Eating the calories I burn

Christensledden

Am I supposed to eat back the calories I burn or half of the calories I burn or just stick to 1200 calories. I am burning about 2200 from workouts each day, Anyone help me understand?

Rae6503

If you think you are getting accurate numbers for your exercise, I vote eat them and see what happens. If you are loosing anything eat half of them. I'm always a fan of eating as much as possible...

ladyhawk00

Should help to read these (hint, the answer is yes ) :

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/186814-some-mfp-basics

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/10589-for-those-confused-or-questioning-eating-your-exercise-calo

I would question though, exactly how you are getting burns that high. If it is from work, that should generally be included in your activity level, not exercise. If it is from exercise, you may be over-exercising. There is a point at which your body is no longer gaining benefit from extreme daily calorie burns, but rather just catabolizing muscle and wearing out joints, etc.

MissMandy1010

If you at back all of your calories, you probably won't lose much. You need some to fuel your workouts, but if you eat them all how will you lose?? thats the way I think about it anyways. :-)

SB3535

From what I remember my cousin saying.. you CAN eat the extra BUT it is not neccessary.. it just gives you the option.. kinda like a bonus.. I try really hard not to because you will see better results with weight loss.. hope this helps!

mystiedragonfly

If you are burning 2200 calories just in your work outs, you need to up your "activity level" or start eating at least 1500 calories a day. What you are doing right now is the same as putting a couple gallons of gas into your car and wondering why it won't make it across the state.

Also, think about taking a snack (yogurt, protein bar, something) to eat right after your work out. That is a lot of energy and calories burned, but it's also a lot of depleting your nutrients that keep your body burning fat.

Pebble321

If you at back all of your calories, you probably won't lose much. You need some to fuel your workouts, but if you eat them all how will you lose?? thats the way I think about it anyways. :-)

If you eat them all you will lose what you have set into MFP - the 1 pound per week that you set in your goals (or half or 2, depending on what you set). Works for me.
MFP is set up to give you a calorie deficit even when you eat all those exercise calories, how good is that?

ladyhawk00

From what I remember my cousin saying.. you CAN eat the extra BUT it is not neccessary.. it just gives you the option.. kinda like a bonus.. I try really hard not to because you will see better results with weight loss.. hope this helps!

Not necessarily. MFP creates a built in calorie deficit, based on your loss per week goal, regardless of exercise. So when you log exercise, cals are added back in to keep that deficit stable. If you don't replace those cals, you've made your deficit larger than you (presumably) intended. A larger deficit does not necessarily mean faster/more weight loss; it is usually unhealthy and unsustainable and most often backfires, leading to feelings of deprivation, binges, irregular blood sugar levels, lack of energy, quitting, and weight regain. Also, too large of a deficit can result in slower metabolism and loss of muscle.

imprimez

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

MZNIKKIBOO

HEY SHOWS U STARTED IN JUNE -- AND YOUVE ALREADY LOST 14 LBS? THAT IS IMPRESSIVE --- NOW THE BIG ? SHOULD I EAT BACK.. I STRUGGLE WITH THIS CONCEPT-- I THINK YOU JUST HAVE TO SEE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU AND YOUR BODY AT DIFFERENT TIMES THROUGHOUT YOUR WEIGHT LOSS JOURNEY. ONE FRIEND TOLD ME TO EAT BACK OTHERWISE I CAN LOOSE AT 1ST BUT THEN CAUSE YOUR BODY TO GO INTO STARVATION MODE FROM NETTING NEGATIVE CALORIES WILL PUSH YOUR BODY INTO STARVATION MODE--BUT WHEN BURNING SO MUCH I WILL STILL FIND IT HARD TO EAT THAT MANY BACK IN HEALTHY MANNER SO IVE DECIDED TO NOT BURN AS MANY NEXT MONTH SO NOT SO MUCH OF A DEFICIT TO RISK BEING PUT INTO STARVATION MODE... BUT STILL WORK OUT TONE AND LOOSE! IM TRYING TO GET A SCHEDULE WORKED OUT FOR ** # OF DAYS STRENGTH TRAIN ** # OF DAYS CARDIO ** # OF MINUTES ETC BUT HAVNT HAD TIME TO GET ONE TOGETHER.
FROM WHAT IVE GATHERED ON THIS SITE YOU ARE TO NET AT LEAST 1200 SO U N I BEING ON 1200 CAL DIET ALREADY IF WE EAT OUR 1200 PLUS THE WHOLE 2200 UR BURNING (I RECENTLY HAVE BEEN BURNING 800-1200 MOST DAYS) THEN UD BE EATING 3400 CAL IN 1 DAY JUST TO NET THE 1200 RECOMMENDED! CRAZY I KNOW......SO I CANT TELL U WITH ALL CERTAINTY WHATS BEST BUT ID SAY LISTEN TO UR BODY IS THE BEST ADVICE.

jamielise2

I eat most of them back most days. Not always. If you keep your body guessing it won't go into a plateau as easily. For me, I usually left about 600 calories at the end of the day, but when I hit a plateau I started leaving only 150-200 and started losing again.

RocheleLynn

You should to eat back 75% of all calories burned.

You can also figure out your calorie deficient to figure out how much you want to use. Calories burned VS. calories eaten. 3,500 burned calories is 1 pound.

ladyhawk00

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

Actually, this is kind of contradictory. MFP DOES automatically adjust calories --- to include adding calories to your goal when you log exercise. This is because MFP works differently than other counters/plans, or the way most trainers set up a plan. These other plans take your “intended exercise” and use that to create a deficit, keeping your daily cal goal static. Therefore, with other plans, you would not replace calories you burn through exercise. MFP is different and you CANNOT compare them, unless you’re prepared to do some calculations to get apples vs. apples and not apples vs. oranges.

MFP was designed with the idea that many people can't exercise regularly, or at all, due to physical limitations or time. They also recognized that most people set up an exercise plan with good intentions, but as we all know, that's not necessarily what actually happens every day. So they built the site to allow for weight loss with or without exercise, and keep the daily deficit stable by adding calories for exercise.

joanneeee

HEY SHOWS U STARTED IN JUNE -- AND YOUVE ALREADY LOST 14 LBS? THAT IS IMPRESSIVE --- NOW THE BIG ? SHOULD I EAT BACK.. I STRUGGLE WITH THIS CONCEPT-- I THINK YOU JUST HAVE TO SEE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU AND YOUR BODY AT DIFFERENT TIMES THROUGHOUT YOUR WEIGHT LOSS JOURNEY. ONE FRIEND TOLD ME TO EAT BACK OTHERWISE I CAN LOOSE AT 1ST BUT THEN CAUSE YOUR BODY TO GO INTO STARVATION MODE FROM NETTING NEGATIVE CALORIES WILL PUSH YOUR BODY INTO STARVATION MODE--BUT WHEN BURNING SO MUCH I WILL STILL FIND IT HARD TO EAT THAT MANY BACK IN HEALTHY MANNER SO IVE DECIDED TO NOT BURN AS MANY NEXT MONTH SO NOT SO MUCH OF A DEFICIT TO RISK BEING PUT INTO STARVATION MODE... BUT STILL WORK OUT TONE AND LOOSE! IM TRYING TO GET A SCHEDULE WORKED OUT FOR ** # OF DAYS STRENGTH TRAIN ** # OF DAYS CARDIO ** # OF MINUTES ETC BUT HAVNT HAD TIME TO GET ONE TOGETHER.
FROM WHAT IVE GATHERED ON THIS SITE YOU ARE TO NET AT LEAST 1200 SO U N I BEING ON 1200 CAL DIET ALREADY IF WE EAT OUR 1200 PLUS THE WHOLE 2200 UR BURNING (I RECENTLY HAVE BEEN BURNING 800-1200 MOST DAYS) THEN UD BE EATING 3400 CAL IN 1 DAY JUST TO NET THE 1200 RECOMMENDED! CRAZY I KNOW......SO I CANT TELL U WITH ALL CERTAINTY WHATS BEST BUT ID SAY LISTEN TO UR BODY IS THE BEST ADVICE.

is your caps lock key broken?

MZNIKKIBOO

NO I TYPE IN CAPS ALOT :-)

TeMpi

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

Actually, this is kind of contradictory. MFP DOES automatically adjust calories --- to include adding calories to your goal when you log exercise. This is because MFP works differently than other counters/plans, or the way most trainers set up a plan. These other plans take your “intended exercise” and use that to create a deficit, keeping your daily cal goal static. Therefore, with other plans, you would not replace calories you burn through exercise. MFP is different and you CANNOT compare them, unless you’re prepared to do some calculations to get apples vs. apples and not apples vs. oranges.

MFP was designed with the idea that many people can't exercise regularly, or at all, due to physical limitations or time. They also recognized that most people set up an exercise plan with good intentions, but as we all know, that's not necessarily what actually happens every day. So they built the site to allow for weight loss with or without exercise, and keep the daily deficit stable by adding calories for exercise.

So, basically, what you're saying is I should always be at my daily target calorie goal no matter what? Even if I'm netting 500 cal under my goal and I'm not hungry?

ladyhawk00

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

Actually, this is kind of contradictory. MFP DOES automatically adjust calories --- to include adding calories to your goal when you log exercise. This is because MFP works differently than other counters/plans, or the way most trainers set up a plan. These other plans take your “intended exercise” and use that to create a deficit, keeping your daily cal goal static. Therefore, with other plans, you would not replace calories you burn through exercise. MFP is different and you CANNOT compare them, unless you’re prepared to do some calculations to get apples vs. apples and not apples vs. oranges.

MFP was designed with the idea that many people can't exercise regularly, or at all, due to physical limitations or time. They also recognized that most people set up an exercise plan with good intentions, but as we all know, that's not necessarily what actually happens every day. So they built the site to allow for weight loss with or without exercise, and keep the daily deficit stable by adding calories for exercise.

So, basically, what you're saying is I should always be at my daily target calorie goal no matter what? Even if I'm netting 500 cal under my goal and I'm not hungry?

In general, yes. There are some variables that factor into it. Largely because you don't have a lot to lose, it is more important that you don't have too large of a deficit. Your body doesn't have a lot of fat stores to provide energy, and what you do have is in "hard to reach" places, so it will be more difficult for the body to access it quickly. Which means you need a conservative deficit. If your net cals are low, you have a higher deficit. With a higher deficit, you will likely burn a higher ratio of muscle, rather than fat.

So, as long as you are accurate in your logging (weight/measure food, use realistic burn numbers, etc) you should probably try to be within 50 or so cals over or under your Net goal for the day.

TeMpi

In general, yes. There are some variables that factor into it. Largely because you don't have a lot to lose, it is more important that you don't have too large of a deficit. Your body doesn't have a lot of fat stores to provide energy, and what you do have is in "hard to reach" places, so it will be more difficult for the body to access it quickly. Which means you need a conservative deficit. If your net cals are low, you have a higher deficit. With a higher deficit, you will likely burn a higher ratio of muscle, rather than fat.

So, as long as you are accurate in your logging (weight/measure food, use realistic burn numbers, etc) you should probably try to be within 50 or so cals over or under your Net goal for the day.

Well, my goal is to lose fat only. I have my goal set to lose 2lb/week which puts me at 1330 cal for the day. AT THE SAME TIME, I burn about 300 calories a day for 4 days out of the week and almost 800 for 2 days out of the week. I also just began weight lifting at the gym 6 days a week.

Sometimes, I net 600 calories from a food intake of 1400. I don't think or feel like I'm in "starvation mode" because I ALWAYS have energy and am almost never hungry.

What are your thoughts?

ladyhawk00

In general, yes. There are some variables that factor into it. Largely because you don't have a lot to lose, it is more important that you don't have too large of a deficit. Your body doesn't have a lot of fat stores to provide energy, and what you do have is in "hard to reach" places, so it will be more difficult for the body to access it quickly. Which means you need a conservative deficit. If your net cals are low, you have a higher deficit. With a higher deficit, you will likely burn a higher ratio of muscle, rather than fat.

So, as long as you are accurate in your logging (weight/measure food, use realistic burn numbers, etc) you should probably try to be within 50 or so cals over or under your Net goal for the day.

Well, my goal is to lose fat only. I have my goal set to lose 2lb/week which puts me at 1330 cal for the day. AT THE SAME TIME, I burn about 300 calories a day for 4 days out of the week and almost 800 for 2 days out of the week. I also just began weight lifting at the gym 6 days a week.

Sometimes, I net 600 calories from a food intake of 1400. I don't think or feel like I'm in "starvation mode" because I ALWAYS have energy and am almost never hungry.

What are your thoughts?

I would say your loss per week goal is far too aggressive. 2 lbs per week is appropriate for someone who obese or morbidly obese, not someone who is near a healthy BMI - you simply don't have enough fat stores to withstand that large of a deficit. Especially if you're doing that kind of cardio/strength, you need more fuel than that; specifically, your muscles need more fuel than that. With that high of a deficit, you'll almost certainly be catabolizing muscle. I would highly recommend changing it to 1/2 lb per week, 1 lb per week at the most.

I'll note here that while the recommended minimum intake for women is 1200, it is 1500 for the average man to receive adequate nutrition. If you are much smaller than average, you may be able to get away with slightly less than that, but it's likely not necessary, especially if you are active.

No one could say whether you're in starvation mode, but that's the problem with it -- it's not an obvious process. Even if you feel like you have lots of energy, that can simply be a reaction to inadequate intake (a process similar to fight-or-flight.) Same goes with lack of hunger. When your intake is not in line with your expenditures, and the metabolism slows, the hormones that regulate appetite will become imbalanced and your body won't send the proper hunger cues. So you really can't depend on them.

Think of it this way. (I'm just using a guess, since you didn't provide height) A 5'7" male, 23 yrs old, at about 165 lbs, would have a BMR around 1700. That means he'd burn 1700 just for basic function, as if in a coma.

For people who have a lot of fat stores, they can get away with a much higher deficit, because they have energy stores for the body to fall back on. But in your case, you don't have that much in reserve. So the body has to find that required energy somewhere. And the quickest source of energy in your body is muscle (once you burn through glycogen stores.) So, while you'll burn some fat, you'll also burn a high percentage of muscle as well. In your situation, you should be eating your BMR every day, at the very minimum. And if you want to maintain muscle mass, eat at least most of your exercise cals, to maintain a conservative deficit.

JustBreathSB

The way I see it, if I worked out hard and I'm extra hungry, I'm not going to deny myself an extra 100 or 200 calories, I won't feel guilty if I burned 700 cal working out and I eat a little bit back. But if I'm not hungry and I feel like I don't need them, I don't eat extra. But they're not off limits. Just go with what your body is telling you.

TeMpi

I would say your loss per week goal is far too aggressive. 2 lbs per week is appropriate for someone who obese or morbidly obese, not someone who is near a healthy BMI - you simply don't have enough fat stores to withstand that large of a deficit. Especially if you're doing that kind of cardio/strength, you need more fuel than that; specifically, your muscles need more fuel than that. With that high of a deficit, you'll almost certainly be catabolizing muscle. I would highly recommend changing it to 1/2 lb per week, 1 lb per week at the most.

I'll note here that while the recommended minimum intake for women is 1200, it is 1500 for the average man to receive adequate nutrition. If you are much smaller than average, you may be able to get away with slightly less than that, but it's likely not necessary, especially if you are active.

No one could say whether you're in starvation mode, but that's the problem with it -- it's not an obvious process. Even if you feel like you have lots of energy, that can simply be a reaction to inadequate intake (a process similar to fight-or-flight.) Same goes with lack of hunger. When your intake is not in line with your expenditures, and the metabolism slows, the hormones that regulate appetite will become imbalanced and your body won't send the proper hunger cues. So you really can't depend on them.

Think of it this way. (I'm just using a guess, since you didn't provide height) A 5'7" male, 23 yrs old, at about 165 lbs, would have a BMR around 1700. That means he'd burn 1700 just for basic function, as if in a coma.

For people who have a lot of fat stores, they can get away with a much higher deficit, because they have energy stores for the body to fall back on. But in your case, you don't have that much in reserve. So the body has to find that required energy somewhere. And the quickest source of energy in your body is muscle (once you burn through glycogen stores.) So, while you'll burn some fat, you'll also burn a high percentage of muscle as well. In your situation, you should be eating your BMR every day, at the very minimum. And if you want to maintain muscle mass, eat at least most of your exercise cals, to maintain a conservative deficit.

This has been very helpful. Thank you.

ladyhawk00

I would say your loss per week goal is far too aggressive. 2 lbs per week is appropriate for someone who obese or morbidly obese, not someone who is near a healthy BMI - you simply don't have enough fat stores to withstand that large of a deficit. Especially if you're doing that kind of cardio/strength, you need more fuel than that; specifically, your muscles need more fuel than that. With that high of a deficit, you'll almost certainly be catabolizing muscle. I would highly recommend changing it to 1/2 lb per week, 1 lb per week at the most.

I'll note here that while the recommended minimum intake for women is 1200, it is 1500 for the average man to receive adequate nutrition. If you are much smaller than average, you may be able to get away with slightly less than that, but it's likely not necessary, especially if you are active.

No one could say whether you're in starvation mode, but that's the problem with it -- it's not an obvious process. Even if you feel like you have lots of energy, that can simply be a reaction to inadequate intake (a process similar to fight-or-flight.) Same goes with lack of hunger. When your intake is not in line with your expenditures, and the metabolism slows, the hormones that regulate appetite will become imbalanced and your body won't send the proper hunger cues. So you really can't depend on them.

Think of it this way. (I'm just using a guess, since you didn't provide height) A 5'7" male, 23 yrs old, at about 165 lbs, would have a BMR around 1700. That means he'd burn 1700 just for basic function, as if in a coma.

For people who have a lot of fat stores, they can get away with a much higher deficit, because they have energy stores for the body to fall back on. But in your case, you don't have that much in reserve. So the body has to find that required energy somewhere. And the quickest source of energy in your body is muscle (once you burn through glycogen stores.) So, while you'll burn some fat, you'll also burn a high percentage of muscle as well. In your situation, you should be eating your BMR every day, at the very minimum. And if you want to maintain muscle mass, eat at least most of your exercise cals, to maintain a conservative deficit.

This has been very helpful. Thank you.

Quite welcome, good luck reaching your goals!