Do I HAVE to eat some of my exercise calories back?

shiningpotential

I've been reading some of the message boards here, and I've seen multiple people say that you should eat back some of the calories you burned during exercise, specifically at least half. Isn't this counterintuitive? For my personal plan, I typically try to eat 1500 calories a day, and exercise an hour every day. I usually do Zumba, and according to MFP, I'm burning about 772 calories per hour of Zumba. I still try not to go over my 1500, regardless of my exercise. Is this Ok? Am I eating enough?

MB_Positif

The 1500 calorie goal already has a deficit for weight loss built in. If you are burning 772 (MFP #'s can be way high), then your body is living off of about 700 calories, so, no not eating enough. It is not counterintuitive, it prepares you for maintenance.

AllOutof_Bubblegum

It's not very likely you're burning 772 cals, MFP loves to overestimate burns. To make sure, I would suggest investing in an HRM.

And yes. You should be eating at least half of you exercise calories.

shiningpotential

Thank you guys for your input! Maybe this is why I feel Le I'm starving a lot of times. I'm eating a great deal of protein and veggies and such, but I still find myself super hungry before dinner, even with a150 calorie snack.

hearthwood

I think you're fine with what you're doing. You'll lose weight a little faster than the recommended, but I don't see a point in eating back 1/2 the calories burned.

The point is you want the minimum of 1200 in your digestive track so your body doesn't go into starvation mode, thereby shutting down your metabolism.

Argentumdrakon

Definately get a HRM so you have a more exact number for your burn.

MB_Positif

I think you're fine with what you're doing. You'll lose weight a little faster than the recommended, but I don't see a point in eating back 1/2 the calories burned.

No. You may lose a little faster initially, but it's not sustainable.

MB_Positif

Thank you guys for your input! Maybe this is why I feel Le I'm starving a lot of times. I'm eating a great deal of protein and veggies and such, but I still find myself super hungry before dinner, even with a150 calorie snack.

You're welcome. Ultimately I'd suggest getting the HRM as suggested (heart rate monitor) as 772 calories is probably too high and working your way up to eating back the exercise calories. Has never failed me!

segovm

So as always there is a flip side to every coin. Personally I don't eat back exercise calories unless I need more fuel for any given activity. I mostly skip the gym and just hop on the bike for a few hours a day but the calorie burn estimates are huge. If I am hungry or feel low on energy I eat more food but most of the time my 1700-1900 calories eaten a day is plenty even if I go for a five hour bike ride with an estimated calorie burn of 3000 or more.

For me, most of the hunger stuff was dealt with by finding foods that fill me up. I'll eat a serving of lean meat and a big bowl of veggies for 300-400 calories and be good to go for a few hours whatever I am out doing. If you keep poking around with different foods you might find you can fill up well on most any caloric goal you set for yourself.

As others have mentioned, the calorie burns are normally over estimated and most people seem to underestimate their calories eaten (especially before they start weighing and measuring stuff) so if you decide to eat them back just try to keep that in mind especially if you don't end up losing close to what your weekly goal is set for.

Anyway, just thought I would toss out the "conflicting" view. Good luck!

shiningpotential

Thank you guys for your input! Maybe this is why I feel Le I'm starving a lot of times. I'm eating a great deal of protein and veggies and such, but I still find myself super hungry before dinner, even with a150 calorie snack.

You're welcome. Ultimately I'd suggest getting the HRM as suggested (heart rate monitor) as 772 calories is probably too high and working your way up to eating back the exercise calories. Has never failed me!

Yeah, someone else suggested the HRM, too. I'm going to see about getting one. Is there a moderately proceed brand that gives accurate measurements that you could recommend?

shiningpotential

So as always there is a flip side to every coin. Personally I don't eat back exercise calories unless I need more fuel for any given activity. I mostly skip the gym and just hop on the bike for a few hours a day but the calorie burn estimates are huge. If I am hungry or feel low on energy I eat more food but most of the time my 1700-1900 calories eaten a day is plenty even if I go for a five hour bike ride with an estimated calorie burn of 3000 or more.

For me, most of the hunger stuff was dealt with by finding foods that fill me up. I'll eat a serving of lean meat and a big bowl of veggies for 300-400 calories and be good to go for a few hours whatever I am out doing. If you keep poking around with different foods you might find you can fill up well on most any caloric goal you set for yourself.

As others have mentioned, the calorie burns are normally over estimated and most people seem to underestimate their calories eaten (especially before they start weighing and measuring stuff) so if you decide to eat them back just try to keep that in mind especially if you don't end up losing close to what your weekly goal is set for.

Anyway, just thought I would toss out the "conflicting" view. Good luck!

Thank you so much for that flip side of the coin! And it's been in the back of my mind that I may be underestimating caloric intake and overestimating caloric burn. I'm very new to MFP, and am trying to find a good balance and what works for me. I'm down 11 lbs in just a few weeks, so I feel like I must be doing something right, right? Lol. I'll try to bulk up on more veggies. I do eat way more than I used to, but apparently I need more. Maybe I'll stay full for longer periods of time.

perseverance14

I do Zumba sometimes but I don't believe the burn numbers. I will tell you what, I will do some Zumba sometime this week and see how much my hrm with a chest strap says it burns, I think it is more like 400 calories/hour on a good day unless you are doing an advanced form.

You should not go under 1200 as you need that much just to function, so you should eat some back, but you don't have to eat all that, it is probably more than you really burn anyway.

I recommend getting a heart rate monitor, for something like Zumba, you will get a pretty accurate number.

johnsongs1

What is a HRM and how does it work? Can you use it with stationary biking and all exercises - or just running, zumba, walking? I'd also like a recommendation or a reasonably priced product. Also I see that some have a chest strap and others don't. What"s that about?

madaraku

I do 1200ckal diet and workout 5 days per week. I burning around 550 cals per 1 hour and trying to eat back. But not always I can eat back coz just don't wanna eat.
I do not know if it's right or not but I can not lose 1 kg per week like it's says.

BlueButterfly37

I keep wondering about eating back calories so this is an interesting topic. I will say a couple of weeks ago I bought an HRM and found I was not burning anywhere near what I thought for every exercise-

shiningpotential

I do Zumba sometimes but I don't believe the burn numbers. I will tell you what, I will do some Zumba sometime this week and see how much my hrm with a chest strap says it burns, I think it is more like 400 calories/hour on a good day unless you are doing an advanced form.

You should not go under 1200 as you need that much just to function, so you should eat some back, but you don't have to eat all that, it is probably more than you really burn anyway.

I recommend getting a heart rate monitor, for something like Zumba, you will get a pretty accurate number.

That would be so awesome if you could do that for me! At least that will help my calculations till I get an HRM.

shiningpotential

So does anyone have any input as to what a good, reasonably priced, and accurate HRM brand/type/style is?

mirrim52

I do 1200ckal diet and workout 5 days per week. I burning around 550 cals per 1 hour and trying to eat back. But not always I can eat back coz just don't wanna eat.
I do not know if it's right or not but I can not lose 1 kg per week like it's says.

2 lbs a week is not realistic unless you are severely overweight or obese. 0.5 - 1 lb is more likely if you have less than 25 lbs to loose.

_IronDan_

The polar ft4 is a good reliable HRM and in the uk sells for £55 ish on amazon

I personally don't eat back calories burnt but you have to find what works for you.

unapologetically_crystal

they way myfitnesspal is designed is what they suggest your calories are you eat that AND exercise calories. if you use a tdee method then you dont eat the calories back. again get an hrm because the calorie burns here are guesstimates and often inaccurate.

the most popular hrm brands are polar but they are kinda pricey. if you have a chest strap one then its supposed to be more accurate. personally i bought a one touch hrm watch from walmart for $30 cuz thats all i could find locally and afford. it gets the job done most of the time. i would like to buy a fancy one, one day though.

navyrigger46

I think you're fine with what you're doing. You'll lose weight a little faster than the recommended, but I don't see a point in eating back 1/2 the calories burned.

The point is you want the minimum of 1200 in your digestive track so your body doesn't go into starvation mode, thereby shutting down your metabolism.

Don't listen to a single word of this ignorant nonsense.

OP, eat back between 25-50% of your exercise calories, MFP's calculations for exercise are a bit high, and listen to your body when it tells you it needs more fuel.

Rigger

michelleepotter

I have a Polar FT4. You can get it on Amazon for about $60. Polar is a well respected brand, and I have every reason to believe that the burn estimates it's giving me are realistic.

As for whether to eat back your calories, that's a matter of preference. What's important is getting as accurate as you can with your calories (weigh your food, use a HRM), and maintaining a reasonable deficit. You need to eat enough calories to fuel the work your body is doing, but also have enough deficit to lose weight. Some people manage this by setting their calories high enough in the first place to account for exercise, others set them lower and eat back their exercise calories. I prefer the latter, but all that really matters is coming out with the right amount of deficit in the end.

ChrisM8971

So as always there is a flip side to every coin. Personally I don't eat back exercise calories unless I need more fuel for any given activity. I mostly skip the gym and just hop on the bike for a few hours a day but the calorie burn estimates are huge. If I am hungry or feel low on energy I eat more food but most of the time my 1700-1900 calories eaten a day is plenty even if I go for a five hour bike ride with an estimated calorie burn of 3000 or more.

For me, most of the hunger stuff was dealt with by finding foods that fill me up. I'll eat a serving of lean meat and a big bowl of veggies for 300-400 calories and be good to go for a few hours whatever I am out doing. If you keep poking around with different foods you might find you can fill up well on most any caloric goal you set for yourself.

As others have mentioned, the calorie burns are normally over estimated and most people seem to underestimate their calories eaten (especially before they start weighing and measuring stuff) so if you decide to eat them back just try to keep that in mind especially if you don't end up losing close to what your weekly goal is set for.

Anyway, just thought I would toss out the "conflicting" view. Good luck!

While I admire your self control and ability to maintain large negative net calories I would also suggest that you need to do some research about the potential consequences

One of the issues with a large deficit is the loss of a higher percentage of muscle than you would wish and I would guess the ultimate result of this style of diet may be a hospital stay.

Promoting an unhealthy diet is also against the rules at MFP and suggesting its ok to eat at a substantial negative net on calories is about as unhealthy as it gets

karahm78

I can also recommend the previously mentioned Polar FT4, best place I found was Amazon and there is TONS of colors for the watch. In addition to measuring caloric burn, a bonus is that the treadmills at my gym pick up the signal and display my heart rate while I am working out.

I eat back half of my exercise calories, or at least enough to get up to 1200 net. That is healthier and makes it much more likely for me to stay on plan and be ready for maintenance. I don't want to gain it all back when I get to my goal.

segovm

While I admire your self control and ability to maintain large negative net calories I would also suggest that you need to do some research about the potential consequences

One of the issues with a large deficit is the loss of a higher percentage of muscle than you would wish and I would guess the ultimate result of this style of diet may be a hospital stay.

Promoting an unhealthy diet is also against the rules at MFP and suggesting its ok to eat at a substantial negative net on calories is about as unhealthy as it gets

While I admire you reply I find it utterly irrelevant as I have done plenty of research into my specific plan that is unique to my weight loss goals. At no point have I recommend anyone do anything, instead I cheerfully contributed to a conversation with personal input relevant to my experiences on the topic being discussed, highlighting that my specific plan was both conflicting and in opposition to other peoples ideas with regard to weight loss.

Perhaps you should provide insight and input into the conversation at hand rather than breaking the forum guidelines and attempting to hijack this thread with your opposition to my particular, albeit well informed, personal decisions.

If you would like to discuss this further just drop an email in my inbox so these nice folks can enjoy a bicker free reading of the topic at hand.

perseverance14

I did the Zumba 20 minute express and used my heart rate monitor and chest strap, it burned 189 calories, which means in 1 hour you would burn 597, about the same as the hour long treadmill workouts I do with 2/3 of the time on 9-10% incline, 3-4 speed (I like fast walking). I weigh 143.8, and my heart rate doing Zumba averaged 145-150, your mileage may vary, but probably not that much, I suggest a heart rate monitor.

GrandmaJackie

I say experiment, when I want to lose weight I don't! That being said, if your hungry you need to eat DON'T starve yourself! I usually eat about 15,000 calories a day!

criticaltodd

I eat back my exercise calories but I also set my calorie goals so that they don't assume exercise in the calculation.

As for MFP overestimating calories, I've found that often the calories estimated my MFP come in below what my HRM presents, sometimes by over 100 calories.

shiningpotential

I did the Zumba 20 minute express and used my heart rate monitor and chest strap, it burned 189 calories, which means in 1 hour you would burn 597, about the same as the hour long treadmill workouts I do with 2/3 of the time on 9-10% incline, 3-4 speed (I like fast walking). I weigh 143.8, and my heart rate doing Zumba averaged 145-150, your mileage may vary, but probably not that much, I suggest a heart rate monitor.

Thank you so much for checking!! At least that gives me a starting point, until I can get my HRM. As for everyone's suggestions regarding which one to buy, thank you!! I just didn't want to waste money on one that was to cheap and inaccurate, or one on the opposite ends of the spectrum that has way more bells and whistles than I need.