Slightly different question about exercise calories

Options
Generally, don't people say that it's less important to eat your exercise calories when you are heavier and that people with very little to lose really should do it?

I am not a believer in eating my exercise calories personally. But this doesn't affect my diet too much as a 2 hour work out will only burn around 600 calories on average for me. But I am very short and average weight. I pretended I was 100 pounds heavier than I am today to see what the difference would be. For somebody around 215ish pounds the same workout could be burning 1300 calories!!

So for me, if I ate my 1200, my net would be 600. Fairly reasonable.
For someone 215lbs, if they ate their 1200, their net would be -100. A much bigger problem surely?

So why isn't it the case that they bigger you are the more important it is to eat the exercise calories given that you are burning so much more!

Also, the same difference presumably applies in everyday living - so, discounting overweight/normal weight and looking purely at height, why doesn't the average tall woman eat more than the average short woman? (I don't think they do?)

I'm not saying I'm jealous of heavier people btw (though I definitely am if you are tall and muscular!!) but I did sort of sigh inwardly when I saw that I could burn 700 extra calories with no extra effort if I was taller and heavier.

Replies

  • h3h8m3
    h3h8m3 Posts: 455 Member
    Options
    The more fat you have the bigger deficit your body can handle, because it's got more fat cells to pull energy from. That's why bigger folks can better handle not eating their exercise calories.

    The more you weigh the more energy is required to move your body, therefore the more calories it burns. If you think that being bigger would let you burn more with the same amount of effort, you're definitely not seeing that. What you do without a huge amount of effort is a bigger effort for someone carrying more weight. There's no shortcut.

    In answer to your last question, bigger people DO need to eat more calories. Whether it's maintain, lose or gain weight, bigger folks will have higher calorie requirements than smaller folks.
  • jellybaby84
    jellybaby84 Posts: 583 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the reply. Yeah, that makes sense about the fat cells. And I hadn't considered it actually being harder work so thanks for that perspective.

    I swear I've never noticed my taller friends eating more than my shorter friends though. It's interesting and definitely makes me want to be taller!
  • h3h8m3
    h3h8m3 Posts: 455 Member
    Options
    By the way. Diet Pepsi is way better than Diet Coke.

    Not that I have either these days... sigh...
  • ladybg81
    ladybg81 Posts: 1,553 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'10 and I have the same calorie goals as a lot of my "friends" on here who are significantly shorter. So in my experience, being taller does not mean you get to eat more.
  • h3h8m3
    h3h8m3 Posts: 455 Member
    Options
    I'm 5'10 and I have the same calorie goals as a lot of my "friends" on here who are significantly shorter. So in my experience, being taller does not mean you get to eat more.

    It's not about height, it's about mass. More mass requires more energy. Lean mass requires more than fat, but all mass requires energy.
  • jellybaby84
    jellybaby84 Posts: 583 Member
    Options
    By the way. Diet Pepsi is way better than Diet Coke.

    Not that I have either these days... sigh...

    Noooooooooooooo!

    HATE diet pepsi.

    Cola wars!