Do I or don't I eat back exercise calories?

WendyTerry420

Someone on the thread pointed out that people should not try to lose weight. This is true. The scale number is IRRELEVANT! In fact, people pick a random number say 125 as their goal. That is the WRONG goal. Your goal should be to GET RID OF THE FAT. It should be everyone's goal. Your BF% will tell you if you are getting leaner or fatter.

THIS!

Amen! Preach it! It's the excess FAT that is the problem, not the total body weight!

chrishgt4

Someone on the thread pointed out that people should not try to lose weight. This is true. The scale number is IRRELEVANT! In fact, people pick a random number say 125 as their goal. That is the WRONG goal. Your goal should be to GET RID OF THE FAT. It should be everyone's goal. Your BF% will tell you if you are getting leaner or fatter.

THIS!

Amen! Preach it! It's the excess FAT that is the problem, not the total body weight!

I presume it was my comment being referred to, and I wish more people would realise this. It's fine to set a number as a bit of an aim and just keep adjusting on the way but no one can really know what target to aim for without years of experience and even then, it's just estimation.

The key is muscle growth/retention and fat reduction. The numbers are largely irrelevant. What matters is the mirror (internal health benefits aside of course).

moosegt35

I was told no don't eat the extra calories because it defeats the purpose of the diet and exercising..Just saying..

That isn't even close to being true though. If your "diet" is aimed at losing weight then you are already running a calorie deficit and burning extra calories doing exercise runs this deficit even lower. If you eat some of those back you still have your original deficit.

Say your "diet" plan is to eat 10 cals per day and that is already low enough to lose 2 pounds per week. If you burn 3 calories doing exercise then you are now at only 7. If you eat back those 3 you are still only back to netting 10 and right on track to lose weight. I know those numbers aren't anywhere close to realistic I just used them to make the math simple.

jaxipants

I dont eat them back as I find the mfp calculations to be abit generous with how many cals youve burnt, I go to a gym where each machine tells you how much youve burnt on each 10 mins on a rowing maching is 100 cals at the rate I go but mfp says its 300!! its a little misleading. even swimming, I went recently for a leisure swim with my son we were there for 4 hours and mfp said I have gained over 1000 cals that cant be right.

psuLemon

I wouldn't. You'll lose weight faster if you don't. In my opinion, it's like rewarding exercise with more food.

Since you are new, I would suggest browsing this forum to see how many people only eat 1200 calories or less than their BMR and later post threads about plateaus or am I eating enough. There are hormonal responses, such as cortisol that will preserve body fat if you do not supply it enough calories from food over time.

Also, look at the fit people on this board, both women and men, that have low body fat and are highly defined. I can bet they all eat 20% below their TDEE. Now, I understand a lot of people will say, I am losing weight so obviously it's working. But what they aren't realizing, not all weight loss is created the same. Fat loss > muscle loss. Not is it not uncommon to lose lean body mass during weight loss, even if you eat enough protein and resistance train, but minimizing it is critical. LBM is what fills out your skin and gives you the defined look. The more lean body mass you have, the better your immune system, the better insulin control you have (this is why there are very skinny people with type II diabetes), the more cushion your joints have, the more stability your body has, and so much more.

Honestly, i don't care what people do, in the end, I still help them when they are plateau'd or not losing because they aren't fueling your body, but I can tell you I have worked with several women to get back on track from years of low calorie diets and it can take up to a year to stabilize your metabolism and get your body losing fat again. But just for fun, below are two examples of what happens when you fuel your body and add lean body mass.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/392784-skinny-fat-vs-fit-photo?hl=skinny+fat


http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/07/21/meet-staci-your-new-powerlifting-super-hero/

BeSophisticate

Seriously, the whole reason I exercise is so that I can eat more! My daily net is only 1300 calories. Some days, at 1300 calories, I'm so hungry by the end of the day that I'm getting nausea and acid reflux.

As an added bonus, the exercise makes me feel even more motivated. So, for me, the exercise is necessary because I need to be able to eat more. I will admit, though, that I do have days I don't feel much like eating the extra, so I don't.

psuLemon

As long as you eat 1200 at least (as a woman) you don't have to eat them back unless you are exercising heavy.

Exercise burns calories. You should net 1200 calories. More importantly, you should net your basal metabolic rate or your metabolism will adapt and slow down!

psuLemon

I've been on MFP for a couple of weeks now and have never eaten them back. Must admit, though, I am a bit worried about it. I am losing just under 2 lbs a week. Is there anyone else who has never - or seldom - eaten them back? Are you still alive?

plenty of people dont but you will increase muscle loss doing it this way and slow down your metabolism as your body will catabolize your lbm.

I dont think this is necessarily true. If you incorporate some resistance training into your fitness routine your muscles wont just poof dissapear or start to shrink. Just look at all the different type of intermittent fasters out there who routinely eat below their maintenance levels and still have great success.

If you want to save muscle incorporate resistance training...either with weights or some sort of body weight exercise. Start out slow and shoot for more weight, reps, or whatever each week.

Protein and resistance training can help preserve it, but even with it, if your caloric deficit is too large, your body will have to acquire energy from somewhere.. this is why it will catabolize lean body mass.


Case in point..

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/765169-1400-cal-diet-i-m-a-boy-and-other-questions?page=3

It's amazing after I showed him a 7 lb loss of lean body mass in 12 weeks on a lcd, he then tried to change his body fat numbers.

moosegt35

I dont eat them back as I find the mfp calculations to be abit generous with how many cals youve burnt, I go to a gym where each machine tells you how much youve burnt on each 10 mins on a rowing maching is 100 cals at the rate I go but mfp says its 300!! its a little misleading. even swimming, I went recently for a leisure swim with my son we were there for 4 hours and mfp said I have gained over 1000 cals that cant be right.

The machines aren't right either. If me and you sat side by side on the same machine and went the exact same speed for the exact same amount of time down to the second our cals burned would be quite different. Swimming for 4 hours, I wouldn't be surprised if you did burn that many cals unless you just mean floating and not actually swimming. No general calculations are going to be correct because it depends on the person.

BeSophisticate

I dont eat them back as I find the mfp calculations to be abit generous with how many cals youve burnt, I go to a gym where each machine tells you how much youve burnt on each 10 mins on a rowing maching is 100 cals at the rate I go but mfp says its 300!! its a little misleading. even swimming, I went recently for a leisure swim with my son we were there for 4 hours and mfp said I have gained over 1000 cals that cant be right.

This is true. MFP calculations for burn are way off. I always use a heart rate monitor and go by those numbers. I simply create my own exercises in MFP and log them with the calories from my HRM.

lallaloolly

-sobs- I am starting to feel stupid now it is just going over my head.

don't feel stupid. it is confusing and not all of these explanations are clear or consistent.

When you're trying to lose weight and you use MFP as your guide, MFP gives you a daily minimum calorie goal. this minimum is without ANY exercise built in. for example, a lot of people get set at 1,200 calories. this is the amount of calories your body needs to function properly if you don't do any exercise at all.

so what happens when you exercise? your body uses up more than 1,200 calories to function that day! if you burn 200 calories doing exercise, you add those calories to your daily minimum. 1200+200 = 1400 to eat that day. If you burn 150 calories doing exercise, you add that to your daily minimum. 1200+150=1350 to eat that day. if you burn 800 calories doing exercise, then you add that to your daily minimum. 1200=800=2000 to eat that day.

some people choose to only eat back a percentage of their exercise calories. i would start out eating all of them, and if after a couple weeks you aren't seeing any results, adjust. just remember, the scale isn't the best indicator of your fitness level. you can add muscle and lose fat and inches without losing any pounds, but you are still getting fitter and healthier. try not to rely on the scale for your positive reinforcement.

a HRM is a heart rate monitor. you wear it around your chest and it transmits your heart rate to a watch on your wrist, and tells you how many calories you actually burn during exercise. it is going to be far more accurate than anything you find in this database because it is based on your heart rate and no one elses. you can get them at most sporting goods stores or target or walmart, etc. i started using one a couple of weeks ago, and i am much more confident about tracking my calories now.

Melaniec78

EVerybody needs to do what works for them. When I hit a funk I will look at making changes. Plateaus happen regardless and they mean you have to change things up. My doctor recommended this, it has worked for me, is safe and I feel great. I am still eating enough to be healthy at 1200 whether I exercise or not.

Melaniec78

As long as you eat 1200 at least (as a woman) you don't have to eat them back unless you are exercising heavy.

Exercise burns calories. You should net 1200 calories. More importantly, you should net your basal metabolic rate or your metabolism will adapt and slow down!

sorry I was responding to this.

slimtrimgoody

Try not to eat them back. You will lose weight quicker that way. Good-luck!!

Melaniec78

As long as you eat 1200 at least (as a woman) you don't have to eat them back unless you are exercising heavy.

Exercise burns calories. You should net 1200 calories. More importantly, you should net your basal metabolic rate or your metabolism will adapt and slow down!

sorry I was responding to this.

Oh and I also don't consider anyone on here to be experts least of all me and none of the rest of you should either (IVE READ SOME CRAZY STUFF ON HERE) . We give advice and opinions based on our own thoughts and assumptions and people should read this advice subjectively and use common sense. :happy:

Cgrnlaw

Ive been told to eat have back also.

psuLemon

As long as you eat 1200 at least (as a woman) you don't have to eat them back unless you are exercising heavy.

Exercise burns calories. You should net 1200 calories. More importantly, you should net your basal metabolic rate or your metabolism will adapt and slow down!

sorry I was responding to this.

Oh and I also don't consider anyone on here to be experts least of all me and none of the rest of you should either (IVE READ SOME CRAZY STUFF ON HERE) . We give advice and opinions based on our own thoughts and assumptions and people should read this advice subjectively and use common sense. :happy:

Most doctors are not experts either and have very little background in nutrition. So unless your Dr. decided to do metabolic testing or at least ran your body fat and weight, understood your daily and workout requirements, then his recommendation is just as much in the dark as many of us. Now if you went to the dietitian or nutritionist or a Dr. that specializes in nutrition, I would agree with you. But I am friends with too many Dr's that know nothing about nutrition expect the basic recommendations like yours provided.

Not trying to be rude, but making a point.

MissTattoo

lol As Bill Clinton would say, it's arithmetic!


Example: MFP has me set to eat 2200. That's about 500-600 calories less than my TDEE on days I do not workout.
MFP gives you a deficit ASSUMING you are NOT going to work out. (You don't need exercise to lose weight. Just a deficit from your TDEE)

When I work out, I burn 500-1000 more calories. If I just ate 2200 that puts my deficit at 1000-2000 less than TDEE. If I ate back my exercise calories, it still puts me at a deficit from my TDEE when I work out. Make sense?

now into numbers. Here is me.

Non workout days. TDEE 2700/2800....MFP has me eat 2200. That's more than 500 deficit from 2700/2800.
On workout days my TDEE is 3100...I can eat 2600 calories and still have a 500 calorie deficit from my TDEE.


Does that make sense? FUEL your body! Another example.

I'm 5'11, 300 pounds. 1200 calories is not going to cut it.

You can put $10 of gas in a Geo Metro and go further than putting the same $10 in a Hummer.

You have to fuel your body.

geekyjock76

I'm going to be quite simple with this one as it depends on two main components.

1) What your actual, present TDEE needs are vs your natural TDEE.
2) The state of your endocrine system in relation to your metabolic function.

Your natural TDEE is the amount of energy you need assuming you are truly eating enough to maintain body weight given your current level of activity. Your actual, present TDEE is the amount of energy you need based on alterations of the endocrine system - ie reduced RMR, leptin concentration levels, etc.

Your natural TDEE may be 2200 calories, but, because of chronic low energy availability, your present TDEE is reduced to 1400 calories.

This does not mean you should base your TDEE off of 1400, however. You should up calories and decrease additional exercise back to your natural TDEE and maintain until the alterations of the endocrine system have returned to optimal levels.

After this is complete, you then can deduct the appropriate deficit according to how much fat mass you have and how much fat mass per 24 hours you can realistically lose.

If people would actually start their weigh loss journey at their natural TDEE, they'd have far more success and less stress over their progress.

Cyriatan

No - your maintenance caloric amount is calculated including your activity level. Thus, the deficit is calculated also considering it. If you eat them back you're eating more than you should be eating. The MFP calorie calculator seems to not consider exercise in the activity part, anyhow (another reason to not consider it) I won't use it, it undestimates a lot (1200kcal, the recommendation to me, is VERY low; I've seen a lot of people following this. Very, very few people needs to eat 1200kcal/day, it's actually the limit for a women to eat, under that is considered an unhealthy caloric amount). Any other decent calculator (better stick with Mifflin-St Jeor formula, thought to be the most accurate) will include exercise in your maintenance calories thus no, you should not be eating them back.

Btw another reason to not use the MFP calculator is that calculating the calories burned in exercise is very difficult even with heart rate monitors and such (which are very inaccurate) and it has been studied how people tend to overstimate the calories burned (as well as calories consumed) so I would stick to a generic formula and eat the same amount of calories everyday -this will help to create well founded habits, also- and see how it goes. I personally think is more accurate.