Exercise calories?!

I think, long term, that it's not a great idea. But from day to day you can vary it to meet your mood.

Just my personal opinion, not based on any facts.

I do not eat back my calories, HOWEVER, I have my exercise calories pre-programmed (so to speak) into my daily calorie allowance.

I went to scooby's calculator (google it) and entered in how much exercise I do and it gave me what my TDEE and BMR are. I subtracted 20% from my TDEE and that's the cals I eat.

An exception to this is when I have a long run on the weekend and run for 2+ hours... then I up my cals because you have to feed your body. Not for "starvation" mode, but for it to work.

If you're hungry hungry (not bored hungry, not stressed hungry, not sad hungry) then EAT! It's your body's way of telling you it's, well, hungry ;-)

Your ticker says you only have about 25 lbs to lose. Too big of a calorie deficit isn't very good for you if you don't have a lot to lose. People who have a lot more to lose, and therefore larger fat stores, can usually sustain bigger calorie deficits. MFP gives you a calorie goal based on the information you give it (including activity level), but the goal it gives you is based on the assumption that you will log additional exercise (that isn't accounted for in your activity level) and eat back those calories. Otherwise, MFP would have given you a higher calorie goal.

To avoid having too large a calorie deficit, you should account for your exercise somewhere, whether it's in the activity level you give MFP, or whether you choose to log & eat back exercise calories. Having too large of a calorie deficit could mean that you risk losing more lean mass than you would on a small deficit. That means losing muscle along with fat. People generally do lose some muscle, but you can reduce this risk with a smaller deficit, doing some strength training and getting adequate protein. You might also find that you are more likely to plateau as your metabolism adjusts to a reduced intake. Again, this happens anyway, but drastically reducing your calorie intake makes this problem worse.

It is true that you really have to find what works for you, but do bear in mind that not being hungry doesn't necessarily mean your body doesn't need food. It's actually quite common to have a reduced appetite when you're not eating enough. It's also true what someone said that you don't have to have the same number of calories every 24 hours. It's fine to spread them out over the week if it suits you better to eat more on some days than others.

Ok...I don't have a heart rate monitor to accurately track my calories burned so I have to use what MFP tells me. That being said, I eat back half of them. It has been working for me. Yes, you might need to experiment a little to see what is right for you, but it sounds like if you set your goal at 1,600 and do eat some more on days you exercise you should be fine. And that is my non-medical, educated by MFP message boards, opinion.

If the activity is Yoga, MFP tells me I have burned about 200 cals, but I don't eat those back because I feel energised and I get home toward bedtime anyway, so I have an egg sandwich within my TDEE and a supper light hot chocolate. I don't think Yoga increases my metabokic rate even if it is a challenging class as I come away calm and relaxed although energised.

However, if I have cycled 18 miles round trip to and from work and my muscles are aching and I have been breathing hard for around 80 minutes (40 there, 40 back), then I eat half of those calories back because I know my metabolic rate will be up for a while, because I need to feed and repair those muscles and because I need to build a defense around myself after road cycling which can be quite stressy.

Depends on what I'm doing. Hope this helps.

I like eating mine back. My bonus is getting a burger or whatever on the days I exercise. This whole thing wouldn't be sustainable if I didn't.

OK, that's helped..Thanks guys..I'm going by what the machine tells me..so that's why I don't eat most of them back..because 500 for 45 mins does sound a lot..i walk on the highest possible incline on the treadmill at a moderate speed, and then i sprint for a minute..so it may or may not be true, but I won't know until I get my heart rate monitor in the mail. lol

get a HRM...the machine is usually wrong. you could be burning a lot more or a lot less depending on the stats set up on the machine. a HRM is the best way to go.

500 calorie burn for 45 minutes is pretty high. Are you measuring that or just going by MFP or machines? If you don't have a HRM or some other device to measure your burn, I'd assume it's lower. That said, I agree that you can probably eat around 1600 and still lose, and maybe even eat back some of your exercise calories on days you feel hungry. Try it for a while longer. If you've lost 4 lbs in a month, that's pretty good. Everyone is different, tho, so don't want to do what everyone else is doing. Just keep trying things and see what works for you.

500 calories is not high for a 45 minute workout. It all depends on what you are doing. I can burn 800 - 900 in 45 minutes running at 8-10 MPH for a 5 mile run. Or doing a high impact Insanity workout. This is based on my HRM of course which is consistent with every workout and kicking *kitten* on my workout.