Why you should eat your exercise calories

SergeantSunshine_reused

Makes sense to me and why would you complain about eating more if you've burned it off.
I guess it's the fear we all have about gaining.

Have you read any of his books? It looks like he knows what he's talking about.

I have read 3 of them Constantly reading his articles and case study reviews too

SergeantSunshine_reused

Eating back you kcals is great for the under 50lbs to go crowd, but if you are like me needing to loose 175lbs every calorie burned up is a step closer and faster. That said, i eat at slightly under my daily goal and only eat exercise if i am really hungry and normally only half of my exercise kcals.

I agree with you there. There are always different situations where it may not apply.

CMmrsfloyd

this is all really interesting, and could be my problem. I've been doing an hour exercise a day and only eating 1200 kcals a day on average and seen no progress; i even came off the pill in case that was having an effect.

I'm still not entirely sure how many kcals i should aim for, sorry i'm a bit of a thicko with technical stuff like this. So we're saying eat BACK what you've exercised, on top of what? The recommended amount i should be eating or...? (5 ft1 and 132lbs)

I am 5'4", down to 132 lbs now, my calorie goal is set at 1390 per day for a 1/2 lb loss per week, and I eat my exercise calories. I have eaten them pretty consistently throughout my weightloss, and I have pretty consistently lost weight at at least the rate I requested from MFP - sometimes slightly faster. I also have not stalled in weightloss for longer than 1 week, which I attributed to water retention from starting a new workout and not taking breaks. So the whole 'eat your exercise calories' thing has worked very well for me. I will also say that I have a HRM that estimates my calories burned during exercise, they are not perfect but I feel they are probably more accurate than MFP estimates so I go ahead and eat those cal's if I want them (which is most of the time LOL). I routinely burn anywhere from 200-700 per day in exercise, just depending on how long I want to workout that day, it seems most days I end up eating around 1800-ish but I do try to go higher on the days that I burn significantly more. I was scared of bumping up from my original 1200 goal, too, but it has worked beautifully for me. Just my personal experience, but thought it might help. :-)

Also - the *reason* that I mainly eat them back is that I had read on here multiple times that losing weight at a rate faster than is ideal for the amount of weight you have left to lose can cause you to lose a larger amount of muscle mass than if you lose at a more moderate pace, so I eat my calories so I can stick to the rate I set here on MFP (currently 1/2 lb per week, previously 1 lb per week, and before that 2 lb per week) b/c I don't want to sacrifice more muscle than necessary. So it also does depend on your goals and whether that is a consideration for you.

Getting_Fit_4_Life

bump

gregthegroove

I posted this a while ago, but I have been seeing more and more new members asking whether or not they should be eating them back.

Short answer: YES!

Here is why: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html

MFP has already created a deficit for you. When you don't eat your exercise calories back you are creating an even larger deficit which can cause you to stop losing. I strongly suggest you to read the link I provided for details!

There is some truth to this, however the MOST that MFP will deficit you for is 2lbs per week. So if someone wants to lose more than that, eating back all of your excersie calories is not applicable to them. I personally don't eat any of them back. If I would have to, I would maybe eat 300 or so calories back if I were hungrier than normal. If a person isnt hungry to begin with, there is no need for them to eat anything back. Just my two cents.

Jenniriggins

I never specified whether I wanted MFP to give me a deficit or not. I was wondering if it automatically does? I'm at 1200 calories and I do eat some of the extra "exercise calories".

CMmrsfloyd

I never specified whether I wanted MFP to give me a deficit or not. I was wondering if it automatically does? I'm at 1200 calories and I do eat some of the extra "exercise calories".

If you tell MFP you want to maintain your weight, it gives you a calorie goal designed to help you stay where you are. If you tell it you want to gain weight, it gives you a calorie goal higher than your maintenance requirement to help you gain. If you tell it you want to lose weight, it subtracts a certain amount of calories from your calculated maintenance requirement to put your goal at an automatic deficit. If you told it you want to lose 1/2 lb per week, it automatically subtracted 250 from your maintenance. If you said 1 lb per week, it subtracted 500. If you said 2 lbs per week, it tried to subtract 1000 but if you maintenance calorie needs are 2200 or lower, you would automatically get the 1200 calorie goal even if it means you'd lose LESS than 2 lbs per week, b/c MFP's system will not suggest a number lower than 1200 no matter how much weight you want to lose or how fast you want to lose it - reason being they believe it to be difficult to get in adequate nutrition on a level lower than 1200.

Anyway YES, the deficit is already built in based on the information you gave MFP when you created your profile. If you want to see what you exact deficit really is, click on 'my home' and then click on 'goals' right under that - that'll bring you to a screen that gives a quick rundown of what MFP calculates that your body burns just from normal daily activities, plus it will tell you what your deficit is if you stick to 1200 calories per day and it will tell you an estimate of how much weight you might expect to lose per week if you stick to that number. Just keep in mind that while it would SEEM like this weightloss thing is strict math, it doesn't actually work that way in real life for everyone, and many find that 1200 calories works great in the beginning but in the longrun may turn out to be too little to keep your body happily losing weight for a long period of time. Especially if you are exercising intensely.

cmodde

it has set a goal of 1200 calories a day for me. when speaking to someone i know they said with my age i should not be eating anything less than 1400 a day. the first week i lost 2lbs and the second week i gained .5lbs on the 1200 cal

any suggestions

kwest_4_fitness

Its a good article but there's also a lot of self admitted speculation in the article. Like anything else..it works for some and not for others and no one size fits all.

Too true.

thelovelyLIZ

I've always heard it's important to eat your exercise calories, especially for the last 10lbs (which is exactly where I am). I generally do, but I feel my food and exercise diary doesn't always reflect it. I can't get an accurate calorie count on the machines because they default to 150lbs, which is more than I weight. So the machine says I'm burning 300, and it's close to 250. I also account for some small snacks I may not log.

I think eating exercise calories back is important though, and I generally do, or else I starve.

silhouettes

I eat them back, but on days like today when I work out for 4 hours and burn 1800 I feel kinda of fat having to eat 3000 calories in one day... seeing my hubby's small portion of dinner and my huge one when I'm supposed to be the one dieting lol.

psuLemon

I posted this a while ago, but I have been seeing more and more new members asking whether or not they should be eating them back.

Short answer: YES!

Here is why: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html

MFP has already created a deficit for you. When you don't eat your exercise calories back you are creating an even larger deficit which can cause you to stop losing. I strongly suggest you to read the link I provided for details!

The downside to this method is you kill two things, muscle mass and your metabolism. Long term results will definitely suffer for short term gains.

There is some truth to this, however the MOST that MFP will deficit you for is 2lbs per week. So if someone wants to lose more than that, eating back all of your excersie calories is not applicable to them. I personally don't eat any of them back. If I would have to, I would maybe eat 300 or so calories back if I were hungrier than normal. If a person isnt hungry to begin with, there is no need for them to eat anything back. Just my two cents.

psuLemon

There is a good chance that your BMR is low because you have been consistently under eating which hurts LBM as noted before. And since your metabolic rate is directly calculated by the amount of LBM, the less you have the slower the metabolism. This is very apparent in long distance runners since they burn so many calories during their runs. If you want to change your metabolism though, then you need to eat more and increase lbm, which actually means eating a surplus. But in the end, it's all about what you care about. Do you care about a metabolism or weight?

My metabolism was at the same level of efficiency when I was overeating as well.

I care more body fat % which right now translates into weight.

Do you know your weight and body fat now? Also, are you trying to increase LBM and decrease BF%?

Yup of course I am 220 lbs, and have 24.43% body fat as of January 1st. I'm trying to decrease BF%. My goal is to get under 20% BF.

If you want to do body recomposition you truly are.better off with a very small deficit and add in some heavy weight training. This way you dont screw your metabolism even more with the loss of lbm.

SergeantSunshine_reused

Its a good article but there's also a lot of self admitted speculation in the article. Like anything else..it works for some and not for others and no one size fits all.

Too true.

Which is how it is with most things. It is assumed that not every person is going to be the same here. Which is why it is still good knowledge to have to understand how your body reacts to that. My friend chevy has to eat high calorie or she wont lose so she fits the article

SergeantSunshine_reused

I posted this a while ago, but I have been seeing more and more new members asking whether or not they should be eating them back.

Short answer: YES!

Here is why: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/why-big-caloric-deficits-and-lots-of-activity-can-hurt-fat-loss.html

MFP has already created a deficit for you. When you don't eat your exercise calories back you are creating an even larger deficit which can cause you to stop losing. I strongly suggest you to read the link I provided for details!

There is some truth to this, however the MOST that MFP will deficit you for is 2lbs per week. So if someone wants to lose more than that, eating back all of your excersie calories is not applicable to them. I personally don't eat any of them back. If I would have to, I would maybe eat 300 or so calories back if I were hungrier than normal. If a person isnt hungry to begin with, there is no need for them to eat anything back. Just my two cents.

Hunger plays an interesting role in weight loss. Hunger doesn't always determine when your body actually needs food and fuel. As lemon said, metabolism and muscle mass can suffer

auticus

There is a good chance that your BMR is low because you have been consistently under eating which hurts LBM as noted before. And since your metabolic rate is directly calculated by the amount of LBM, the less you have the slower the metabolism. This is very apparent in long distance runners since they burn so many calories during their runs. If you want to change your metabolism though, then you need to eat more and increase lbm, which actually means eating a surplus. But in the end, it's all about what you care about. Do you care about a metabolism or weight?

My metabolism was at the same level of efficiency when I was overeating as well.

I care more body fat % which right now translates into weight.

Do you know your weight and body fat now? Also, are you trying to increase LBM and decrease BF%?

Yup of course I am 220 lbs, and have 24.43% body fat as of January 1st. I'm trying to decrease BF%. My goal is to get under 20% BF.

If you want to do body recomposition you truly are.better off with a very small deficit and add in some heavy weight training. This way you dont screw your metabolism even more with the loss of lbm.

My nutritionist and trainer have both kept me on a higher deficit program and have told me to avoid heavy weights until after I am down to about 22%. At 22% I stabilize the weight training to cardio ratio and up my calories. At 20% I do more weight training than cardio.

MichelleRenee13

I have a knee injury and can't exercise for the time being. I guess I don't have to worry, as of right now, about the issue in this thread. I do thank you all for the information given so I can plan for what I will need to do when I am able to exercise again.

jonm192

No!

If you put your activity level into MFP, it calculates based upon that. So, it's already accounted for you going to the gym 3x a week or w/e you put. Now, you start throwing that into MFP, and i counts it double.

i.e. My maintenance while lifting weights is ~2450 calories. Again, that's already counting lifting weights. Now, if I put 45 minutes of weight lifting, and it gives me 250 calories back--and I eat that, then I've reduced my deficit.

Prolonged extreme deficits are bad, 1 day of 900 here and there isn't bad. General rule, you can sustain a deficit of 31 kcal/lb of fat.

Tzippy7

everyone is different. I didnt lose any weight until i stopped eating my exercise calories back.

rockerbabyy

No!

If you put your activity level into MFP, it calculates based upon that. So, it's already accounted for you going to the gym 3x a week or w/e you put. Now, you start throwing that into MFP, and i counts it double.

i.e. My maintenance while lifting weights is ~2450 calories. Again, that's already counting lifting weights. Now, if I put 45 minutes of weight lifting, and it gives me 250 calories back--and I eat that, then I've reduced my deficit.

Prolonged extreme deficits are bad, 1 day of 900 here and there isn't bad. General rule, you can sustain a deficit of 31 kcal/lb of fat.

if you actually include your exercise in your activity level, thats true. but most people dont because thats not really how the site was designed. it really wants your activity level EXCLUDING exercise, so that it can calculate your deficit and allow people to choose to exercise or not - and to eat more if they do

BeautyFromPain

I'm still researching on this one too. If that is the case, why workout, and just not diet. If anyone with letters behind their name would like to comment, I would like to read it. Some credentials would be nice.

Soo many reasons to workout...
1. speeds up metabolism
2. it's fun?
3. it helps reduce stress
4. would you rather be skinny fat or fit?
5. would you rather be able to run away if someone is chasing you with a baseball bat?
6. would you like more energy
there are so many more.

ALSO, sunshine may not have credentials YET but she is working on them... just letting you know, she does know a lot more about nutrition than a lot of people on this website.

samandlucysmum

I find that after doing a long walk, that I am really hungry for the rest of the day, I have tried not using my calories earnt, but I just end up picking up the nearest food item, usually the biscuit barrell! I think the best thing for me would be to prepare something healthy to eat when I get back, to stop the cravings.

CMmrsfloyd

No!

If you put your activity level into MFP, it calculates based upon that. So, it's already accounted for you going to the gym 3x a week or w/e you put. Now, you start throwing that into MFP, and i counts it double.

i.e. My maintenance while lifting weights is ~2450 calories. Again, that's already counting lifting weights. Now, if I put 45 minutes of weight lifting, and it gives me 250 calories back--and I eat that, then I've reduced my deficit.

Prolonged extreme deficits are bad, 1 day of 900 here and there isn't bad. General rule, you can sustain a deficit of 31 kcal/lb of fat.

if you actually include your exercise in your activity level, thats true. but most people dont because thats not really how the site was designed. it really wants your activity level EXCLUDING exercise, so that it can calculate your deficit and allow people to choose to exercise or not - and to eat more if they do

I agree - when I joined MFP I set my activity level to my *normal daily activities* and it was not at all normal for me to exercise. When I started exercising, I took the credit for those exercise calories b/c I knew for a fact it was not included in the activity level I set here (set to sedentary). I hesitate to just bump up the activity level and stop accounting for individual workout sessions b/c that seems extremely inexact, especially if you're not exercising off about the same calories every day. I prefer leaving my activity level low and then accounting for the amount of exercise I do individually, it feels more precise and works extremely well for me personally. Plus as pp just said, that's how this particular site is really designed, to add in specific exercise after you have actually done it. Once I get to a maintenance phase, I may experiment with upping my activity level and not logging every single exercise, but for now I like the feeling of precision I get from accounting for every little thing, especially since I'm in a 1/2 lb per week stage where being off by a couple hundred here and there could cause me to stop losing.

Azdak

everyone is different. I didnt lose any weight until i stopped eating my exercise calories back.

That could just be arithmetic, not metabolism. IMO, about 90% of the "eat or not eat" "debate" is nothing more than debating math skills.

CMmrsfloyd

everyone is different. I didnt lose any weight until i stopped eating my exercise calories back.

That could just be arithmetic, not metabolism. IMO, about 90% of the "eat or not eat" "debate" is nothing more than debating math skills.

That is so true. MFP's numbers are just an estimate, there are several different ways to get these estimates and they don't all work perfectly for everyone. Activity levels, exercise calorie estimations, lean body mass vs. bodyfat, etc, can all make the math very complicated and harder and harder to get 'right' for an individual person. There are definitely people on this site that find they have to do things very differently than what MFP suggests in order to get results. MFP cannot account for everything even though it tries to make us do so. LOL

psuLemon

My nutritionist and trainer have both kept me on a higher deficit program and have told me to avoid heavy weights until after I am down to about 22%. At 22% I stabilize the weight training to cardio ratio and up my calories. At 20% I do more weight training than cardio.

as long as that works for you. The only downside to that method is you are trying to play catchup on increasing your metabolism and re gaining the lbm you lost.

LorinaLynn

All of the debates can be solved with one thing: Trial and error. If it's what you're doing is working for you, keep doing it. If it's not don't be afraid to try something different. And don't get hung up on the scale.

I mentioned earlier in this thread that last time I lost weight, I was a size 8 at 130#, and this time at 130#, I'm a size 4. Last time, I was eating between 700-1000 calories a day. This time, between 1800-2000 calories a day. I don't have any photos from the last time, but I do have the size 8 jeans, and they're really big on me now: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/449570-mfp-mythbusters-losing-weight-fast-exercise-calories-girl

luvmybaby333

this is all really interesting, and could be my problem. I've been doing an hour exercise a day and only eating 1200 kcals a day on average and seen no progress; i even came off the pill in case that was having an effect.

I'm still not entirely sure how many kcals i should aim for, sorry i'm a bit of a thicko with technical stuff like this. So we're saying eat BACK what you've exercised, on top of what? The recommended amount i should be eating or...? (5 ft1 and 132lbs)

I would say that this is your problem exactly. Nobody should be dropping under 1200 calories per day. If you are only eating 1200 calories, and then you are exercising on top of it, then you are effectively eating less than that because you've burned some off. So if you've exercised for an hour and burned 400 calories (estimating here), then it's like your body is only taking in 800 calories per day. That is probably putting you into starvation mode, which is causing your body to want to retain fat stores.

amandaruiz2011

bump