a car...you can't drive all from NY to California on an empty tank of gas!
  • clipsychic
    clipsychic Posts: 99
    Options
    Liking the thread... Thanks.

    It totally makes sense.
  • AlyRoseNYC
    AlyRoseNYC Posts: 1,075 Member
    Options
    WHOA!!! I LOVE LOVE that last line. Thanks for this analogy!
    Think about Michael Phelps when he stated that he eats about 10,000 calories per day....but then again he swims some 8 hours a day; there is no way he could sustain swimming that much regularly on a 1200-1500 calories diet...I think of it like a car...you can't drive all from NY to California on an empty tank of gas!
  • cutmd
    cutmd Posts: 1,168 Member
    Options
    here are all the answers:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/23912-links-in-mfp-you-want-to-read-again-and-again :bigsmile:

    best of luck!

    Banks does say this:
    "As I have hinted to throughout this summary of metabolic process, the body has a "range" in which it feels it is receiving the right amount of fuel. The range (as most doctors and research scientists agree) is somewhere between 500 calories above your maintenance calories and 1000 calories below your maintenance calories. This means that the metabolism won't drastically change it's functionality in this range, with that said, this is not exact, it is a range based on averages, you may have a larger or smaller range based on the 3 factors of metabolism stated at the top. "

    Doesn't that mean that if we are only set to have a 500 cal deficit we can exercise away the other 500? Where does the net 1200 come from?

Categories