I tried eating back my exercise cals and it's bs!
Replies
-
This is why there are overweight people at the gym that workout every day yet still can't seem to lose the weight. Firstly people are not burning as many calories as MFP or those machines in the gym are estimating...those numbers are usually overstated. So if you are depending on those numbers to estimate how many calories you should be eating in many cases you are probably overeating.
MFP is the only place that I see so many people so passionate about eating more. My gut tells me it's because these people just do not want to eat cleaner or reduce their portions. I started my journey under the supervision of a medical doctor who had me eating 1200 - 1300 calories (high protein) per day and not eating back exercise calories and I lost the weight with no problem and did not feel hungry.
Actually when I first started out and heard that my doctor suggested 1200 - 1300 calories per day I thought that I would be starving too. But as my doctor advised and as I later found out, it all comes down to food choices. If you are eating healthy food choices with a good protein and for that matter a moderate fat content you will not be hungry and it is very doable.
I lost my weight and didn't go into "starvation mode" as some claim happens here,,,
I seem to be doing ok. You might want to check my diary - it's not exactly dirty.
And again, many weight specialists recommend 'eating back' - e.g. weight watchers.
Also, the op Is calling .bs on something she dIdnt try. She's a chronic under eater.
I looked. Looks good to me. I can't eat some of the stuff you eat. Not because I don't like it or think it's bad. It's just stuff I can't eat due to health issues. Glad I looked though, reminded me of honey, I meant to get some the other day. I try to have a few spoonfuls in hot tea during certain times of the year when I'm likely to get sick. I'll pick some up tomorrow. Thanks for that!
I do agree with meeka. Daily calorie intake would be more for someone with more to lose. We all have different bodies.0 -
It is what works FOR YOU. There are some people out there that this applies to. They are few and far between. I will keep exercising and eating my 1800 cal a day.0
-
This is why there are overweight people at the gym that workout every day yet still can't seem to lose the weight. Firstly people are not burning as many calories as MFP or those machines in the gym are estimating...those numbers are usually overstated. So if you are depending on those numbers to estimate how many calories you should be eating in many cases you are probably overeating.
MFP is the only place that I see so many people so passionate about eating more. My gut tells me it's because these people just do not want to eat cleaner or reduce their portions. I started my journey under the supervision of a medical doctor who had me eating 1200 - 1300 calories (high protein) per day and not eating back exercise calories and I lost the weight with no problem and did not feel hungry.
Actually when I first started out and heard that my doctor suggested 1200 - 1300 calories per day I thought that I would be starving too. But as my doctor advised and as I later found out, it all comes down to food choices. If you are eating healthy food choices with a good protein and for that matter a moderate fat content you will not be hungry and it is very doable.
I lost my weight and didn't go into "starvation mode" as some claim happens here,,,
I seem to be doing ok. You might want to check my diary - it's not exactly dirty.
And again, many weight specialists recommend 'eating back' - e.g. weight watchers.
Also, the op Is calling .bs on something she dIdnt try. She's a chronic under eater.
No offense, but it also appears that you had a significant amount of weight to lose. The heavier you are, the more calories it requires to maintain that weight. It appears from your diary that you are eating about 1900 - 2000 calories a day in addition to whatever exercise you are doing which is probably a huge deficit for you. It is not rocket science why you've lost the weight. Nice job by the way.
But someone with less weight to lose is not going to be able to do so at that level as it may be higher than the maintenance level for that person's goal weight.
I think you'll find the opposite is true for most. In the initial stages, I didn't have to worry about eating plenty (this is why VLCD works for obese people). Now, I have to be a lot more careful. I eat more now than I did when I was at my heaviest. And I lose if I eat enough. If I don't, weightloss crawls. I plateau if I don't eat enough to fuel my runs. I eat exercise cals, up to my TDEE - 500.
My point, though, in directing you to my diary was that I really don't live up to your stereotype that most people who want to eat a healthy amount of food simply don't want to give up the junk food. It's just not true.
How could I possibly take offense? Obviously I had a lot to lose, or I'd be a skeleton right now.0 -
It might be BS for your but its not for other people. I don't eat my exercise calories because I eat enough to support my exercise whilst still at a deficeit. So essentially my activity level is built into my calories. I'm actually dieting right now for show and wouldn't last long on 1200 calories and if I did I'm sure I'd damage my metabolism and lose a lot of muscle, not to mention probably drop something really heavy on my face.
I literally hate the environment MFPs food tracker/ exercise system causes. I get why they are doing it because its a reward/adjustment to the variables of someone's activity level but geesh! This topic is getting ridiculous.0 -
Yeah, we're all special snowflakes. It's a wonder that modern medicine works at all.0
-
So for several weeks I tried to switch it up by increasing my cals and eating back my exercise cals. Absolutely DID NOT work! I am no back to sticking at 1200 cals whether I work out or not and almost immediately noticed the scale going down! I knew eating more to lose weight sounded too good to be true. Here's what works: eat less, move more. Period.
I am with you sista!0 -
If I don't eat enough I don't lose. I also think that eating a lot of processed foods is not great for the body. I'd rather eat a ton of real food than bars and such. If it works for you than do it but I would be hungry and my insides work so much better with plenty of fruits and veggies!0
-
I eat back my calories sometime & sometimes I even go over.But like everyone has been saying, everyone is different. Do what works for you. I can eat 2000+ cals and exercise and lose weight. I just have that type of metabolism.0
-
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they wanted without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
My metabolism is geared toward cavewoman survival it seems. If I do the whole eating of the exercise calories while lifting heavy thing, my body goes "Oh, it looks like we're working hard a lot, must be a famine! Better store it up for the lean times!" and fat sticks to me like glue. I've gone for months where the numbers simply did not add up (i.e., I'd religiously burn more calories than I ate and nothing would come off.) I'm just a highly efficient keeper of the fat!
I've sadly come to the realization that I will probably always have to keep my calories under 1500...regardless of how much I work my *kitten* off. And I do work my *kitten* off.0 -
So for several weeks I tried to switch it up by increasing my cals and eating back my exercise cals. Absolutely DID NOT work! I am no back to sticking at 1200 cals whether I work out or not and almost immediately noticed the scale going down! I knew eating more to lose weight sounded too good to be true. Here's what works: eat less, move more. Period.
I am with you sista!
You chronically undereat like the OP, don't eat exercise cals back, and then post odd threads about how you did, and it didn't work? (Her diary very clearly demonstrates she was eating well under a thousand, quite frequently, started eating a little more - but still generally under 1200.... not exactly the 'eat more to lose' poster child.... )
How odd. I really did think that, in the OP, we had in fact found our unique snowflake....0 -
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they want without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
No I was never that person. They key is to remain at a deficit while still eating them back. I don't exercise to lose weight. I exercise for my health. I eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight. That is the difference.0 -
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they wanted without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
Not me, sorry.0 -
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they want without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
No I was never that person. They key is to remain at a deficit while still eating them back. I don't exercise to lose weight. I exercise for my health. I eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight. That is the difference.
And so are people that are eating 1200 calories and not eating exercise calories back. The key is to eat at a deficit. Eating more does not equal weight loss unless you are eating at a deficit and the fact of the matter is at lower weights that level is going to be lower than it is at higher weights.0 -
I guess I should have added that I had been doing the eat-more-to-lose for about a year and saw no movement in the scale whatsoever. Even at a deficit with calories eaten back. I use a HRM, measure my food on a scale and don't trust exaggerating gym machines, etc, so I've ruled out miscalculation. Granted, I only had about 10-15 pounds to lose, but it simply does not work for some. Like me...0
-
If i look at a label i gain weight, it sounds like you were over estimating your exercise calories, there a hundred different reasons you gained one of the BIGGEST is if your body has already gone into starvation mode and your now eating healthy you WILL gain first then lose. The reason people say eat back your exercise calories is because MFP arlready creates a deficit for you, 1200 a day is the MINIMUM your body can survive on, you may want to consider getting a heart monitor for your exercises, that way your actually seeing the amount of calories each exercise burns based on your heart rate.
I truly am glad you have found something that works for you! Although you may want to be careful with only eating 1200 a day ALONG with burning during exercise you may go back into starvation mode and gain faster then you lost on your first binge. You may also have had water weight from your workouts depending on how hard your working out i weigh every two weeks naked and before i drink ANYTHING in the morning. I hope you continue to lose ~<30 -
Yeah, I never lost by eating mine back either. Just maintained.0
-
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they wanted without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
My metabolism is geared toward cavewoman survival it seems. If I do the whole eating of the exercise calories while lifting heavy thing, my body goes "Oh, it looks like we're working hard a lot, must be a famine! Better store it up for the lean times!" and fat sticks to me like glue. I've gone for months where the numbers simply did not add up (i.e., I'd religiously burn more calories than I ate and nothing would come off.) I'm just a highly efficient keeper of the fat!
I've sadly come to the realization that I will probably always have to keep my calories under 1500...regardless of how much I work my *kitten* off. And I do work my *kitten* off.
If your lifting your building muscle under your fat, at this point the scale shouldnt matter! Muscle weighs more then fat, were u strictly baseing it on the scale or on your inches? If your looking to be skinny stop lifting and do cardio. Otherwise you may only tone the fat you have and the scale may never move your inches will.
P.S. Lmao at cavewoman survival mode haha0 -
you would eat back all ur cals if u were trying to maintain ur current weight. depending on how much u burn in a day, its nice to be able to have some wiggle room with ur diet, but beware....i tried this 1200 adn exercise like a nut job, i lost 10lbs, but 6lbs of that was muscle
whaaaa boo hoo! u need to feed ur body to maintain the muscle mass u currently have-at least. 0 -
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they want without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
No I was never that person. They key is to remain at a deficit while still eating them back. I don't exercise to lose weight. I exercise for my health. I eat at a calorie deficit to lose weight. That is the difference.
And so are people that are eating 1200 calories and not eating exercise calories back. The key is to eat at a deficit. Eating more does not equal weight loss unless you are eating at a deficit and the fact of the matter is at lower weights that level is going to be lower than it is at higher weights.
MFP puts the deficit for you already. That is why everyone regardless of current body composition seems to be on this ridiculous 1200 calorie amount. So essentially your taking the deficit that MFP creates for you taking into account safe means of losing weight and creating a bigger deficit via exercise that your not supporting with nutritional intake because your already eating at a deficit. This is why MFP wants you to eat your calories back. The deficiit is built in already!0 -
My theory on this is that people who can eat back all of their exercise calories now are people who were, at one point on their lives, able to eat whatever they wanted without gaining. Their metabolisms are geared to burn if they exercise modestly at all. I was never, ever one of those people, ever.
My metabolism is geared toward cavewoman survival it seems. If I do the whole eating of the exercise calories while lifting heavy thing, my body goes "Oh, it looks like we're working hard a lot, must be a famine! Better store it up for the lean times!" and fat sticks to me like glue. I've gone for months where the numbers simply did not add up (i.e., I'd religiously burn more calories than I ate and nothing would come off.) I'm just a highly efficient keeper of the fat!
I've sadly come to the realization that I will probably always have to keep my calories under 1500...regardless of how much I work my *kitten* off. And I do work my *kitten* off.
If your lifting your building muscle under your fat, at this point the scale shouldnt matter! Muscle weighs more then fat, were u strictly baseing it on the scale or on your inches? If your looking to be skinny stop lifting and do cardio. Otherwise you may only tone the fat you have and the scale may never move your inches will.
P.S. Lmao at cavewoman survival mode haha
I can definitely tell I'm building muscle, but I'm concerned when I see the scale go up instead of down. It's been about a year. I would think that would've evened out by now. I'm still pretty much in the same size jeans as I was before. I'm not looking to be skinny. My ultimate goal is to get down to about 145. Sounds high, but I looked good at that size, I think. I've gone from about 155ish to 162 with lifting and muscle work. It's damn frustrating.
My mom is actually the one who always used to call the females in my family cavewomen...she has all the same problems that I do, lol.0 -
ok i'm getting a bit confused - i've been assuming that MFP is 'giving' me 1200 net calories a day if i want to lose 2lbs/wk and that it's up to me if i choose to eat 1200 cals and do no exercise, or burn 600 calories and eat 1800 calories. But should i be eating 1200 cals regardless of whether i exercise or not. I don't purposefully eat back the calories, but try and keep the net weekly calories to average around 1200 to allow for a bit of day to day flexibility. i haven't been doing the calorie counting for long enough to work out what works for me.0
-
You have to understand the concept of emtwl. They call it that because many people still believe eating too few calories is the healthy way.0
-
Definitely this. There is so much more to research and find out but I think that some people just want it all figured out for them which MFP will do, but then they don't follow MFP either. When a person sees that they will weigh 5 lbs less in 5 weeks, they don't look any further. There is a *NOTE: that tells of the danger of eating under 1200 or whatever your net is.
I just think that some folks are more inquisitive about how their body works and, realize after studying, that the scale doesn't really tell much of importance. You can't tell what weight you are losing. And there are also people who just don't care about tone or muscle. I think for years muscle building was just gross to a lot of people. Now many are educated and understand how to shape your bod while losing fat. I want some shape and don't care to look like a limp noodle by eating 600 calories a day in order to reach some "dream" weight that I think will make me look gorgeous. I wouldn't, I'd look limp and weak which is what I'd be. Might as well lay in bed and be fed with an IV if that's all I'm gonna do for myself.
I know I used to only care about the scale and what it said. I did not care to look any further. I am glad I changed my mind, or at least opened it:drinker: :drinker:
But hey, if you like eating teenie amounts of food every day and that scale is going down and making you happy, more power to you!! This 59 year old is gonna prove to someone that eating right(which mine is around 1500 per day(after minus 20% deficit, and I eat more if I go over my typical exercise routine and burn more).
denise:drinker: :drinker:
The problem with that formula is that most people seem to think the 'eat less' part of that equation means 'eat as little as possible', or eat a bunch of 'diet food'. Calories out great than calories in does work, but there are more variables if you want the weight loss to last and be to fit rather than just skinny.I'm going to write the best, shortest book on weight loss ever. It's how I'm going to get filthy rich. Here it is, ready? Eat less, move more. When calories out are greater than calories in weight loss occurs. End of book. I'm not a doctor, but I play one on MFP, just like a few thousand others.
The simplest formula for me has been to find my BMR and TDEE (as accurately as possible), and eat in between those numbers, making sure to net at or above my BMR. Because really, shouldn't I give my body more fuel than what it can burn I was comatose?
I'm not trying to argue, I'm just agreeing that it is simple, and that eating exercise calories back isn't BS. :bigsmile:
Might as well add my favorite link: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/654536-in-place-of-a-road-map-2-0-revised-7-2-120 -
Different strokes for different folks. I lost weight cycling 60-90 minutes, 5 days a week, and eating over 2000 calories and I was only 142 to begin. I think time needs to be given to it, so the body adjusts to not being deprived, before the weight starts dropping. I personally believe that many who stick to rigid 1200 calorie a day diets, tend to either end up having to keep to a really low calorie diet for life to maintain their weight, or end up regaining a lot of their weight afterwards. It seems a better idea to start closer to how you mean to go on, meaning focussing on a healthier lifestyle, rather than purely on weight loss, and on something that can be maintained easily for life. Many simply eat at the maintenance level of calories for their goal weight and that works well.0
-
Personally, I was eating 1200 calories per day and exercising without eating back any calories up until this past week. It worked wonderfully, and I was never fatigued. Then I hit a plateau for 3 weeks, and the scale stopped moving. Last week my energy hit rock bottom, and I started to get ravenously hungry. Now I've upped my calories, and started eating back my calories to net about 1500 per day... and the scale is moving again. What's more important- I feel a lot better. Like I've been rejuvenated.
Not every weight loss plan works for every person. Listen to your body. If 1200 cals per day works for you, great. If you feel like you need to change it up, change it up.0 -
I UNDERSTAND! I am right there with you... I am really small and short too so 1200 calories for me is alot at 5'1 and 107! HAH! I know with me i need a huge deficit. Thats just how my body works I guess. Others can eat them back and still loose but this is me! With a HRM potentially being off and I have a food scale but packaged foods are allowed to be off by 20% that is alot for me! If my HRM was off and my package foods were actually 20% high then the label and a couple grabs of snacks here and their can add up to easily 500 calories and then I will be at maintenance weight, eheheh. I have started to figure this out and I am weighing the packages foods too as best as I can. Like today it said 2 pieces of bacon (15g) 80 calories. Well 1 piece was around 18g!!! it was almost 60% off at that point! IKK! You try your best to do everything you can right but sometimes what works for you doesn't for someone else!!!
Good luck on your journey!! 0 -
I don't eat them back.
Then again, I've set up MFP so, based on food and no exercise I should just maintain (TDEE + 10% - if I'm not actually exercising I'm VERY sedentary, as I work on a computer at home. Some days, I don't even leave the house!). For me this means about 2100 cals a day.
I try to eat to this, as a minimum, regardless of exercise. However, when I do exercise I can burn anywhere from 600 - 1500 calories a day (I do a lot of long distance cycling). I generally eat more on these days (maybe 2500) but only if I'm feeling hungry or drained - I certainly don't consciously try and eat it back.
As far as I'm concerned, as long as I'm getting 1g of protein per lb of bodyweight and I'm eating the minimum of 2100 calories, then it doesn't matter if I "should" be eating 3500 cals that day because of exercise. Let that deficit come from fat - that's why I'm exercising after all! Works for me, anyway.0 -
People that are trying to lose weight unsuccessfully are probably not logging their calories correctly, both on their food and on their burns. And they probably don't know their TDEE. :ohwell:0
-
Welcome to the evil eating 1200 calorie a day and not (gasp) eating exercise calories back club :-)
:raised hand: me too me too :raised hand:0 -
I agree with you on the 1,200 calories.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions