Eating Back Calories....I JUST DON'T GET IT.

Aprillsmith

Ok the thing is to eat more than you burn so why is eating back calories included encouraged?! I have asked this question over and over but no one seems to know the answer. It just seems like you are canceling out the burn by eating the calories back. I just dont get it...DOES ANYONE UNDERSTAND THIS PHILOSOPHY??

Matt_Wild

No, I do not. I could understand a protein shake an maybe some fast acting carbs to help the body repair post workout but, eating back exercise calories? Je nais comprends pas?

MDWilliams1857

The idea is that MFP already has a deficit built in. So the calorie goal that MFP has set for you is already set with a deficit to lose weight, so if you burn 500 calories in a workout, you can eat 500 more calories that day and have the same deficit. However, I dont eat mine back. I drink a post workout protein shake and thats it, usually.

penny_eclipse

This has been explained a million times already, but I'll try one last time.

When you sign up to MFP you select how quickly you want to lose weight...0.5lb a week/1lb a week/1/5lb a week...
MFP then tells you how many calories to eat to achieve this...the deficit needed is already there.
If you then exercise your deficit becomes even bigger and therefore you need to eat back the exercise calories to go cancel out the extra calories you've burnt ON TOP of the deficit.

For example (using a hypothetical person):

Maintainence Cals 2000
MFP goal lose 1lb/week
Daily deficit required to achieve this = 500cal a day
(this is worked out because 3500cals = 1lb and 500 x 7 = 3500)
Therefore MFP says eat a net of 1500 a day
You eat 1500 cals of food and all is great
But then you do a 300cal workout
Therefore you've eaten 1500 - 300 = 1200
To get back to the 1500 net cals you need to eat 300cals back.

Does this make sense?

PercivalHackworth

The whole vodoo behind this, simply put :
You want to lose weight :
#1 - You eat less in order to create a deficit (usually way too big, anyway)
#2- You exercice, you make the deficit even bigger
#3 - Maintaining a too big deficit is dangerous - useless - slows down the weight loss
#4- eating em back maintain the main deficit

In fact, it depends on the way you setup your goals. If u have a daily intake without having calculated ur TDEE, in most cases, you should eat em back. If you have calculated it, so your deficit - you don't need to eat em back - since the TDEE calculation uses your activity level as a base of calculation
here is a tool (excel sheet) I created to manage my stuff :
http://interzone.kicks-*kitten*.net/Calculating_calories.xls

Being the living proof of it , I maintained a 60% deficit during much time, trust me, I won't go back there

jimmie25

http://www.shouldieatmyexercisecalories.com/

Matt_Wild

The idea is that MFP already has a deficit built in. So the calorie goal that MFP has set for you is already set with a deficit to lose weight, so if you burn 500 calories in a workout, you can eat 500 more calories that day and have the same deficit. However, I dont eat mine back. I drink a post workout protein shake and thats it, usually.

The issue is if you are eating back calories, you don't want ANY old calories. I don't like the set up at all.

HeidiMightyRawr

MFP already has a deficit. For example: 500 calories a day to lose 1lb a week.

If you exercise and burn 1000 calories you have increased that deficit to 1500. This might seem good at first: Bigger deficit = bigger weight loss, but it's not always healthy and you may find at some point that your weight loss stalls until you eat more again.

Also, the smaller deficit you have, the less likely you are to have excess skin (if you have quite a bit to lose), you're more likely to stick to it, as it is more manageable, and you will lose less muscle mass. (you naturally lose muscle as you lose weight)

Exercise is beneficial in many other ways than just burning calories. Find something you enjoy doing, and you can enjoy the benefits of greater cardiovascular health / better fitness, the ability to eat more yet still lose weight, and you may even find a new hobby in the process

SteveTries

That advice is just to stop you netting out on too few calories for normal body function. It's makes some sense. What I would caution on however is that I believe many calculators of exercise expenditure are very generous indeed - I typically half what they say and wouldn't eat back more than that.

Works for me.

Matt_Wild

MFP already has a deficit. For example: 500 calories a day to lose 1lb a week.

If you exercise and burn 1000 calories you have increased that deficit to 1500. This might seem good at first: Bigger deficit = bigger weight loss, but it's not always healthy and you may find at some point that your weight loss stalls until you eat more again.

Also, the smaller deficit you have, the less likely you are to have excess skin (if you have quite a bit to lose), you're more likely to stick to it, as it is more manageable, and you will lose less muscle mass. (you naturally lose muscle as you lose weight)

Exercise is beneficial in many other ways than just burning calories. Find something you enjoy doing, and you can enjoy the benefits of greater cardiovascular health / better fitness, the ability to eat more yet still lose weight, and you may even find a new hobby in the process

Again, MFP figures are usually far to generous IMO.

ladyraven68

The idea is that MFP already has a deficit built in. So the calorie goal that MFP has set for you is already set with a deficit to lose weight, so if you burn 500 calories in a workout, you can eat 500 more calories that day and have the same deficit. However, I dont eat mine back. I drink a post workout protein shake and thats it, usually.

The issue is if you are eating back calories, you don't want ANY old calories. I don't like the set up at all.

Most people on here aren't bodybuilders, they are just regular people trying to lose weight.

If you told someone on 1200 calories NOT To eat back the 500 calories thay had just burned, leaving them a net 700, surely that's worse than them eating some sensible calories to get back to their goal calories.

Nobody is suggesting that people go out and eat McDonalds burgers to make up their exercise calories.

MDWilliams1857

Is there any real scientific evidence that suggest that your weight loss will slow or stop if your deficit is too large?

PercivalHackworth

Two :
http://www.ajcn.org/content/71/6/1421.full
http://www.jci.org/articles/view/17490

Hundred more :
Google.fr

Chairless

Try to understand it in simple terms.

If you dont you are creating a bigger defecit which means you lose weight quicker.

Losing slowly and steadily is the best way to end up with an end result you are happy with and not with a load of sagging skin wrapped around bones.

CMomma23

Personally, I don't get it either... I have read both side of the fence (Do and Don't) and both logics seem to make complete sense. However, I wish there was a way I could log my exercise and it won't add to my "net" calories. I figure if I can maintain while eating 1400 "net" calories (this includes a 300-400 calorie burn that I tend to eat back) Then I would like to just up my calories to about 1500-1600 to ensure I'm eating enough (I tend to underestimate how active during the day I really am, I call myself sedentary to be safe but most days, I move non stop cleaning and chasing a toddler, plus I can't sit still long) and exercise without adding those burned calories into my daily goal. I have been using MFP off and on for about 2 1/2 years now and I love it. But, there are glitches, etc (I truly believe MFP overestimates as well)

Matt_Wild

Most people on here aren't bodybuilders, they are just regular people trying to lose weight.

If you told someone on 1200 calories NOT To eat back the 500 calories thay had just burned, leaving them a net 700, surely that's worse than them eating some sensible calories to get back to their goal calories.

Nobody is suggesting that people go out and eat McDonalds burgers to make up their exercise calories.

Sigh.

I have the same digestive etc systems as you. I higher muscle mass which ultimately enable one to burn more calories and retain less fat as your metabolism is increased. I'm not remotely different to you, just I have a different shape and eat as my body actually needs.

As for calories, it shouldn't be just 'calories'. Your body doesn't need 'calories' it needs protein and fast carbs to repair. Which is where the eating back falls over.

As for me being a body builder so its not the same, tell this to my misses who recently lost 3 stone following my advice on IF



She's no body builder and did zumba for her resistance, cardio and ab work. We all work in a very similar way.

ladyraven68

Most people on here aren't bodybuilders, they are just regular people trying to lose weight.

If you told someone on 1200 calories NOT To eat back the 500 calories thay had just burned, leaving them a net 700, surely that's worse than them eating some sensible calories to get back to their goal calories.

Nobody is suggesting that people go out and eat McDonalds burgers to make up their exercise calories.

Sigh.

I have the same digestive etc systems as you. I higher muscle mass which ultimately enable one to burn more calories and retain less fat as your metabolism is increased. I'm not remotely different to you, just I have a different shape and eat as my body actually needs.

As for calories, it shouldn't be just 'calories'. Your body doesn't need 'calories' it needs protein and fast carbs to repair. Which is where the eating back falls over.

As for me being a body builder so its not the same, tell this to my misses who recently lost 3 stone following my advice on IF



She's no body builder and did zumba for her resistance, cardio and ab work. We all work in a very similar way.

But you seemed to be advocating not eating the calories back at all.

Yes your way of eating tham back in the right macros is probably the right way to do it, but eating them back simply as part of a persons normal healthy calorie intake, is better than not eating than and trying to survive on a net of 700 calories.


.

Matt_Wild

But you seemed to be advocating not eating the calories back at all.

Yes your way of eating tham back in the right macros is probably the right way to do it, but eating them back simply as part of a persons normal healthy calorie intake, is better than not eating than and trying to survive on a net of 700 calories.


.

Correct.

They aren't trying to survive on 700 calories. They ingested 1200 calories. If you train say 4x a week and don't digest the extra 500 cals, you will have an extra 2000 calories burnt from your fat stores. Thats not a huge amount of difference and will not put you at any risk, its an extra half a pound of fat. Also the body prefers to use fat stores when pushed with weights and steady state cardio which most people will do.

claire7090

I cannot explaing the science behind it but I know it works as I have reached my goal.

I lost 28lbs in 6 months (approx 1.1lb a week if I average it out but that 6 months did include Christmas and I did have a few mince pies!) I always eat back the majourity of my exercise calories but I am careful not to overestimate how many calories I have burned - for example one website (not MFP) told me that 60 minutes of zumba would burn 700-1000 calories however in talking to my instructor she said it would be more like 350-450 so I log it at 350, so as long as you are honest and only logging calories you have really used I would say eat them back it worked for me.

ladyraven68

But you seemed to be advocating not eating the calories back at all.

Yes your way of eating tham back in the right macros is probably the right way to do it, but eating them back simply as part of a persons normal healthy calorie intake, is better than not eating than and trying to survive on a net of 700 calories.


.

Correct.

They aren't trying to survive on 700 calories. They ingested 1200 calories. If you train say 4x a week and don't digest the extra 500 cals, you will have an extra 2000 calories burnt from your fat stores. Thats not a huge amount of difference and will not put you at any risk, its an extra half a pound of fat. Also the body prefers to use fat stores when pushed with weights and steady state cardio which most people will do.

You are the only person I have seen on here that believes netting 700 calories is OK.

but somehow looking at your profile, I doubt that has ever been an issue for you

machinegunkate

boomp.