To everyone who thinks you shouldn't eat your exercise calor

UltraRunnerGale

Since menopause a little over a year ago, I have struggled with my weight. I had weighed about 131 for years, suddenly I was over 140 and sometimes pushing 150! I was a runner, too!!

Since I got on this site about 3 weeks ago, I have lost 7 pounds!! I'm still as active as ever and do longgggg endurance events sometimes, but I'm being able to actually see how much I need to eat versus how much exercise I get and am able to manage it so much better.

I believe in eating my exercise calories because, as an endurance athlete, I KNOW it's important to fuel your body when you are putting it through stress (exercising)!! A car won't go anywhere without gas and neither will your body.

Just sayin'.....................

bmfrazie

Congrats on the 7 pounds! I am also a runner and totally agree 100% with you that it is VERY important to eat back your work out calories. Your body needs fuel! Better yet is the people that eat UNDER their daily calories workout and then don't eat any back and are thinking they are doing their body good with having a net calorie in take of less then 1000

mrphil86

I would agree with you but everybody is different. I eat all my exercise calories and more.

However, a severely obese person for example would not. Where as someone with just a few more pounds to loose would eat their exercise calories. Weight loss is not as simple as controlling your calorie deficit. There are a lot more to the equation.

It's all about the situation and goals.

mdanemann

I agree. It also seems that the closer I get to my "ideal" weight, the harder it is to lose weight. I notice this with people around me too. When they have an extra 20 lbs or more, they lose very quickly, sometimes more than 2 lbs a week. But for me, with only a few pounds left to lose, I can't do it at 2 lbs a week. It's more like a lb or less a week. It seems like my body adjusts to the food intake and the larger the deficit (with little other to work with in the way of stored fat) the more my body wants to hold on to the fat. It's like I have to trick it to lose by making it think everything is fine, I'm not counting calories. I too exercise a lot -- typically 6 days a week and I need the food to do it.

art4fun69

I know I should eat the calories back, but I am not hungry. This week I am going to try and eat as many back as possible and see how it goes.

taiyola

I find that exercising is an incentive to allow me to eat more :laugh:

However when I've been eating them ALL I haven't been losing, so I typically tend to lose when I'm a couple of hundred under. But maybe that's because I wasn't doing tough enough exercise? Yesterday I ate about 1500 cals, and a year or so ago I was on about 900 biiig difference!

taiyola

And tbh, I don't know how people manage with not eating ANY of them? I'd be constantly hungry and thinking about food all day long.

Wimpey

Amen! ;-)

registers

If you're getting results, that's great keep on doing what you're doing. I feel the opposite about the subject. Well it depends on your goals. Such as yourself yes it's a good idea. For weight loss, I don't believe it's a good idea. The caloric calculator is dead wrong. Assuming you're not using a heart rate monitor and just logging your exercises. I tested it to see if it was inaccurate it is. I entered walking as my exercise for 15mins said i burned 75 calories. I declared my weight by 100 lbs and i input walking again for 15mins still said 75 calories. The amount of calories you burn is dependent on your weight.

When you do high intensity work, where you "need" the energy to perform. Yes I agree on keeping your muscles full of glyocgen. But this is very dependent on how fit you are. The fitter you are, the faster you can run, while being in aerobic state (fat burning state) so you will get your fuel from your fat not your glyocgen.

There was a study done where people ate 800 calories with resistance training and didn't lose any muscle mass and dropped 25lbs of fat. I am highly against calories that low. Keep in mind this was under medical supervision. Here is the link to the study. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10204826

Humans burn more fat with out eating, when you eat, you're "storing energy" when you don't eat. you're releasing energy. I do a form of IF (intermittent fasting) I don't eat anything all day untill the evening. This causes your body to mostly burn fat, eating takes energy away from you, by using calories to digest. People think "well i burn more calories if I eat often" that is also untrue. Here is the studies for that.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8399092

When you don't eat, this releases adrenaline, and growth hormone. What would you rather have for energy, carbs or adrenaline and fat?

Yes I do recommend eating for endurance based performance. Like you stated.

registers

I accidentally double posted, I can't delete one post. I can just edit it. So this is my edit.

bethdris

I've been on this site close to 3 months. I've lost 48 pounds so far. I'm only 5'9 so I had a lot to lose. I started at 246.2 and as of yesterday was 198.2.

I've never been a runner, at best I walked. I am now starting to jog. If I do start running I will prob increase my calorie intake and eat back some of those exercise calories. Since being on here I also have never eaten back any of my exercise calories, and no I'm not hungry after I eat my regular calories.

To each their own, what works for one, doesn't work for another. As long as you are getting healthy and losing weight in a healthy fashion, is what matters most.

LorinaLynn

I have to laugh when people ask, "Why exercise if you're just going to eat more?!"

Because... I CAN EAT MORE! :laugh:

I love food. I love eating. It makes me happy. It makes me feel good. If all I have to do is spend a little time workin' up a sweat, and it means I can eat mostly what I want, and not child size portions of rabbit food... I'm in, baby!

I entered walking as my exercise for 15mins said i burned 75 calories. I declared my weight by 100 lbs and i input walking again for 15mins still said 75 calories. The amount of calories you burn is dependent on your weight.

It doesn't do that for me. I'm burning far less calories now running than I was 20 pounds ago. If I walk 20 minutes at 3mph at my current 136#, it says I burn 68 calories. At 160#, I burned 80. Running a nine minute mile now burns 102 according to MPF, and at 160# I'd have burned 120.

mrphil86

Humans burn more fat with out eating, when you eat, you're "storing energy" when you don't eat. you're releasing energy. I do a form of IF (intermittent fasting) I don't eat anything all day untill the evening. This causes your body to mostly burn fat, eating takes energy away from you, by using calories to digest. People think "well i burn more calories if I eat often" that is also untrue. Here is the studies for that.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8399092

This study just shows the frequency of eating. Eating twice a day vs eating 7 times a day...

When you don't eat, this releases adrenaline, and growth hormone. What would you rather have for energy, carbs or adrenaline and fat?

Yes I do recommend eating for endurance based performance. Like you stated.

And last time I checked, putting your body into shock is not a good thing....

fteale

I agree if you are an endurance athlete, you need your fuel, and you need carbs. However I don't think people logging housework or the school run or shopping as exercise and then eating back their calories are doing themselves any favours.

registers

Humans burn more fat with out eating, when you eat, you're "storing energy" when you don't eat. you're releasing energy. I do a form of IF (intermittent fasting) I don't eat anything all day untill the evening. This causes your body to mostly burn fat, eating takes energy away from you, by using calories to digest. People think "well i burn more calories if I eat often" that is also untrue. Here is the studies for that.. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8399092

This study just shows the frequency of eating. Eating twice a day vs eating 7 times a day...

When you don't eat, this releases adrenaline, and growth hormone. What would you rather have for energy, carbs or adrenaline and fat?

Yes I do recommend eating for endurance based performance. Like you stated.

And last time I checked, putting your body into shock is not a good thing....

I don't know where you get shock from. But here is the proper post, pasted the wrong one here
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10204826

keepkickingbutt

Because... I CAN EAT MORE! :laugh:

hell yeah! with you on this one 100%! and deserve it after all that hard work

art4fun69

I have been reading the book Burn the Fat Feed the Muscle and in that book it says we should determine our maintenance calories for our current weight then decrease by 15-20 percent for fat loss. Which makes sense. He recommends not going below 1200 cal per day for women and 1800 cal per day for men. He too is a believer in eating small meals every 3 hours to prevent starvation mode from kicking in.

amandavictoria80

I have to correct you. Body shock DOES exist because I just went through it!!!

For the first ten days of eating right and exercising my body did go into a state of shock. Everything my body was used to changed.
I didn't loose even one pound or one inch in that ten days.
According to a doctor and what I have researched, my body was indeed in shock and it took some time to get up to speed.

Just because something has not happened to you doesn't mean it doesn't happen to others.

___________________________________________________________________________________________


* Can always use more friends so please ADD me if you want! *



Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter