excersise calories?! eat them or not

ladyhawk00

I don't understand why some people on this site get so caught up and annoyed with people who don't eat all of their allowed calories. Claiming that people who don't eat them all back are just "starving themselves to fit into a smaller pair of jeans" is absolutely ridiculous. I am certainly NOT starving myself by any means. I eat around 1,300 calories a day - 3 meals and 2 snacks usually, I aim for the meals to be around 350 and the snacks 150. MFP gives me 1,450 per day. If I burn off 500 a day, like I said earlier I'd need to eat 650 back to hit my goal of 1,450. By eating 3 meals and 2 snacks a day I'm already satisfied. I don't understand why I need to eat an extra 650 calories to maintain my weight loss when I'm not even hungry. I'd just be eating for the sake of eating. I'd need to eat a hell of a lot to eat an extra 650 calories too. I guess I just eat a lot of low calorie foods. I don't eat any less than I did before I started eating better - I just eat foods that are significantly lower in calories. I go to bed every night feeling satisfied and I am not depriving my body in any way whatsoever. What's unhealthy about that?

So you're saying that, with about 20 lbs to lose, you think that having a deficit of 1150 cals per day, and thus trying to lose 2+ lbs per week, is a good idea?

Spitfirex007

I don't understand why some people on this site get so caught up and annoyed with people who don't eat all of their allowed calories. Claiming that people who don't eat them all back are just "starving themselves to fit into a smaller pair of jeans" is absolutely ridiculous. I am certainly NOT starving myself by any means. I eat around 1,300 calories a day - 3 meals and 2 snacks usually, I aim for the meals to be around 350 and the snacks 150. MFP gives me 1,450 per day. If I burn off 500 a day, like I said earlier I'd need to eat 650 back to hit my goal of 1,450. By eating 3 meals and 2 snacks a day I'm already satisfied. I don't understand why I need to eat an extra 650 calories to maintain my weight loss when I'm not even hungry. I'd just be eating for the sake of eating. I'd need to eat a hell of a lot to eat an extra 650 calories too. I guess I just eat a lot of low calorie foods. I don't eat any less than I did before I started eating better - I just eat foods that are significantly lower in calories. I go to bed every night feeling satisfied and I am not depriving my body in any way whatsoever. What's unhealthy about that?

That is my way of thinking. I eat healthy foods, around 1500-2000 calories a day. I bust my *kitten* in the gym. If I'm hungry, I'll eat. If I'm not, I certainly won't shove food down my throat because someone said I have to.

ladyhawk00

I don't understand why some people on this site get so caught up and annoyed with people who don't eat all of their allowed calories. Claiming that people who don't eat them all back are just "starving themselves to fit into a smaller pair of jeans" is absolutely ridiculous. I am certainly NOT starving myself by any means. I eat around 1,300 calories a day - 3 meals and 2 snacks usually, I aim for the meals to be around 350 and the snacks 150. MFP gives me 1,450 per day. If I burn off 500 a day, like I said earlier I'd need to eat 650 back to hit my goal of 1,450. By eating 3 meals and 2 snacks a day I'm already satisfied. I don't understand why I need to eat an extra 650 calories to maintain my weight loss when I'm not even hungry. I'd just be eating for the sake of eating. I'd need to eat a hell of a lot to eat an extra 650 calories too. I guess I just eat a lot of low calorie foods. I don't eat any less than I did before I started eating better - I just eat foods that are significantly lower in calories. I go to bed every night feeling satisfied and I am not depriving my body in any way whatsoever. What's unhealthy about that?

That is my way of thinking. I eat healthy foods, around 1500-2000 calories a day. I bust my *kitten* in the gym. If I'm hungry, I'll eat. If I'm not, I certainly won't shove food down my throat because someone said I have to.

This is my opinion on the whole "trust your body, it knows if you're hungry" idea, especially in the first couple of months: (Cppied from my response to another thread)


I would disagree that you can't/won't have a loss of appetite in the beginning - I experienced it myself. Or rather, I should say a continued lack of appetite. My previous habits included a LOT of soda and eating no breakfast and rarely eating lunch - I had suppressed my appetite during the day for many years and it took some time to retrain my brain to recognize hunger. That's just my opinion, but I've heard a LOT of people claim a lack of appetite in the first couple of weeks and I find it hard to believe they're all lying or wrong.

One of the biggest reasons for the existence of a site such as MFP is that the majority of people who are overweight or underweight are not able to recognize the true feelings of hunger. Saying "trust your body" just isn't a useful thing in the beginning. Most overeaters/undereaters have established habits over many years that contradict the body's normal hunger cues - and thus they can no longer distinguish between real hunger and other feelings or mental cues. It's a classic case of Pavlov's dog - over time, associating something with food brings the same response whether the food is there or not. Overeaters will feel hungry when they are not, and not feel hungry when they need fuel (and undereaters will claim they can't eat another bite), because they are mentally trained to have the inappropriate assocations/responses with food that caused their overeating.

This is one reason why MFP (or any calorie counting) is so useful. One of its best applications as a weight loss tool is to help retrain the body AND mind to recognize the cues a HEALTHY body gives us. The way it does this is it says "You need to eat this many calories today. Don't go too far over or under - try to meet this goal." By doing that over the first few weeks or months, it helps us recognize healthy portions, and a healthy schedule, and a healthy amount of total calories - based on fairly accurate estimates of what a person this size/age/activity level needs.

The idea is this: MFP already calculates a cal deficit that allows for a certain amount of HEALTHY weight loss per week. Exercise over and above that number of calories needs to be replaced to some extent or the deficit is larger than what you (presumably) intended.

thankyou4thevenom

Lets put it this way. If you're not eating your exercise calories. You're doing it wrong.

You WILL gain the weight back when you go back to normal eating. You'll possibly gain more.

If you want to lose weight forever and be able to go back to normal eating then you need to eat your exercise calories.

The links given multiple times in this post explain why. Educate yourself and be smart.

idealisticdiva

I notice that you are suppose to have a deficit. You basically earn more food but the weight comes off slower.

idealisticdiva

Lets put it this way. If you're not eating your exercise calories. You're doing it wrong.

You WILL gain the weight back when you go back to normal eating. You'll possibly gain more.

If you want to lose weight forever and be able to go back to normal eating then you need to eat your exercise calories.

The links given multiple times in this post explain why. Educate yourself and be smart.

Really? Thanks for that should have read that before I wrote mine LOL

scagneti

EDIT: Just like the BMI chart. MFP has me at 35% body fat and being "obese" It doesn't take into account that my arms and legs are extremely built. But for somebody else, that chart might be 100% correct.

How do you have nearly 70 lbs to lose if you're not on the high end of overweight/low end of obese?

FearAnLoathing

.

FearAnLoathing

Last aprill I startedtrying to lose weight going to the gym everyday and using a food tracker I never ate my exercise calories and lost 40 pounds.I had some changes in my life and stoped exercising in sep and didnt start up Iagain untill I signed up here.I never gained a pond back in those 4 months or so.I think everybodys differnt and it work for me.

jkestens63

I asked our fitness coach at work and he suggest not to eat the exercise calories. He said I would just be erasing the exercise I did. Made sense to me.
[/quote

This actually makes no sense to me. I get allotted 1210 calories a day. Today I exercised 1100 calories. So my body would have to function on 100 Calories? Its not possible or healthy. As previosly srared mfp already figures in a calorie deficit so you will lose. I generally try to eat sll of my exercise calories, maybe leving a 100 - 200 cushion because I think sometimes mfp estimates calories burned a little high. If you don't eat enough you will not lose and you will eventually binge.t

Spitfirex007

EDIT: Just like the BMI chart. MFP has me at 35% body fat and being "obese" It doesn't take into account that my arms and legs are extremely built. But for somebody else, that chart might be 100% correct.

How do you have nearly 70 lbs to lose if you're not on the high end of overweight/low end of obese?

Because 70lbs will put me around 10% body fat. My ultimate goal is to get my "6 pack" back and tone and build muscle.

You guys believe whatever MFP tells you. I'll go with what I've been told by my trainers and family. No offense, but I'm 5 years younger and very athletic for my current size. I have played football from pee wee leagues to minor league ball. Maybe that is why I've never had problems with burning fat? I don't know. I know what has worked in the past when I had to drop a few lbs.

ladyhawk00

EDIT: Just like the BMI chart. MFP has me at 35% body fat and being "obese" It doesn't take into account that my arms and legs are extremely built. But for somebody else, that chart might be 100% correct.

How do you have nearly 70 lbs to lose if you're not on the high end of overweight/low end of obese?

Because 70lbs will put me around 10% body fat. My ultimate goal is to get my "6 pack" back and tone and build muscle.

You guys believe whatever MFP tells you. I'll go with what I've been told by my trainers and family. No offense, but I'm 5 years younger and very athletic for my current size. I have played football from pee wee leagues to minor league ball. Maybe that is why I've never had problems with burning fat? I don't know. I know what has worked in the past when I had to drop a few lbs.

Well, that would be my issue - if it works for you, that's fantastic. I'm ecstatic for you. Keep it up. But it's not likely to work - and is actually unhealthy -- for 85% of the other people - so why tell them to do it? Eating at least some exercise cals (and NOT losing more than 2 lbs/week), for the vast majority of the population, when done correctly, is backed by mountains of research and data. It's not opinion, there is plenty of evidence to back it up.

klynn97

Well I am so very glad to have asked this question! Seems as though it is a hot topic. I think I am going to go with eating my allowed daily calories excersing to feel good and if my body is telling me that I am hungry and I have a few calories left becuase of my excersise than I will use them. Thank you so much for the response!!!