Arent burnt calories better than calories not eaten.

zorbaru

MFP gives me a daily allowance of 1900. on most days i will go over this but with the exercise i log it brings it back under the goal.

so, is it better to only eat 1900 or to eat 2100 and burn off 200?

i would have thought the burnt ones would be better due to other reasons such as the continuous burning after you have finished, fitness, fat burning etc.

thoughts?

mishmash73

EAT & BURN. My trainer says you need to eat fat to burn fat.... not eating = starvation mode & your body will hoard the calories

colochel

Excellent question... bump!

marrtini

well put ... you cannot lose weight if you aren't eating enough to feed your body. You can't expect a machine to run if you aren't giving it any fuel. The body is a machine and needs to have fuel to run. Do what you feel you need to do. Listen to your body, your body will tell you when you are hungry or not. Follow the guidelines and see how you feel, listen to your body about the remaining calories. Somedays you will find you worked harder than you thought, and you need it, other days ... its just there. Follow the guidelines for a while and see how successful you are, make small changes if you find you aren't very successful.

iplayoutside19

Calories in/Calories Out.

To answer your original question. Both are important. Exercise is imporant. But you can't out exercise a bad diet.

I would personally argue in favor of exercise. But I know people who have lost a significant amount of weight while doing nothing more strenious than walking. All they changed was their eating habits.

cacrat

Exercise is much better than just diet. A diet will provide you with essential macro and micro nutrients, which you can't get from not eating. I'm assuming all other things are equal. Exercise will also provide with cardiovascular benefits as well as muscular work. Again, you can't do that from not eating.

velix

judging solely on the "If every day were like today, in 5 weeks you'd weigh XX lbs" message, when I work out, i get a much lower number (by about 5 lbs) eating more total calories than when I have a (rare) no exercise day like today where I ate 1177 calories and my message still noted a loss, but was a good 5lbs heavier ... (if that makes sense)

junewonder

judging solely on the "If every day were like today, in 5 weeks you'd weigh XX lbs" message, when I work out, i get a much lower number (by about 5 lbs) eating more total calories than when I have a (rare) no exercise day like today where I ate 1177 calories and my message still noted a loss, but was a good 5lbs heavier ... (if that makes sense)

I wondered about that! It's neat to know.