I tried eating back my exercise cals and it's bs!

lyttlewon

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.

meerkat70

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.

meeka472

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.

pudadough

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...

rocksyraeis

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 ~<3

MemphisKitten

Yeah, I never lost by eating mine back either. Just maintained.

rocksyraeis

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

MsNewBooty83

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.

kiachu

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!

pudadough

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.

dragonfly_em

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.

NWCountryGal

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.

NWCountryGal

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:

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 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.

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-7-2-12

Graelwyn75

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.

jenihullett

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.

alexis831

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!!

JamesBurkes

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.

WendyTerry420

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:

wisters

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:

Butterfiemorning

I agree with you on the 1,200 calories.