Ok stillllll confused about eating workout calories

pghfan

The other thing that is often discussed here is that the estimate of calories burned is often VERY high. Compared to everything else I have read, this site seems to give way too high of a number so it may be good to use some caution in eating back all those calories

ladyhawk00

Another note on this topic - there are more reasons to exercise besides immediate fat-loss.

As you get closer to your goal it's going to be harder and harder to lose the pounds. The muscle you build with exercise helps you burn those calories. The less muscle mass, the less you burn. Not exercising is basically sabotaging yourself in the long-term.

Muscles are the "engines" of your body, the more you have, the more fuel you burn. That's why if you can only do one type of exercise for fat-loss (or only have time for one!), any 'in the know' trainer will tell you lifting weights or resistance training is more effective than cardio.

In that case, why do cardio? Cardio is cardiovascular health and burns a ton of calories, but it's not effective for building muscle (look at a professional runners body). So, while it may not build 'engines' for burning calories, it can help you meet daily calorie goals and has the real benefit of adding to your endurance. The better your heart and lung health, the more blood and oxygen you can get to your muscles, the longer you can work out and the more muscle growth you can support.

So, in short:

1) muscle building = long term calorie burning and weight loss
2) cardio = short term but extreme calorie burning, supports muscle building indirectly

A combination of both is your best bet . So, when you eat those exercise calories back don't be shortsighted! It's easy to look at every calorie when you're doing this and not want to put it back in your body, but you need to provide that fuel for long-term health and fat-loss.

Aw, everyone already answered everything. :laugh:

Excellent points, Sw, and well explained.

sharonuk10

What i have read it should be like this "You can do that by reducing extra calories from food and beverages OR increasing calories burned through physical activity. " You should try and cut 500 calories a day from your diet. By which means is up to you. You can do 500 less food/drink intake OR 500 via exercise OR half and half. MFP does the 500 (250 if half pound a week) in calorie intake. So when you exercise you then get what you exercise as extra calories.

Waite am I reading the original question wrong? I thought he said "AND" in his statement not "OR" like you pointed out in your quote. "AND" implies to do both and "OR" implies to just pick the one you would sooner do. The way I take his original post is that we should not eat back work out calories.

Yes I put in the OR instead of AND. As I believe you can cut the 500 calories ( to lose 1 pound a week) either via food/drink intake OR exercise OR bit of both. That is why I eat some of my exercise calories. Since MFP gives me a calorie deficit already. Ex. I am set to lose 1/2 pound a week so that gives me a daily deficit of 240. I burn about 400-600 calories via exercise. I tend to lose a bit more than a pound a week too.

atomdraco

LOL I get it guys, and thank you. I forgot the site automatically puts you at a deficit. When he sends me emails im sometimes like...wait hold on....and then i remember this site does all that stuff for you..so i get confused. I forget that 1200 calories is restrictive for some, and for me it has become the norm LOL. (wow it really has! i guess thats progress). so eating the healthy foods to make up the calories makes sense bc your body needs it as fuel to help you not be sick, muscle regeniration etc. thanks again

Glad to see someone got it! :P

curleesam

HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAA! You are kidding right? How many times is this going to be discussed????? LOL LOL LOL

shaunshaikh

Let's do an ancedote. Everybody know somebody who has done a dramatic low-carb diet. What happens to those people when they slip up and eat 4 cookies or have a quesadilla? Their body says, "woo hoo", stores all the carbs as fat, and those people gain weight. That's why a lot of people who do dramatic no/low-carb diets gain a lot of weight back when they go back to their normal lifestyle.

That ancedote should show you that the human body is extremely adaptive to its conditions. It doesn't always act the same -- it responds to how you treat it. If you constantly underfeed your body based on what your metabolic rate is, your body will find a way to compensate by lowering your metabolism and storing fat whenever possible. Your body will essentially be doing whatever it can for survival.

How big of a deficeit is too big? The answer isn't the same for everybody. Obese people can handle more of a deficeit than people closer to their goal. If you're one of those people that works out constantly and eats a very low calorie diet, yet you haven't seen results over a long period of time, there's a good chance you're one of those people who has been systematically underfeeding yourself. I've heard 20-25% of maintainance calories a good guideline.

I think people always see what happens on Biggest Loser and assume that's the fastest way to lose weight. One thing to consider is that most of the people on that show ARE very obese and can handle larger deficeits. They also dedicate their entire lives to proper nutrition and exercise with no opportunities for slip ups. You also need to consider that they workout so much that their BMR could be 0 and they would lose weight based on what they burn in exercise versus what they eat. A lot of contestants that are close totheir goal weight do struggle to lose weight like everybody else. Every show there is that 170 pound girl that gains weight instead of loses weight. Bottom line -- you're not at the Biggest Loser Ranch and it's not realistic for you to do exactly what they do. Set up realistic goals and make a lifestyle change, not a quick fix.

bhelmreich

I didn't start losing weight until I started eating back most of my exercise calories. Not always all of them though.

stormieweather

HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAA! You are kidding right? How many times is this going to be discussed????? LOL LOL LOL

About 14 times a day :laugh:

No kidding.

Seriously.

stormieweather

Let's do an ancedote. Everybody know somebody who has done a dramatic low-carb diet. What happens to those people when they slip up and eat 4 cookies or have a quesadilla? Their body says, "woo hoo", stores all the carbs as fat, and those people gain weight. That's why a lot of people who do dramatic no/low-carb diets gain a lot of weight back when they go back to their normal lifestyle.

That ancedote should show you that the human body is extremely adaptive to its conditions. It doesn't always act the same -- it responds to how you treat it. If you constantly underfeed your body based on what your metabolic rate is, your body will find a way to compensate by lowering your metabolism and storing fat whenever possible. Your body will essentially be doing whatever it can for survival.

How big of a deficeit is too big? The answer isn't the same for everybody. Obese people can handle more of a deficeit than people closer to their goal. If you're one of those people that works out constantly and eats a very low calorie diet, yet you haven't seen results over a long period of time, there's a good chance you're one of those people who has been systematically underfeeding yourself. I've heard 20-25% of maintainance calories a good guideline.

I think people always see what happens on Biggest Loser and assume that's the fastest way to lose weight. One thing to consider is that most of the people on that show ARE very obese and can handle larger deficeits. They also dedicate their entire lives to proper nutrition and exercise with no opportunities for slip ups. You also need to consider that they workout so much that their BMR could be 0 and they would lose weight based on what they burn in exercise versus what they eat. A lot of contestants that are close totheir goal weight do struggle to lose weight like everybody else. Every show there is that 170 pound girl that gains weight instead of loses weight. Bottom line -- you're not at the Biggest Loser Ranch and it's not realistic for you to do exactly what they do. Set up realistic goals and make a lifestyle change, not a quick fix.

Nice post

Just_Dot

Is there some way we can sticky one of these threads? Holy cow!

LovelySnugs

okay. so. let me get this straight, using myself as an example: i set my weekly goal at "lose 1 pound" so the thing put me at a 500 calorie a day deficit and told me to consume about 1800 calories a day without the exercise counted. however, with my exercise, i occasionally burn an EXTRA 250 calories or more in a day. now, if i wanted to MAINTAIN that 500 calorie a day deficit, i would have to eat those extra calories back. but in my specific case, my net calorie intake after exercise is still higher on those days than it would need to be if, say, i wanted to lose 2 pounds a week (in which case the thing would have told me to eat only 1300 or so calories a day). so in my specific case, it's not as necessary to eat back those exercise calories because i'm still over that 1200 net calorie don't-starve-your-body-or-you'll-regret-it line . . . right?

tanniew78

Well if your main focus is to lose weight, then, why not just eat less and not workout? It sure would make it a lot less painful. I know working out helps you to tone muscle, but some people are more worried about the SCALE. I don't eat my exercise calories, and I feel great and losing the weight. I think proof is in the pudding.

Yeah. and these are the same people that cry because they get to their goal and look like a wrinkle dog! Exercise is good for all sorts of things. It rids your body of toxins. It aids digestion. It pretty well eliminates depression. It makes you stronger. It tones. It tightens. It makes you feel good overall. It gives you more energy to power through the day. Why wouldn't you want to exercise? Not to mention you DO lose better when you exercise. Faster and more efficiently.

ladyhawk00

okay. so. let me get this straight, using myself as an example: i set my weekly goal at "lose 1 pound" so the thing put me at a 500 calorie a day deficit and told me to consume about 1800 calories a day without the exercise counted. however, with my exercise, i occasionally burn an EXTRA 250 calories or more in a day. now, if i wanted to MAINTAIN that 500 calorie a day deficit, i would have to eat those extra calories back. but in my specific case, my net calorie intake after exercise is still higher on those days than it would need to be if, say, i wanted to lose 2 pounds a week (in which case the thing would have told me to eat only 1300 or so calories a day). so in my specific case, it's not as necessary to eat back those exercise calories because i'm still over that 1200 net calorie don't-starve-your-body-or-you'll-regret-it line . . . right?

You can probably do ok not eating them, or eating less of them, since you have a large amount to lose. And you have more leeway since you chose the 1 lb goal. Also, since that's not that high of a burn, your deficit isn't that much larger even if you don't eat them.

However, remember that part of this is a mind game. Reducing your calories too low, too quickly, can feel like deprivation - which can lead to binges. Again, we're not talking about a big difference in your case, but it's something to keep an eye on. Making the changes that you can turn into lifelong habits is what will keep the weight off long term. So as long as you aren't feeling deprived, tired or fatigued by not eating them, you should be ok. Good luck to you!

EricJonrosh

I keep hearing different answers on this. Dr. Oz (YOU on a Diet) says if you lose more than 2.5 pounds a week, you're probably burning something other than fat. So, if you're at a 3,500 weekly deficit and burn another 3,500 in workouts, you're still in a safe zone. Another consideration is are you getting an accurate read on how many calories you burned? Are you adding 800 calories for an hour of housework?

This is so complicated. 20 years ago I lost 75 pounds in 6 months by eating healthy and working out every day. And I did the same exact workout every day - no muscle confusion, no calorie counting, no internet, no books, no p90x, no fat burning zone, no protein shakes (haha!), bars, chromium picolinate or supplements. Have we learned so much more, or are we indulging a publishing industry that recycles what we already know?

ladyhawk00

I keep hearing different answers on this. Dr. Oz (YOU on a Diet) says if you lose more than 2.5 pounds a week, you're probably burning something other than fat. So, if you're at a 3,500 weekly deficit and burn another 3,500 in workouts, you're still in a safe zone. Another consideration is are you getting an accurate read on how many calories you burned? Are you adding 800 calories for an hour of housework?

This is so complicated. 20 years ago I lost 75 pounds in 6 months by eating healthy and working out every day. And I did the same exact workout every day - no muscle confusion, no calorie counting, no internet, no books, no p90x, no fat burning zone, no protein shakes (haha!), bars, chromium picolinate or supplements. Have we learned so much more, or are we indulging a publishing industry that recycles what we already know?

This is true for a select group of people with very large amounts to lose. A woman with 20-40 lbs to lose cannot handle the same deficit (whether through diet or exercise or both) as a man with 75 lbs to lose.

I agree that we sometimes make it more complicated than it needs to be (and pay far too much for "insight" from supposed gurus), but there have been advances in knowledge of diet and fitness in the last 20 years. We understand a lot more about how the body works, and how different systems and substances work together - and frankly, I think we've still just barely scraped the surface.