Eating Back Exercise Calories

Yes that is how it works and when i fist started this I didnt put my exercise in and i felt like i was starving for the first few days then my light bulb went off lol so now i dont feel like im starving.. good luck to you all

No worries guys, I`m still kinda confused too. I worked out really hard at the gymtoday and burned over 650 calories Very happy about that, but I cant imagine eating that extra 650 calories today?? Should I be??

I think you should eat it IF you feel hungry (or just a bit less than your 650 if it's very too much). In fact, this exercice ALLOW you more calories. This is the way I see it. If you have like 1200 + 650 calories (so 1850 calories allowed), and it feels to much for you, then I think it's fine as long as you don't go under your 1200 base calories AND you don't feel hungry. I heard once that we should never eat when we are not hungry. But never skip the breakfast EVEN if you're not hungry and eat the minimum you need to be healthy!

Thanks for the feedback, this helps

Okay, so I think the lightbulb FINALLY came on. Shut it off if it's completely out of order.

Say I eat 1200 calories a day. Now, let's say in a day I workout & burn off another 1,000. If I don't eat back those 1,000 calories, does that mean I only ate 200 calories that day?

1200 - 1000 = 200.

If that's true, then I now completely see the entire reason of eating back calories! Any exercise one does, and not eat back, would take a person below the 1200 calorie threshold, thus forcing the body into survival mode.

Am I right?

If you eat 1200 calories for the day, then you ate 1200 calories for the day no matter how much you burned from exercise so when you say does that mean you only ate 200 calories, no....that is not right, you ate 1200 calories and you burned off 1000. I know what you mean or meant but 1200 calories consumed is just that.

I don't think if I ate 1200 calories for the day and burned off lets say 600 calories from workout that I am forcing my body into survival mode, so many people use that term so losely around these boards like it could just happen in a day.

I've noticed that the only way for me to lose weight is NOT to eat back my exercise calories. Eating back your exercise calories works for some people and for some people it does not. I think its all related to your metabolism but I've eaten 1200 calories and burned 500 at the gym and do not eat it back and do not notice a slow down in my metabolism whatsoever.

Remember that MFP already sets you up for a caloric deficit before you ever exercise so that is why they suggest you eat some of your exercise cals back because it's just adding to the deficit.

While by the "letter of the law" with exercise calories, Dr. isn't really only eating 200 calories, she is increasing how many calories she burned that day so in essence that becomes the total.

Look at it in terms of calorie deficit as opposed to calories burned. It's much easier to handle.

so if MFP gives you a 500 calorie per day deficit. Your goal is to stay at that 500 calorie per day deficit. If you exercise for 600 calories, your deficit is now 1100 calories, in order to get back to that 500 calories you have to eat an extra 600.

I know I know, some are saying "But why? The bigger my deficit, the more I lose."

Nope, that's not how the game is played.

without getting technical about it, here's what happens. The body KNOWS how much energy it needs, you can trick it a little, creating a modest deficit, but create too big of a deficit and the body panics, when it does this is basically hits the emergency alarm, red lights start flashing in the body, and the body begins the process of reducing how many calories you need to live your day to day life. How? Well, first thing it does is say, well if we don't have enough calories, all this expensive muscle around here needs to go, so it starts canabalizing muscle. Next it says wow, all this bone density was needed because I had lots of muscle supporting it, so it starts decreasing bone density, then it says, well with less calories, I really don't need to use my (for instance) liver at 100%, so lets shut down some of that...and so on and so forth. Finally the body thinks, wait, if this gets any worse I could be in real trouble here, so it grabs any available energy and stores it as fat, at a higher level than normal. So now not only are you slowing down your daily calories, you are adding extra body fat and reducing muscle size.

This is why so many of us preach moderate goals, and eating exercise calories. Will you still lose weight? Probably, but not as fast as one would think, and far less of it will be fat than would normally be the case. Starvation can become a medical issue quite quickly (in a few weeks even). Moderate starvation probably won't affect you, and you may not even notice the effects, but it will surely affect your weight loss, it's sneaky, it's why so many people have a problem losing weight once they get down from obese into the overweight category.

Boss.....you have much more patience than I would for explaining things. If I had a dollar for ever time you had to write all that down I'd be rich!!! :bigsmile:

I totally get what you are saying, I do. What I was saying is that a lot of people I've seen post on these boards will freak out if they don't eat their exercise calories in that one day and assume they will immediately go into starvation mode. I understand that if you consistently practice this then it will have negative effects on your body long term - I just don't think that if I didn't eat all my calories in one night that I will immediately go into starvation mode. I don't believe that.

... and you shouldn't.
And, if I may, that's not what SHBoss is saying.
Nutrition, body chemistry, etc are all extremely complex subjects. A lot of the information about it has been dumbed down here for the laymen MFP users (edit to add -- that includes me! :embarassed: ). Unfortunately, a lot of folks take the watered down versions and run with them which leads to the propagation of a lot of information that isn't exactly accurate. If you hang around here long enough you'll know which posters are posting valuable information and which posters aren't.

Talking about that..wouldn't it be nice to have the profession or formation of the person who's answering? So we will KNOW who to believe!!!:happy:

I don't think it would help. In fact, I think it would make it even more dangerous. A degree/job does not an intelligent/informed person make (necessarily).

Finally the body thinks, wait, if this gets any worse I could be in real trouble here, so it grabs any available energy and stores it as fat, at a higher level than normal. So now not only are you slowing down your daily calories, you are adding extra body fat and reducing muscle size.

First - FMPer of the year to Banks for being our Exercise Cals Go-to so well and patiently! I also wanted to elaborate on this point - You may say "I'm not burning less calories. My metabolism has not changed. I'm not storing any extra fat - i'm not gaining weight! So this cannot be true." BUT, this "save up all the fat" won't really kick in until you are eating again. So, if you are still on your "starvation mode" diet of 200 - 600 (or even negative!) net calories a day, your body may not be able to store up any weight at this time because it is truly trying to survive - but if you hit your goal weight and start eating more, or just up your cals in general - that is when you will see some pretty drastic weight gain. It's part of why people gain back their weight after dieting.

First - FMPer of the year to Banks for being our Exercise Cals Go-to so well and patiently! I also wanted to elaborate on this point - You may say "I'm not burning less calories. My metabolism has not changed. I'm not storing any extra fat - i'm not gaining weight! So this cannot be true." BUT, this "save up all the fat" won't really kick in until you are eating again. So, if you are still on your "starvation mode" diet of 200 - 600 (or even negative!) net calories a day, your body may not be able to store up any weight at this time because it is truly trying to survive - but if you hit your goal weight and start eating more, or just up your cals in general - that is when you will see some pretty drastic weight gain. It's part of why people gain back their weight after dieting.

Why thank you!

I would like to interject my thoughts on the point of when and how your body stores fat though. While I agree, moving from starvation to a more healthy diet too quickly will absolutely kick off fat storage for a while, until the body adjusts to it, that doesn't mean your body won't store fat even in starvation. It will, remember, the body can only process a fixed number of calories at any one time, and in starvation that fixed number lowers, so if you eat a meal that's say (for example) 100 calories more than your body can use, that 100 calories would be stored as fat. Now make no mistake, I am dumbing down the concept really severely to make it easy to understand, but essentially that's what happens.

In reality there's no such thing as 100% for your body, I.E. you don't go from "normal" calorie burn to "starvation mode" like crossing a line, it's a gradual move, just as your body doesn't go from normal fat storage to hoarding, it just takes what it doesn't need and stores it, it's just that when you are in what we commonly believe is a state of starvation, the amount of food your body needs at any one time is smaller, so the amount of energy converted to fat becomes greater, even though the total volume of food is the same as it was before.

These facts are why I always say to slowly move either up or down with calories. I.E. in 50 or 100 calorie increments with about a week after each move to allow your body to adjust.

Put it this way, if you instantly lower your calorie amount by 500 or 600, after 2 or 3 days your body's gonna panic for a little while (unless you have really high body fat %, in which case the game completely changes), and you may end up not losing weight for a couple of weeks until your body gets used to the new calorie amount. This is especially true for those who choose to ONLY do diet changes and no new exercise, why? Because exercise forces the body to release more fat burning hormones, which will minimize fat storage as it keeps the metabolism artificially high.

I know it's a lot, and really it takes a while to get a good grasp, but keep reading stuff guys, if it sounds counter-intuitive, then it probably is, or you probably don't have the whole picture. Question everything, keep learning, knowledge is the BEST way to win this fight!

I've noticed that the only way for me to lose weight is NOT to eat back my exercise calories. Eating back your exercise calories works for some people and for some people it does not. I think its all related to your metabolism but I've eaten 1200 calories and burned 500 at the gym and do not eat it back and do not notice a slow down in my metabolism whatsoever.

I'm the same way. For a few months, I tried eating back my exercise calories, and I plateaued for those months. I quit eating back the calories and I started losing again.

Every body is different. What works for some may not work for others. You just have to go through a trial and error process and find what works for you.

I totally get what you are saying, I do. What I was saying is that a lot of people I've seen post on these boards will freak out if they don't eat their exercise calories in that one day and assume they will immediately go into starvation mode. I understand that if you consistently practice this then it will have negative effects on your body long term - I just don't think that if I didn't eat all my calories in one night that I will immediately go into starvation mode. I don't believe that.

... and you shouldn't.
And, if I may, that's not what SHBoss is saying.
Nutrition, body chemistry, etc are all extremely complex subjects. A lot of the information about it has been dumbed down here for the laymen MFP users (edit to add -- that includes me! :embarassed: ). Unfortunately, a lot of folks take the watered down versions and run with them which leads to the propagation of a lot of information that isn't exactly accurate. If you hang around here long enough you'll know which posters are posting valuable information and which posters aren't.

Totally off topic. You go girl! Look at those pants!!

actually i completley argree with her. I asked some people why i wasent losing weight and they told me to up my calories. I did that and i gained two pounds. So i went back to eating my 1200 cals. and i lost 3 pounds because of going back to the 1200 calories. read a biggest loser book they will say take your body weight times 7 and that is what you should be eating. It says nothing about calories. and the book has the influence from doctors and exercise experts.

In 90% of the cases I can explain EXACTLY why that happened to you. It has to do with my reply a little ways up, and how people change their calories too fast, but it's exhausting explaining this stuff.


I'll say this, not specifically to you Lara, but to anyone who's had this type of issue, and I've seen it quite a bit on here in the past.

It takes the body time to adjust to a new calorie deficit, and by that I mean it can take a month or more for your body to adjust to a 300 calorie drop, So yeah, if you change your calories upward, many times you will see an initial weight gain if you do it all at once. I'd bet anything that if you did 50 calories a week for 6 weeks you wouldn't see that rise, because you're giving your body time to adapt to the new calories.

Also, remember this, if you WERE in starvation, you probably wouldn't know it, but your body does, so when you up your calories, your body's going to immediately hoard them, making you gain, or it could just be fluid weight from the change in calories.

this is why I don't like using weight as a weight loss measure, it's just so arbitrary.