Burning and Eating Calories back, what's the point!
Replies
-
these larger bodies have a maintenance caloric need well over 300 calories about the maintenance of a healthy bmi (not the best thing but works here). So no they would not weigh 1000lbs.
For the math geeks in the room.
Harris-Benedict predicts a man who eats an extra 300 calories/day, all else being equal, would gain 12lbs and then stop due to the effect you noted. A woman would gain an extra 14lbs. The formulae--
Men = 300 / (13.7 x 2.2)
Women = 300 / (9.6 x 2.2)0 -
Stop using the calorie burns on the machines. You are NOT burning 400 calories 30 minutes.0
-
these larger bodies have a maintenance caloric need well over 300 calories about the maintenance of a healthy bmi (not the best thing but works here). So no they would not weigh 1000lbs.
For the math geeks in the room.
Harris-Benedict predicts a man who eats an extra 300 calories/day, all else being equal, would gain 12lbs and then stop due to the effect you noted. A woman would gain an extra 14lbs. The formulae--
Men = 300 / (13.7 x 2.2)
Women = 300 / (9.6 x 2.2)
Hurrah for maths!0 -
Yes it is, a calorie is a unit of energy and the calculations for weight loss is simply calories in - calories out = if it is a negative you lose weight, if it is zero you maintain and if it is a positive you gain. It is math and not even complex math at that, just some elementary school addition.
USDA reports that average American daily calorie intake has increased by 300 since the 70s. If you reduce this to "elementary math," the average 30-40 year old American should weigh more than 1000lbs. I hate it that so many people here reduce weight loss to "simple math" in a very condescending tone to others. Calories do matter in weight loss but so does hormonal responses in the body among many other things.
Remember that two generations ago, nobody knew what a calorie was let alone counted them and the rates of overweight were twenty times lower than they are today. Counting calories cannot be required to stay slim.
What you are not recognizing here is that the average increased by 300 calories IN AVERAGE. It's not an exponential figure, meaning, it does not keep increasing by 300 every year.
I will give you myself as an example. When I first started losing weight, my maintenance calories were around 2600. Now they are 2100. If I were to increase my calories by 500 I would eventually get back to my starting weight then my weight would settle and I would stop gaining. I would still be eating 500 calories more than I do now to maintain, but I won't be gaining anything extra unless I increase my calories further.0 -
You don't believe the science......?????
Ok, then why are you bothering with asking a question here?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
i realize that i will be probably the only one saying this and maybe I'm nuts but I just don't believe in the science or fact that I have to eat back the calories I burned. I don't lose weight when I don't work out, bottom line. When I do workout especially at night I notice that in the morning I am lighter and depending on my eating I'm usually >6 to sometimes 2 pounds lighter. I went from 265 to 245 within a couple of months last year but stopped working out (and tracking my calories and pretty much dieting) and went back to 258 as of April of this year. I've been working out and dieting for the last 55 days and so far I've lost about 19 pounds. I feel as if my metabolism kicks up by me working out and the deficit in calories equate to my weigh loss. Mind you growing up I was always skinny and atheletic so I don't know how that contributes to it but I just can't believe that if I just ate 1850 calories every day that I would lose weight within the near future if at all.
Here is a good example of why I believe what tolks are swying. My girlfiend & I both joined WW at the same time. We pretty much did everything the same, by eatng about the same things. The main difference was, she worked out. I did not. We lost almost the same amount of weight. She was not happy about that. She dd look more fit, though.0 -
The point is... I can eat 1500 calories to lose weight if I don't exercise... but 1800 if I exercise.0
-
I don't lose weight when I don't work out, bottom line.
If exercise is the only cause of your weight loss, then you'd be eating at maintenance and your deficit is only being created by calories burned through exercise.
Yep!
Personally I'll say keep doing what works until it doesn't. I really don't think OP is starving himself. He's most likely eating more than he thinks! Start weighing everything and logging accurately then complain about having to eat 1800 calories plus exercise. Hahah0 -
Leon - you don't weigh and measure all your food, so your whole argument is irrelevant. Sounds like you are actually eating at maintenance and your exercise is creating the deficit you need to lose weight (which is fine, but you need to realize what's actually happening). Listen to all the advice you are getting here and educate yourself on BMR, TDEE, eating back exercise calories, etc. It will do you a world of good. Good luck. :flowerforyou:0
-
I just don't believe in the science.
It hurts me. It physically hurts me.0 -
You don't believe the science......?????
Ok, then why are you bothering with asking a question here?
This is just my opinion...
I think most of us (or maybe I am the only one) start out fairly uneducated about weight loss. It is such a personal journey that we don't associate it with science...until...we start researching on how best to achieve the weight loss.
Where better to ask these questions...express your doubts...than a place where many of us have finally gotten to the point that...yes...there is a "science" aspect to weight loss?
Oh...okay...the rest was borderline snarky...so I erased.
The OP maybe is just here to learn...like many of the people that use this forum.0 -
I will jump in here. The reason you work out, cardio or weight training, is to get fit. You can lose weight without being fit. If you only goal is weight loss then, sure starve yourself and you'll be thin in no time. But don't confuse thin with healthy. Running, burns calories but it works your heart and muscles. Strength training builds muscle which makes you stronger, look better, and burn more fat. However any workouts require calories to power it. there is a whole science to feeding your workouts that we won't get into here. This site focuses on caloric deficit which is a good measure of how much weight you will lose but there is more to fitness than a number on a scale.
What a great first post! Well done :flowerforyou:0 -
Burning calories is what we do every day. It's also called "daily activity" or "living life." Exercise is what we do to stay fit and healthy. You have to eat for your activity level. If trying to lose weight, then you eat a little bit less than you burn.0
-
MFP gave you a calorie deficit BEFORE exercise. That way people who can't/won't exercise still lose weight.
^ This0 -
i realize that i will be probably the only one saying this and maybe I'm nuts but I just don't believe in the science or fact that I have to eat back the calories I burned. I don't lose weight when I don't work out, bottom line. When I do workout especially at night I notice that in the morning I am lighter and depending on my eating I'm usually >6 to sometimes 2 pounds lighter. I went from 265 to 245 within a couple of months last year but stopped working out (and tracking my calories and pretty much dieting) and went back to 258 as of April of this year. I've been working out and dieting for the last 55 days and so far I've lost about 19 pounds. I feel as if my metabolism kicks up by me working out and the deficit in calories equate to my weigh loss. Mind you growing up I was always skinny and atheletic so I don't know how that contributes to it but I just can't believe that if I just ate 1850 calories every day that I would lose weight within the near future if at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYb6rwtOx4Q
0 -
I don't lose weight when I don't work out, bottom line.
If exercise is the only cause of your weight loss, then you'd be eating at maintenance and your deficit is only being created by calories burned through exercise.
Yep!
Personally I'll say keep doing what works until it doesn't. I really don't think OP is starving himself. He's most likely eating more than he thinks! Start weighing everything and logging accurately then complain about having to eat 1800 calories plus exercise. Hahah
Yes, this is probably the truth. If he isn't hungry, then he's likely not eating only 1800 calories.0 -
I think it's up to you, and your approach may even vary from day to day. What I mean is that some days you may feel extra hungry and want to eat more, so you might want to dip into them. Other days, you might be fine without them. I'm a relatively small woman, so to lose 2 pounds a week, I'd actually have to eat less than 1200 calories a day, which is no fun. I'd rather do an intense cardio session and burn 500 calories and then eat them back for a total of 1700 than only eat 1200 calories worth of food. 1200 is nothing!! Another person, such as a large male, might be able to eat 2,000 calories a day and still lose weight, and so may be satisfied at not eating back exercise calories. Hope that helps.0
-
Stop using the calorie burns on the machines. You are NOT burning 400 calories 30 minutes.
I have to say that you don't know that for sure. I think it depends how intensely you work out. I could plod along on my elliptical and only burn 200 calories at a lower level. However, before my current pregnancy, I got so fit that I could crank that puppy up to a level 10 at an incline, do "sprinting" intervals and burn 100 calories every 7 minutes. Again, that IS what the machine said, but I also looked it up according to my heartrate, intensity level, etc., on other sources and it was about the same caloric burn. It certainly helped my weight loss! I'm just saying, the machines are not necessarily wrong IMO.0 -
USDA reports that average American daily calorie intake has increased by 300 since the 70s. If you reduce this to "elementary math," the average 30-40 year old American should weigh more than 1000lbs.
No wonder you don't think weight gain/loss is a mathematically predictable metabolic function.
Using the Mifflin-St. Jeor equation, a sedentary 5'8" male, 25yo, 160lbs, needs 2,025 calories to maintain. If this theoretical person suddenly and consistently started eating 300 daily above maintenance, by age 26 he would weigh about 191lbs. However, his TDEE would be 2,188. So during age 26, he would only be eating 137 above maintenance per day and would weigh 205 at age 27. Now his TDEE would be 2,265 and he'd be eating only 60 calories above maintenance and would gain only 6lbs this year, putting him at 211lbs at age 28. Voila, you have a nice, obese 28 year old man eating very close to maintenance (at 216.5lbs, this man's TDEE would be 2,327, or 300 calories a day above maintenance at 25yo and 160lbs).
It is scientifically impossible for someone to gain 1,000 additional pounds by eating 300 calories more per day than they were eating before. Even a 900 pound person would gain only about 50 more pounds before hitting maintenance by increasing daily caloric intake by 300 per day.0 -
Weight loss is pure math you must burn more than you consume, it does not matter to the equation how you accomplish this.
Weight loss is not pure math, wtf.
I agree with you. I have to play about a million mind games on myself, such as weighing myself in kilograms instead of pounds. For those people who find losing weight as simple as a basic math equation, that's great. But it sure as heck ain't that simple for me.
Even if it is not your natural mindset I would encourage you to try to view weightloss scientifically. If I've noticed anything while on MFP its that those who are consistently successful are those who consider weightloss to be "pure math".0 -
Yes it is, a calorie is a unit of energy and the calculations for weight loss is simply calories in - calories out = if it is a negative you lose weight, if it is zero you maintain and if it is a positive you gain. It is math and not even complex math at that, just some elementary school addition.
USDA reports that average American daily calorie intake has increased by 300 since the 70s. If you reduce this to "elementary math," the average 30-40 year old American should weigh more than 1000lbs.
Riiiight. And what has happened to the average SIZE of American's since the 70's? And what is your caloric requirement dependent on? Think about it.0 -
You don't believe the science......?????
Ok, then why are you bothering with asking a question here?
This is just my opinion...
I think most of us (or maybe I am the only one) start out fairly uneducated about weight loss. It is such a personal journey that we don't associate it with science...until...we start researching on how best to achieve the weight loss.
Where better to ask these questions...express your doubts...than a place where many of us have finally gotten to the point that...yes...there is a "science" aspect to weight loss?
Oh...okay...the rest was borderline snarky...so I erased.
The OP maybe is just here to learn...like many of the people that use this forum.
There is a difference between being ignorant of something and declaring that you don't "believe" in it. One is lack of knowledge, the other is a declaration that you are not interested in knowledge.0 -
USDA reports that average American daily calorie intake has increased by 300 since the 70s. If you reduce this to "elementary math," the average 30-40 year old American should weigh more than 1000lbs.
No wonder you don't think weight gain/loss is a mathematically predictable metabolic function.
Using the Mifflin-St. Jeor equation, a sedentary 5'8" male, 25yo, 160lbs, needs 2,025 calories to maintain. If this theoretical person suddenly and consistently started eating 300 daily above maintenance, by age 26 he would weigh about 191lbs. However, his TDEE would be 2,188. So during age 26, he would only be eating 137 above maintenance per day and would weigh 205 at age 27. Now his TDEE would be 2,265 and he'd be eating only 60 calories above maintenance and would gain only 6lbs this year, putting him at 211lbs at age 28. Voila, you have a nice, obese 28 year old man eating very close to maintenance (at 216.5lbs, this man's TDEE would be 2,327, or 300 calories a day above maintenance at 25yo and 160lbs).
It is scientifically impossible for someone to gain 1,000 additional pounds by eating 300 calories more per day than they were eating before. Even a 900 pound person would gain only about 50 more pounds before hitting maintenance by increasing daily caloric intake by 300 per day.
Thank you for figuring this all out, it was 3 am for me when I was having that discussion. I made my point but would have preferred to have the math to back me up :flowerforyou:0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions