Can't get my head around eating what I earn in exercise!

beckssmith70

I must admit I have a slight problem getting my head around this.

10 years ago I did Body4Life I went from 73kg to 56kg and gained 3kg of lean mass, I had a nutritionist and trainer, the nutritionist had me eating 1400 per day and 45 mins cardio & roughly an hours weights 6 x a week, now the results show that this works.

What I cannot get my head round is with this dieting I am expected to eat what calories I burn whereas above I didn' yet still saw results, and very good ones, while I appreciate that rapid weight loss is not the 'best way' regarding maintaining I just cannot see how eating more will get results.

Anyone any thoughts on this?

wattsj56

i'm the same exact way. i don't eat back my calories either. it makes me feel like exercising was pointless lol!

chanixxx

I am in your boat. I just keep my total intake under 1400 and the exercise is gravy. It confuses me alot tho

SMJ1987

The calorie recommendation that MFP gives is based on a sedentary lifestyle, meaning thats the amount of calories you should eat to lose the weight if you are sitting around doing nothing all day. If you exercise, your net calorie intake goes below that amount and even though you will probably still lose weight doing that (maybe even faster), it will not be as sustainable in the long term as I think you probably experienced with Body4life.

A lot of people say that you could go into starvation mode too if you don't net at least 1200 calories, which you might not if you don't eat back exercise. I'm not sure if this is true or not but its another reason to not eat too little for your level of activity.

ChantalFiset

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

jacksonpt

Read this... it's all explained here.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/383956-exercise-calories-explained?hl=exercise+calories+explained

jacksonpt

The calorie recommendation that MFP gives is based on a sedentary lifestyle, meaning thats the amount of calories you should eat to lose the weight if you are sitting around doing nothing all day.

Unless they've changed it recently, no it's not. You get to chose your activity level.

ThePTrain

Honestly I never heard of it either. I just try to keep it to the suggested initial calorie total and ignore the earned ones.

helehcim

I can see both sides of this...but for me personally if I don't net at least 1200 calories a day I feel horrible. Headaches, exhaustion, and eventually I just feel like I'm getting sick all the time. I've tried this twice, each time after about a week of not netting what my body needs I decided it wasn't for me. But that's ME. So, if I burn a ton of calories I will "eat back" until I have net 1200-1500 calories in a day. Sometimes that's eating all those burned calories up, and sometimes it's not depending on my day. After reading lots of messages on this topic I have come to realize some people can get by burning darn near everything they eat in a day. More power to them and I will admit to being a little jealous

So...whatever works for you go for it as long as you feel good and you're healthy!

**edited for really bad spelling**

jacksonpt

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

With all due respect, most of us aren't working with your nutritionist, or have the same goals/restrictions you have. So your advice doesn't apply.

professorRAT

In one sense, it is weight loss vs. fat loss. You may start to lose muscle if you do not eat enough calories (or create too large of a calorie deficit). You will lose weight, but some of it will be muscle and that is not desirable for both health and metabolism reasons. It will, then, be harder to maintain your desired weight if you have decreased your muscle mass, which you need to help burn more calories.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/392158-fat-loss-vs-weight-loss/

biggergirlsrun2

I usually eat back a portion of my burned calories- maybe 20-30% throughout the day and mostly in low-carb, protein, and fiber. The reason being that it does help keep your metabolism going, keeps your insulin levels in check (super important!), and it also helps you rebuild muscle tissue as opposed to losing it (this happens when glycogen levels get too low).

frando

The thing is everyone is different.

When you entered your information and chose your life style and how often you work out etc. the MFP machine worked out how many calories you need and still factor in a deficit. So even without working out you're loosing weight.

Cardio increases this deficit- which is yay if say you want to treat yourself- it is advisable to eat as close to your target as possible, to make sure you take in at least the base level of energy. Really once you've covered that, in my opinion, it's up to you whether you eat it all back. I rarely eat it all back, but if I'm hungry I'll eat it and if I'm not I won't.

DebbieLyn63

I hear ya. With the whole 'calories in, calories out' theory, if you eat all the exercise calories back, it does seem to be counter-productive. Now grant it, your metabolism gets a boost for awhile after a hard aerobic effort, it still nets out to a lot of work done for nothing. I don't eat back my calories. I shoot for 1200 a day with 30 minutes of exercise. The exercise takes care of any mistakes in counting calories, or an occasional day going over. For some people it works eating back the exercise calories, but for me, at 49 and not doing heavy weight work outs, I have to stay at 1200-1400. Whatever works for you, do that.

gopgirl425

I don't eat back my exercise calories. I eat 1200-1400 per day and 60 minutes of cardio 6 days a week. I have a lot to lose and this is working great for me. It has been 10 weeks and I have lost 30 pounds. I do what works for me and I am not hungry at all. I am enjoying the ride~!

professorRAT

I should add that doing strength training can help maintain muscle while losing fat. This will help with maintenance later (as well as give you many other health benefits).

SMJ1987

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

With all due respect, most of us aren't working with your nutritionist, or have the same goals/restrictions you have. So your advice doesn't apply.

Yikes...a little moody? That's why she said it was HER opinion and its working for HER. I don't know what makes your advice more applicable than hers.

jacksonpt

Do people realize that there actually is science and reason behind all this?

SMJ1987

The calorie recommendation that MFP gives is based on a sedentary lifestyle, meaning thats the amount of calories you should eat to lose the weight if you are sitting around doing nothing all day.

Unless they've changed it recently, no it's not. You get to chose your activity level.

Pardon me. I guess what I meant was your "normal" lifestyle, not including exercise. Any exercise above what you do on a normal basis would decrease your net.

KIMBAILEYWILLIAMSON

I must admit I have a slight problem getting my head around this.



^^I have the same slight problem. I am losing weight slower now because (I think it is the reason why) I am getting closer to my goal but when I do eat some of my exercise calories back that is when I see the scales move (in the right direction). It blows my mind but for me it has happened. I don't do this all the time because I just don't understand it but it has happened to help me at times to eat those calories back and get the scale moving again. Good Luck!

GauchoMark

If your goal is to lose weight, then starving yourself is one way to do it.

If your goal is to lose fat, retaining most of your current muscle mass, and keep it off, then eat back the calories.

Eating back exercise calories is an ongoing debate on MFP, but people don't get that if your body needs energy, it is going to either get it from food, fat, or muscle. Personally, I want it to get the energy from fat and food and leave my LBM alone - just me.

To the OP, I mean no disrespect by this, but keeping the weight off is a huge goal of mine. It has been proven time and time again, that slow, methodical weight loss is more likely to stay off. Obviously, what you lost before under your PT's advice didn't stay off. Why would you want to do the same thing again, to see good results, then lose them because you didn't change your habits?

jacksonpt

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

With all due respect, most of us aren't working with your nutritionist, or have the same goals/restrictions you have. So your advice doesn't apply.

Yikes...a little moody? That's why she said it was HER opinion and its working for HER. I don't know what makes your advice more applicable than hers.

First, her advice is a "it works for me" rationale, which by it's sheer nature should be taken with a grain of salt. Second, her experience is based on a nutritionist who, presumably, has put together a strategy based on her situation (goals, limitations, etc etc). Those of us who have different goals or different limitations would probably not be best served by following her plan. Last, there is no reasoning, explanation, or context given to substantiate why others should do what she's advising.

I'm not saying she shouldn't do it. I'm just saying that other people shouldn't try it just because it's working for her with no other context.

I assume you're one of those people who feel this site is for support and encouragement. I believe that this is a place for discussion and learning. I'd rather hurt a few feelings but help a few people understand something than be all fluffy and flowery while people are still misinformed.

beckssmith70

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

With all due respect, most of us aren't working with your nutritionist, or have the same goals/restrictions you have. So your advice doesn't apply.

Well it does apply really, she is basically saying what I said with my nutritionist and proof that it is working - for her ) I am all power to what works x

beckssmith70

I should add that doing strength training can help maintain muscle while losing fat. This will help with maintenance later (as well as give you many other health benefits).

I absolutely believe this to be true, the more lean mass you have the better to burn fat

kanata

Simple.
Most people on here (like myself) are doing the lose 1lb a week option (others go for more which isn't good for you), and thus to do that you have to eat you MINIMUM BASIC METABOLIC RATE. aka minimum BMR.
So basically that's usually around 1200 for most people it seems.

Let's say you ate 1200 calories, and you lost 200 calories exercising - well that'd be down to 1000 calories which is below your bodies BMR.

BMR is the amount of calories your body needs to sustain organs, tissue, cells, everything. So if you eat less than that the likelyhood is that you will lose muscle in the process.

When it comes to discussing the 'starvation mode', i'm not talking about that as that's a completely different world (though easily linked).

If you eat 1200 and eat back those 200 to meet at 1400 which makes your net 1200 your body will still function fine but the benefit of exercise is there as your bodies ability to burn the calories the next day are increased (studies show that calories burned one day are still burning and burning more the next day). This may be partially why yo-yo eating (day to day) is also proven to be an effective method of weight loss.

If like most people you exercise, then have a break/rest day or exercise another part of your body, your body is only becoming more effective with exercise and your body isn't just losing the calories it is using them more effectively in trying to keep your heart pumping moving and flowing, absorbing shock as well as muscle repair.

Maintenance level eating is there to maintain your weight and thus you can get away with eating much more than 1200 without losing weight but staying the same right?bThat's why you need to eat the calories that you've exercised back, otherwise your body may use the muscles or tissues to look for what it's missing out on if it's done during a long period of time.

So eating less than maintanence is already what you're doing you don't want to eat below the minimum!

Banzaix

Only eat the calories back if you are trying to maintain or gain weight, but if your trying to shed pounds never eat them back, thats the most simple way to look at it, then you can get in more detail with amount of fats and carbs, Calories can be deceiving, so i would read up on what good calories and bad calories are and go from there.

jacksonpt

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

With all due respect, most of us aren't working with your nutritionist, or have the same goals/restrictions you have. So your advice doesn't apply.

Well it does apply really, she is basically saying what I said with my nutritionist and proof that it is working - for her ) I am all power to what works x

OK. I eat 1000 cals today (completely doable for me). I burn 1200 riding my bike (also very doable for me). You saying that's good?

SMJ1987

Here's my humble opinion on this (shared by my nutritionist): the calories you gain by exercizing and that you don't eat back are weight you're gonna lose, so I NEVER eat them back, I stick to my 1,400 calorie plan. I'm not judging anyone who does, but it sure works for me as I have lost 12 pounds in 3 weeks

With all due respect, most of us aren't working with your nutritionist, or have the same goals/restrictions you have. So your advice doesn't apply.

Yikes...a little moody? That's why she said it was HER opinion and its working for HER. I don't know what makes your advice more applicable than hers.

First, her advice is a "it works for me" rationale, which by it's sheer nature should be taken with a grain of salt. Second, her experience is based on a nutritionist who, presumably, has put together a strategy based on her situation (goals, limitations, etc etc). Those of us who have different goals or different limitations would probably not be best served by following her plan. Last, there is no reasoning, explanation, or context given to substantiate why others should do what she's advising.

I'm not saying she shouldn't do it. I'm just saying that other people shouldn't try it just because it's working for her with no other context.

I assume you're one of those people who feel this site is for support and encouragement. I believe that this is a place for discussion and learning. I'd rather hurt a few feelings but help a few people understand something than be all fluffy and flowery while people are still misinformed.

Nope. I just see a distinction between being helpfully blunt and being rude. That's all. That being said I agree with what you said in your supplementary post on this topic. You seem well informed.

beckssmith70

If your goal is to lose weight, then starving yourself is one way to do it.

If your goal is to lose fat, retaining most of your current muscle mass, and keep it off, then eat back the calories.

Eating back exercise calories is an ongoing debate on MFP, but people don't get that if your body needs energy, it is going to either get it from food, fat, or protein. Personally, I want it to get the energy from fat and food and leave my LBM alone - just me.

To the OP, I mean no disrespect by this, but keeping the weight off is a huge goal of mine. It has been proven time and time again, that slow, methodical weight loss is more likely to stay off. Obviously, what you lost before under your PT's advice didn't stay off. Why would you want to do the same thing again, to see good results, then lose them because you didn't change your habits?

No you are right I did maintain for several years but it was due to a back problem that left me bed ridden and a caring partner that bought me 'sweet treats' to cheer me up that made me put it back on again.I do absolutely know that is for rapid results not a lifestyle

lewcompton

Eating back your lost calories is pure stupidity! Eat sufficient calories for your brain. The rest of the body can run on stored energy in the lipids that you want to lose, your brain needs glucose. That is why you should eat at least 1200 calories per day and spread it out to six or more mini meals throughout the day to stave off hunger and keep the blood sugar at homeostatic levels. Failure to do that will result in memory issues, illness, fatigue and possibly even death if you do it for too long... As long as the 1200 calories are being consumed, preference to complex carbohydrates, lean proteins and Omega-3, your body should do fine with working out and losing weight. If you experience negative side-affects then by all means increase the caloric intake slightly, but eating back the calories is a great way to stall the weight-loss and gain back weight. Why do you think the Biggest Loser competitors and others are losing so much weight so quickly... I've dropped 65 in 70 days and that was with a binge weekend in between... I will not eat back calories and in fact I usually eat far less than the suggested calories and simply try to stay over 1200...

LadyIntrepid

To each his/her own, but for me, I started losing weight more quickly once I ate all of my exercise calories back and adjusted my net calories up to 1300-1400 from 1200. I also started feeling better, much less fatigued (the fatigue kicked in after two months of netting 1200 or under and working out hard), and frankly, look pretty awesome. I've been in maintenance for several weeks, still working out, eating without logging, and haven't gained any weight back. Again, to each his own, but I think pulling so far back on calories during the intensive weight loss period may make it harder to eat more normally without gaining weight back when you go into maintenance. I don't feel like there's been all that much of a change in my eating habits since going into maintenance; I've viewed the whole process as a lifestyle change and not a diet. And perhaps therein lies the difference. But again, to each his/her own. What has worked for me may not work for others.