Major Flaw in MFP and eating back your calories?
Options
Fit_Britt
Posts: 35 Member
One thing I have been wondering is why MFP does not incorporate NET workout calories. Since you burn calories constantly, you need to subtract your baseline calories for that amount of time you worked out right?
Lets say someone's basal metabolic rate is 2400 calories a day. That's and average of 100 calories an hour. They work out 1 hour and burn 600 calories. MFP would tell that person that they could eat 3000 calories that day. BUT what MFP does not factor in is that, for that 1 hour they worked out, they would have burned 100 calories that hour without working out. Therefore, their net work out calories burned is 500. So, they could eat 2900 calories, and 3000 calories would actually lead to a weight gain right?
I try not to eat my workout calories, but I'm just wondering since a lot of people do. Any ideas?
Lets say someone's basal metabolic rate is 2400 calories a day. That's and average of 100 calories an hour. They work out 1 hour and burn 600 calories. MFP would tell that person that they could eat 3000 calories that day. BUT what MFP does not factor in is that, for that 1 hour they worked out, they would have burned 100 calories that hour without working out. Therefore, their net work out calories burned is 500. So, they could eat 2900 calories, and 3000 calories would actually lead to a weight gain right?
I try not to eat my workout calories, but I'm just wondering since a lot of people do. Any ideas?
0
Replies
-
The base amount of calories burnt while just living is already factored into the BMR calculations. You'd be adding it twice by your method.
If you don't eat your workout out calories, you are now at a calorie count lower than your 1lb/2lb per week schedule.0 -
Isn't the 100 calories that you would have already burned already accounted for in the 2400 that are for the whole day?0
-
It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.
The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.
When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.0 -
One thing I have been wondering is why MFP does not incorporate NET workout calories. Since you burn calories constantly, you need to subtract your baseline calories for that amount of time you worked out right?
Lets say someone's basal metabolic rate is 2400 calories a day. That's and average of 100 calories an hour. They work out 1 hour and burn 600 calories. MFP would tell that person that they could eat 3000 calories that day. BUT what MFP does not factor in is that, for that 1 hour they worked out, they would have burned 100 calories that hour without working out. Therefore, their net work out calories burned is 500. So, they could eat 2900 calories, and 3000 calories would actually lead to a weight gain right?
I try not to eat my workout calories, but I'm just wondering since a lot of people do. Any ideas?
As a genreal rule, i try not to eat my workout calories, while ensuring i still eat a high protein meal right after my workout....
seems to work for me!0 -
It's not an exact science either way. You can't trust any HRM to be exact, any more than you can determine exactly how many calories one truly needs to lose, gain, or maintain weight. Remember, that we each have subtle differences that throw the math of just a tad. I always considered this whole calorie-balancing game to be a "best guess".0
-
The base amount of calories burnt while just living is already factored into the BMR calculations. You'd be adding it twice by your method.
If you don't eat your workout out calories, you are now at a calorie count lower than your 1lb/2lb per week schedule.
Can you explain this a bit more? I'm confused.0 -
i think you're right! yeah i've thought of this before too...0
-
Good thing I don't exercise.
0 -
Not eating back some of my calories = plateau for me
Eating most of them back = steady loss
To each their own0 -
No, MFP accounts for that already.One thing I have been wondering is why MFP does not incorporate NET workout calories. Since you burn calories constantly, you need to subtract your baseline calories for that amount of time you worked out right?
Lets say someone's basal metabolic rate is 2400 calories a day. That's and average of 100 calories an hour. They work out 1 hour and burn 600 calories. MFP would tell that person that they could eat 3000 calories that day. BUT what MFP does not factor in is that, for that 1 hour they worked out, they would have burned 100 calories that hour without working out. Therefore, their net work out calories burned is 500. So, they could eat 2900 calories, and 3000 calories would actually lead to a weight gain right?
I try not to eat my workout calories, but I'm just wondering since a lot of people do. Any ideas?
MFP has already figured out your total calories you need to eat per day to lose 1lb etc. a week.
That's WITHOUT exercise. You'll notice that when you actually add exercise in, the calorie limit goes up to include what you would have burned doing nothing.0 -
I have wondered thistoo, but after exercise you burn calories at a higher rate for a few hours (not sure how long - think its called MET; I am sure someone will know), so perhaps it compensates anyway0
-
Never eat back workout calories! Determine your caloric goal based on your actual daily activity.
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools0 -
It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.
The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.
When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.
How can it be a "major flaw" when I, and many others, have eaten back our exercise calories, and have lost weight? This is where we just have to dial things in for our own personal needs. But we can't say that it is "flawed" logic. It's just not "exact" logic.
0 -
My daily budget is 1450 (Based on MY BMR.....)
I burn between 400-1000 calories during 60 minutes of exercise...
I eat back all but 200-400 of those calories and I lose on average 3-5 pounds a week. I have lost 30 pounds using the MFP calculators.
That is just MY experience. With MY metabolism... on MY Diet....
41 Y/O started at 254, down to 225 and counting.... Exercise is Insanity and before that P90X....0 -
:huh: I'm a little slow today....well, most days...but from what I've read of your question I would say, FALSE! MFP already sets you at a deficit. For example, I want to lose 1lb a week so they have me set at 500 calories less than my BMR. Therefore, your exercise calories are just EXTRA calories burned in addition to the deficit set by MFP. It's already added in, but props to you for thinking so hard and doing double the work! That's dedication!0
-
I assume the exercise calories MFP calculates are NET burn but I could be wrong. The calculations are loose estimates anyway. I usually reduce the number by 10-20% to be sure.0
-
it's worse than double counting BMR calories - you need to subtract the calories you would have burned by say, sitting at a computer or whatever it is you would have been doing had you not exercised (BMR is basically being in a coma). so say I exercised at 3 METs for 30 min, they need to subtract the 1.5 METs I would have spent in those 30 min sitting at my desk as opposed to the 1 MET i would have burned by just being alive. it is instructive to look at the Weight Watchers formula (google it for a few explanations). Exercise points are hard to earn and they are quite graduated. In order to earn any points for low-intensity activities you need to do them for an incredibly long time.0
-
It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.
The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.
When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.
But basically that is making the same assumptions about TDEE that MFP is making. MFP gives you baseline cals and encourages you to eat into your exercise calories. Your trainers have added the calories for exercise into your TDEE calculation and given you that minus a deficit.
I don't see the flaw?0 -
yeah, if you go to goals it tells your calories burned from normal activity. It allots me 450 extra calories for normal daily activity as a "sedentary person". So it tells me to eat 1200 calories and I will naturally burn 1650 calories.0
-
It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.
The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.
When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.
I wouldn't say it is a major flaw. People have lost weight on here, therefore something must be working.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 991 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions