Why eat your exercise calories?

istalkzombies

Don't get in the habit of training your body to survive on very little calories unless you like the idea of "being on a diet" for the rest of your life.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/LorinaLynn/view/exercise-calories-explained-206876

so if I understand your blog correct then you are supposed to eat back the excercise calories or at least the majority of them so as to not create too large of a deficit?

iamthevieve

I'm having the same problem. I work out a solid hour a day and the elliptical states I burn between 1300 and 1500 calories during the workout. I work out at a high level and a fast pace. The food section always adds in the calories I burned as you can eat more food….I don’t want to eat more food. Are there any issues with this? I want to lose fat I currently weight 235 and want to get to 155. Do I need to eat more? If I do need to eat more how much?

I would suggest buying a heartrate monitor. They're much more accurate. An hour on an elliptical won't burn 1300 calories.

luvmybaby333

Why eat them? Because they're tasty. Also, if I can eat them and still lose weight, why *wouldn't* I eat them? I like food. Just because I'm trying to lose weight doesn't mean that food has become my enemy.

jafo88

Thank you

ratherbeskiing

because I like cake:drinker:

LorinaLynn

Don't get in the habit of training your body to survive on very little calories unless you like the idea of "being on a diet" for the rest of your life.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/LorinaLynn/view/exercise-calories-explained-206876

so if I understand your blog correct then you are supposed to eat back the excercise calories or at least the majority of them so as to not create too large of a deficit?

Yep! When I had too large of a deficit, my weight loss was super slow, I felt deprived, and I lost a lot of muscle mass. With a small deficit, I had the exact progress I wanted and never felt like I was dieting.

I don't like using the term "starvation mode," but I definitely hurt my metabolism when I didn't eat enough.

aparker36

It is entirely unhealthy not to eat them, your body is like an engine it's needs the fuel for your workouts. Your body goes through cycles every day and you need to feed the engine so your metabolism is working to it's fullest potential, that's how you lose weight, not by calorie deprivation? Yes you'll lose weight short term but you'll also love healthy muscle mass, and you'll gain it all back when you go back to "normal" eating and make it even harder to lose the next time. The key is not to "diet" but change your relationship with food. Eat on purpose not by accident, and don't deprive your body of what it needs. And put good foods in your body as often as you can...you are what you eat, and if you want to be healthy put healthy things in.

A few tips I learned recently froma nutritionist. Eat as soon as you wake up...something...even if it's a tablespoon of peanut butter or a glass of chocolate milk. Your body has been fasting all night and it needs some fuel to immediately rev the engine and kick your metabolism into gear. Also at night, refrain from carbs. All day long when you are working and going about your day your body needs carbs, protein...everyting to fuel what it's doing, but once you get home at night your body starts to go into shut down mode and rebuilds so your body doesn' t know what yo do with carbs at that point...it doesn't need them for fuel so it just stores them. Inhibits your weight loss. And definitely don't eat or drink in the middle of the night. If you wake up thirsty, have water.

Also right after your workout you need about 2-1 carbs/protein. Chocolate milk is the perfect recovery drink after a workout. Have something within 1/2 hour of your workout so that you can feed that lean muscle mass you just created. Turns you into a lean fat burning machine to have more lean muscle mass on your body.

Hope this helps everyone. Calorie deprivation is not the answer, and calories aren't bad, especially if you are working out, make sure you eat what you need to sustain the muscle you are creating!

Nopedotjpeg

Has anyone noticed the people who argue against eating exercise calories never spell lose right?

lilfurson

I have been exercising really hard the past 6 weeks and sticking with a pretty strict diet. Last week I got stuck at the same weight and had no idea why. After reading the forums and other things I realized I was definitely not eating enough. So for almost a week now i've been eating back 80-90% of my exercise calories (this does not include the FitBit deficit). I have started losing weight again and I feel better. I try to add those calories in during the morning / afternoon since I know approximately how many I will burn when I do my exercise routine at night.

Just wanted to say it does work and you may feel better.

PatasDeGallina

Why eat them? Because they're tasty. Also, if I can eat them and still lose weight, why *wouldn't* I eat them? I like food. Just because I'm trying to lose weight doesn't mean that food has become my enemy.

I like this. Also, luvmybaby333, I love your ticker because at first glance I totally thought those pictures where Pacman ghosts. :happy:

Now I'm going to go find myself a Mrs. Pacman userpic because that's how I feel about food. NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM.

Bottomline! Do what works for you. You won't know until you pick one method and try it a while, and it may only work a while, or it may be "how you work" and work until you're done losing.

It's a numbers game and it's YOUR numbers game. I eat my exercise, I've had a couple plateaus, I've made no major changes, and they pass.

You CAN, but you don't HAVE TO. You don't have to do anything. Ever. Except die. (Not to be morbid, that one is pretty inevitable.)

Good luck and best success to you all!! :happy:

tigersword

I cannot ask my car to drive an extra five hundred miles without fuel, I can't ask it of my body either.

This is not a good analogy because fat is fuel and if you're trying to lose weight, your body has plenty of it.

Fat is a fuel tank. However, fat is a major endocrine organ, and your body will only burn small amounts at a time. If your caloric deficit is too large (over a thousand calories, unless you have 100+ pounds of fat to lose) then your body will break down skeletal muscle and use gluconeogenesis in order to produce energy instead of fat. Skeletal muscle is relatively low priority when it comes to fuel, as it costs a lot to maintain, and only has one bodily function (move whatever joint it's attached to.) Adipose tissue, on the other hand, is responsible for maintaining body temperature, insulating organs, and hormone synthesis. All of those things make adipose tissue a higher priority than skeletal muscle in times of large caloric deficit.

So while yes; the body burns fat, it mostly burns fat that it's stored from food you've recently eaten, plus a little extra in a small deficit, but eventually it will switch to catabolising muscle in order to conserve fat and lower BMR in an attempt to reach homeostasis. That's why the car analogy works. You can't force your body to run on no food, just like you can't force a car to run on no food.

Seriously, if the body burned fat regularly and constantly, why would a morbidly obese person need to eat at all? They should just fast and watch the fat melt right off, right? Doesn't work like that.

tigersword

Has anyone noticed the people who argue against eating exercise calories never spell lose right?

:laugh:

It's the lack of food destroying their brain.

Heidi1987

I always use a HRM to ensure that I have the most accurate reading for how many cals burnt. I eat exercise calories if i'm hungry, or if I know that I am going out for a meal etc. If I am not hungry I don't eat them. Just listen to what your body is telling you.

grinch031

I cannot ask my car to drive an extra five hundred miles without fuel, I can't ask it of my body either.

This is not a good analogy because fat is fuel and if you're trying to lose weight, your body has plenty of it.

Fat is a fuel tank. However, fat is a major endocrine organ, and your body will only burn small amounts at a time. If your caloric deficit is too large (over a thousand calories, unless you have 100+ pounds of fat to lose) then your body will break down skeletal muscle and use gluconeogenesis in order to produce energy instead of fat. Skeletal muscle is relatively low priority when it comes to fuel, as it costs a lot to maintain, and only has one bodily function (move whatever joint it's attached to.) Adipose tissue, on the other hand, is responsible for maintaining body temperature, insulating organs, and hormone synthesis. All of those things make adipose tissue a higher priority than skeletal muscle in times of large caloric deficit.

So while yes; the body burns fat, it mostly burns fat that it's stored from food you've recently eaten, plus a little extra in a small deficit, but eventually it will switch to catabolising muscle in order to conserve fat and lower BMR in an attempt to reach homeostasis. That's why the car analogy works. You can't force your body to run on no food, just like you can't force a car to run on no food.

Seriously, if the body burned fat regularly and constantly, why would a morbidly obese person need to eat at all? They should just fast and watch the fat melt right off, right? Doesn't work like that.

So when you are in a 1000 calorie deficit with say 50 lbs of fat available, how much protein does the body need to burn from the muscles and why can't eating more protein account for that?

Mershon88

I do not eat my calories earned from exercise. It takes me all day and night just to hit my 1200 calorie/day mark. I'm not sure I could eat anymore without making myself physically ill =/

istalkzombies

Don't get in the habit of training your body to survive on very little calories unless you like the idea of "being on a diet" for the rest of your life.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/LorinaLynn/view/exercise-calories-explained-206876

so if I understand your blog correct then you are supposed to eat back the excercise calories or at least the majority of them so as to not create too large of a deficit?

Yep! When I had too large of a deficit, my weight loss was super slow, I felt deprived, and I lost a lot of muscle mass. With a small deficit, I had the exact progress I wanted and never felt like I was dieting.

I don't like using the term "starvation mode," but I definitely hurt my metabolism when I didn't eat enough.

ok awesome thanks for that info!

Mershon88

Ok.. can someone explain to me... dumb it down... wth the deficit thing is all about? I don't understand it. =/ Where exactly should I be seeing what this even is? I can see how much I eat... what I earn from exercise... and totals... ugh.. I feel like such a blonde. LOL

bcattoes

I do not eat my calories earned from exercise. It takes me all day and night just to hit my 1200 calorie/day mark. I'm not sure I could eat anymore without making myself physically ill =/

Then you are probably not eating a good balance of foods. If you eat the recommended amount of fat, it's easy to hit 1200 pretty quickly.

How in the world did you ever gain weight if you have trouble eating more then 1200 calories per day?

MissFit0101

I eat them because they are the yummiest calories. :bigsmile:

taso42

Ok.. can someone explain to me... dumb it down... wth the deficit thing is all about? I don't understand it. =/ Where exactly should I be seeing what this even is? I can see how much I eat... what I earn from exercise... and totals... ugh.. I feel like such a blonde. LOL

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/61706-guide-to-calorie-deficits

gleechick609

If you are following MFP guidelines, you need to eat your exercise calories back. Every single calorie. They are already creating a deficit from your BMRx WORK activity level. 99% of the time, you are eating under your BMR

If you are creating a deficit on your own using your TDEE (BMR x Fitness Activity Level), eat 10-20% below your TDEE and use your exercise as the other part of your deficit (a healthy combination of diet AND exercise)

Eat below your BMR, lose lean muscle mass
Eat 10-20% under your TDEE and burn fat at a sustainable pace

It's up to you. For 7 1/2 months I have been eating 10-20% under my TDEE and have lost 47 lbs, never eating under 1800 calories. Obviously everyone's caloric intake will be different if you use the TDEE method but you will not be eating 1200 calories every day and burning yourself out with cardio to eat more!

fitnessgoddess17

I'm having the same problem. I work out a solid hour a day and the elliptical states I burn between 1300 and 1500 calories during the workout. I work out at a high level and a fast pace. The food section always adds in the calories I burned as you can eat more food….I don’t want to eat more food. Are there any issues with this? I want to lose fat I currently weight 235 and want to get to 155. Do I need to eat more? If I do need to eat more how much?

mine stated my cals where that high too. Then I got a HRM I was really only losing about half that. Invest in a HRM so worth it!

junyr

To the OP:

I'm sorry this isn't related to your question directly, but...

loose = not tight
lose = to get rid of

Again, I'm sorry to be "that guy".

taso42

If you're looking for just "the answer", set up MFP with your settings, log your food and exercise as accurately as possible and eat all the calories.

If you want to understand the "why", go and do some reading about calorie deficits, TDEE, BMR, adaptive thermogenesis, and whatever else you can get your hands on. Look through the Success Stories board on MFP. Look at what people who have continuing, long-term success have done and are doing. Read through the FAQ http://www.myfitnesspal.com/forums/show/474-unofficial-mfp-faq

Keep your mind open enough to allow in new ideas, but not so open that you fall for snake oil and quick fix schemes.

tigersword

I cannot ask my car to drive an extra five hundred miles without fuel, I can't ask it of my body either.

This is not a good analogy because fat is fuel and if you're trying to lose weight, your body has plenty of it.

Fat is a fuel tank. However, fat is a major endocrine organ, and your body will only burn small amounts at a time. If your caloric deficit is too large (over a thousand calories, unless you have 100+ pounds of fat to lose) then your body will break down skeletal muscle and use gluconeogenesis in order to produce energy instead of fat. Skeletal muscle is relatively low priority when it comes to fuel, as it costs a lot to maintain, and only has one bodily function (move whatever joint it's attached to.) Adipose tissue, on the other hand, is responsible for maintaining body temperature, insulating organs, and hormone synthesis. All of those things make adipose tissue a higher priority than skeletal muscle in times of large caloric deficit.

So while yes; the body burns fat, it mostly burns fat that it's stored from food you've recently eaten, plus a little extra in a small deficit, but eventually it will switch to catabolising muscle in order to conserve fat and lower BMR in an attempt to reach homeostasis. That's why the car analogy works. You can't force your body to run on no food, just like you can't force a car to run on no food.

Seriously, if the body burned fat regularly and constantly, why would a morbidly obese person need to eat at all? They should just fast and watch the fat melt right off, right? Doesn't work like that.

So when you are in a 1000 calorie deficit with say 50 lbs of fat available, how much protein does the body need to burn from the muscles and why can't eating more protein account for that?

That's the point, if you eat MORE, you will have a smaller deficit. If you eat a higher percentage of protein, without eating more calories, you'll get the same net result, as your body will use up all the protein you eat anyway, before still needing to break down muscle to make up the deficit. With a large calorie deficit, the macro breakdown you eat doesn't matter much, as the body is going to break it all down for energy anyway.

As for the 1000 deficit, that was an example number, based on an individual's actual metabolism, that number could be much higher, or much lower. Way too many factors to make any kind of blanket definitive number for everybody, but 1000 is seen as the general cutoff for safe weight loss, which would be 2 pounds a week of fat.

engineman312

it is scientifically proven that exercise calories taste better.

drewbird911

I think that MFP is optimistic with the canned/pre-posted Cal. Allowances for Exercise so I avoid eating up to the new allowed amount

grinch031

I cannot ask my car to drive an extra five hundred miles without fuel, I can't ask it of my body either.

This is not a good analogy because fat is fuel and if you're trying to lose weight, your body has plenty of it.

Fat is a fuel tank. However, fat is a major endocrine organ, and your body will only burn small amounts at a time. If your caloric deficit is too large (over a thousand calories, unless you have 100+ pounds of fat to lose) then your body will break down skeletal muscle and use gluconeogenesis in order to produce energy instead of fat. Skeletal muscle is relatively low priority when it comes to fuel, as it costs a lot to maintain, and only has one bodily function (move whatever joint it's attached to.) Adipose tissue, on the other hand, is responsible for maintaining body temperature, insulating organs, and hormone synthesis. All of those things make adipose tissue a higher priority than skeletal muscle in times of large caloric deficit.

So while yes; the body burns fat, it mostly burns fat that it's stored from food you've recently eaten, plus a little extra in a small deficit, but eventually it will switch to catabolising muscle in order to conserve fat and lower BMR in an attempt to reach homeostasis. That's why the car analogy works. You can't force your body to run on no food, just like you can't force a car to run on no food.

Seriously, if the body burned fat regularly and constantly, why would a morbidly obese person need to eat at all? They should just fast and watch the fat melt right off, right? Doesn't work like that.

So when you are in a 1000 calorie deficit with say 50 lbs of fat available, how much protein does the body need to burn from the muscles and why can't eating more protein account for that?

That's the point, if you eat MORE, you will have a smaller deficit. If you eat a higher percentage of protein, without eating more calories, you'll get the same net result, as your body will use up all the protein you you eat anyway, before still needing to break down muscle to make up the deficit. With a large calorie deficit, the macro breakdown you eat doesn't matter much, as the body is going to break it all down for energy anyway.

Do you have a reference that discusses the limitations on fat burning ability? Not that I am disputing you, but I can't find anything that discusses it.

Mershon88

I do not eat my calories earned from exercise. It takes me all day and night just to hit my 1200 calorie/day mark. I'm not sure I could eat anymore without making myself physically ill =/

Then you are probably not eating a good balance of foods. If you eat the recommended amount of fat, it's easy to hit 1200 pretty quickly.

How in the world did you ever gain weight if you have trouble eating more then 1200 calories per day?

I honestly do not know how I managed to put on so much weight. Other than 9 years of being completely lazy. And it was all done with one meal per day or light snacking all day... and probably not the healthiest of choices at that. I have never been a big eater..... so the way I have been eating now is really rough LOL. It is working strangely enough. I am down a total of 18.5lbs (the first 5.5lbs I lost before I found MFP) So i guess it isn't so bad if it's working, right? =/

CoryIda

it is scientifically proven that exercise calories taste better.

It's true!


Also, food is fuel. If you use more fuel than you put in your gas tank, your car won't run. Refuel!