SAY WHAT!? DO I NEED TO EAT MY EXERCISE CALORIES?

look I have to say dont worry about what someone else says or does. Take it all as information and DO WHAT IS WORKING. If your losing weight and body fat, stick with what you are doing. If you plateau then make changes. I dont eat very many of my calories back from running RIGHT NOW, and stay under 1200 RIGHT NOW, but I am dropping 2 lbs a week and .5% body fat a week...when that stops I will up my calories. Also note you need to know your TDEE, check out fitness frog calculator to run your numbers.

so really, eat them back IF IT MEANS YOUR IN ENOUGH DEFICIT TO LOSE, how do you know? YOU WILL KEEP LOSING. Hope that helps

I've been an ethical vegetarian almost 8 years, the last two I've actually been vegan. It does not help with weight loss per se because you xan still be eating junk food and be veg. That said, a plant based diet can work wonders for health and the planet. There are great recipe sites like peasandthankyou.com if you want to give going meatless a try!

I eat my calories back because when I don't, I don't lose weight.

I used to try and stay below my goal, thinking I would lose weight faster, but I found that because I exercised so hard, I really needed to re-fuel my body to keep the metabolism up. I was at a plateau for two months when trying to stay below my calories.

About two weeks ago, when I started to eat every calorie back (and even go over by 100 cal/day), I started to drop weight again.

Keep in mind, the MFP site already calculates a deficit in the number it gives you to eat toward. Don't stall your metabolism by eating too little.

DO WHAT IS WORKING.

No. Do what WORKED for successful people who have reached and maintained goal for a minimum of a year.

Don't take advice from people who aren't at goal, never have been at goal, and/or yo yo.

Here's why you eat exercise cals:

From one of my old posts from a similar topic:

OK. I'm gonna give this a shot. I am an avid lifelong athlete. I have never been overweight, however, I used to eat too few calories (without knowing it), and a couple years ago, I actually GAINED weight bc of having slowed my metabolism to the point that every little extra treat I ate caused a weight gain, even though overall my calories were too low. THIS DOES HAPPEN.

It is also the reason so many fat people stay fat. They restrict their calories so low, slow their metabolisms, binge (even a little), gain weight, restrict more . . . . and so on and so on. But they are still fat.

It is also the reason most people can't lose that last 10-20 lbs. For real.

1. MFP has a deficit built in. Let's say you're trying to lose 1 lb/ week. That is a 500/day deficit from your BMR (the amount of calories your body needs to complete basic functions.

2. You exercise and burn 500 calories. Now you are at a 1000 deficit. If you eat back those 500 exercise calories, you refuel your body and you still have a 500 deficit for that 1 lb loss. If you DON'T eat back those calories, you have too little fuel. This is bad. This is too much of a deficit for basic functions. If you do this for a long time, you will STOP LOSING WEIGHT. Why? bc your metabolism will slow down -- it's like a brownout--not quite enough electricity to make the whole city (your body) run, so it has to slow down some things. You will probably start being tired a lot, your skin and hair might start to look worse, and you might even gain weight. But you might NOT be hungry -- your body is getting used to fewer calories. That's bad.


That's when you start to gain weight. Let's say you're running along, eating 1200 calories a day, and exercising 400 calories a day, so net is 800. You're losing, you think this is great. You keep doing it, but after a while you stop losing. hmmmmm. One weekend you go out to a special event and have a slice of pizza and a beer. 1 slice of pizza and 1 beer. So you ate maybe 2000 calories that day and exercised off 400, so net 1600. BOOM! You gain 3 lbs! What?!

Next, you freak out and restrict yourself down to 1000 calories a day and work out extra hard, burning 500 calories. Great, netting 500 now. You don't lose any weight, but you sure feel tired. Better get some red bull.

Are you getting the picture?

EDIT: When you work out, you need fuel. Food is fuel. If you don't eat back those exercise calories, you will not only have a big calorie deficit, you will have an ENERGY deficit. Remember, the calorie deficit for weight loss is built in when you use MFP. Exercising basically earns you more calories because you must refuel.
--

There are many people who will tell you not to eat exercise calories. Before you take their advice, you might want to see whether they are at goal, have EVER been at goal, or have ever been able to maintain at goal. If anyone says to you 'THE LAST TIME I LOST WEIGHT", just stop listening right there.

Ask some athletes whether or not they replenish their bodies with food equal to the calories they burn. Ask people who are fit and have achieved and maintained a healthy weight for some years. Don't ask people who count walking across a parking lot as exercise.

Here's an interesting case study about how to stay fat while consuming only 700 calories a day. Take a moment, you'll be glad you did:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

blessings.

DO WHAT IS WORKING.

No. Do what WORKED for successful people who have reached and maintained goal for a minimum of a year.

Don't take advice from people who aren't at goal, never have been at goal, and/or yo yo.

Here's why you eat exercise cals:

From one of my old posts from a similar topic:

OK. I'm gonna give this a shot. I am an avid lifelong athlete. I have never been overweight, however, I used to eat too few calories (without knowing it), and a couple years ago, I actually GAINED weight bc of having slowed my metabolism to the point that every little extra treat I ate caused a weight gain, even though overall my calories were too low. THIS DOES HAPPEN.

It is also the reason so many fat people stay fat. They restrict their calories so low, slow their metabolisms, binge (even a little), gain weight, restrict more . . . . and so on and so on. But they are still fat.

It is also the reason most people can't lose that last 10-20 lbs. For real.

1. MFP has a deficit built in. Let's say you're trying to lose 1 lb/ week. That is a 500/day deficit from your BMR (the amount of calories your body needs to complete basic functions.

2. You exercise and burn 500 calories. Now you are at a 1000 deficit. If you eat back those 500 exercise calories, you refuel your body and you still have a 500 deficit for that 1 lb loss. If you DON'T eat back those calories, you have too little fuel. This is bad. This is too much of a deficit for basic functions. If you do this for a long time, you will STOP LOSING WEIGHT. Why? bc your metabolism will slow down -- it's like a brownout--not quite enough electricity to make the whole city (your body) run, so it has to slow down some things. You will probably start being tired a lot, your skin and hair might start to look worse, and you might even gain weight. But you might NOT be hungry -- your body is getting used to fewer calories. That's bad.


That's when you start to gain weight. Let's say you're running along, eating 1200 calories a day, and exercising 400 calories a day, so net is 800. You're losing, you think this is great. You keep doing it, but after a while you stop losing. hmmmmm. One weekend you go out to a special event and have a slice of pizza and a beer. 1 slice of pizza and 1 beer. So you ate maybe 2000 calories that day and exercised off 400, so net 1600. BOOM! You gain 3 lbs! What?!

Next, you freak out and restrict yourself down to 1000 calories a day and work out extra hard, burning 500 calories. Great, netting 500 now. You don't lose any weight, but you sure feel tired. Better get some red bull.

Are you getting the picture?

EDIT: When you work out, you need fuel. Food is fuel. If you don't eat back those exercise calories, you will not only have a big calorie deficit, you will have an ENERGY deficit. Remember, the calorie deficit for weight loss is built in when you use MFP. Exercising basically earns you more calories because you must refuel.
--

There are many people who will tell you not to eat exercise calories. Before you take their advice, you might want to see whether they are at goal, have EVER been at goal, or have ever been able to maintain at goal. If anyone says to you 'THE LAST TIME I LOST WEIGHT", just stop listening right there.

Ask some athletes whether or not they replenish their bodies with food equal to the calories they burn. Ask people who are fit and have achieved and maintained a healthy weight for some years. Don't ask people who count walking across a parking lot as exercise.

Here's an interesting case study about how to stay fat while consuming only 700 calories a day. Take a moment, you'll be glad you did:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

blessings.

Thank you! This is super helpful.

I would recommend NOT EATING THEM BACK.

Here's why: All of the diet logging places I have seen, have been vastly over-estimating the caloric burns of exercises. If you want to slightly increase your caloric intake to refuel yourself after a long workout, that is one thing. But I DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT think it is a good idea to eat back the whole deficit. I was actually losing, quite easily, about 2 lbs a week...

UNTIL I STARTED EATING BACK CALORIES THAT WERE CALCULATED BY THE WEBSITES. Then my weight loss came to a crawl. It still happened, but it was going intensely slow, and I am very overweight. This week, I switched back to my old model. 1600 calories, and don't eat any extra on account of exercise. PERIOD. What do you know? Three pounds fell off. A little more than I hoped, I don't try to lose too fast, but as I am 240 lbs, three pounds isn't really in dangerous territory for me. But I went from losing about 2 lbs a week, to losing less than a pound a week for a whole MONTH. Then when I go back on doing it my way, it's suddenly 3 lbs lost. And I think this has to do with calorie burns being way, way off on these food logging websites. I was using Calorie Count before, and the same thing was going on. So... it's not just MFP. Just a thought. Eating them back could sabotage you, if you over-estimate the calories burned. And it's way, way easy to do that.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

No offense to this poster, but again, if you want to reach and maintain goal, take your advice from people who HAVE reached and maintained goal.

Great posting, I feel I learned a lot reading the responses. I've lost 41 pounds since July 1st. I attribute it to a number of factors, like being more aware of my actual calorie intake (rather than the guessing I was doing previously) and 4-6 visits per week to the gym, but mostly bicycling 90+ miles a week. Some times I seem to be losing weight quick, then I will stay the same for a while, which waqs frustrating, since it was when I seemed to be eating less. From what I've been reading, it seems like I was under-eating.

DO WHAT IS WORKING.

No. Do what WORKED for successful people who have reached and maintained goal for a minimum of a year.

Don't take advice from people who aren't at goal, never have been at goal, and/or yo yo.

Here's why you eat exercise cals:

From one of my old posts from a similar topic:

OK. I'm gonna give this a shot. I am an avid lifelong athlete. I have never been overweight, however, I used to eat too few calories (without knowing it), and a couple years ago, I actually GAINED weight bc of having slowed my metabolism to the point that every little extra treat I ate caused a weight gain, even though overall my calories were too low. THIS DOES HAPPEN.

It is also the reason so many fat people stay fat. They restrict their calories so low, slow their metabolisms, binge (even a little), gain weight, restrict more . . . . and so on and so on. But they are still fat.

It is also the reason most people can't lose that last 10-20 lbs. For real.

1. MFP has a deficit built in. Let's say you're trying to lose 1 lb/ week. That is a 500/day deficit from your BMR (the amount of calories your body needs to complete basic functions.

2. You exercise and burn 500 calories. Now you are at a 1000 deficit. If you eat back those 500 exercise calories, you refuel your body and you still have a 500 deficit for that 1 lb loss. If you DON'T eat back those calories, you have too little fuel. This is bad. This is too much of a deficit for basic functions. If you do this for a long time, you will STOP LOSING WEIGHT. Why? bc your metabolism will slow down -- it's like a brownout--not quite enough electricity to make the whole city (your body) run, so it has to slow down some things. You will probably start being tired a lot, your skin and hair might start to look worse, and you might even gain weight. But you might NOT be hungry -- your body is getting used to fewer calories. That's bad.


That's when you start to gain weight. Let's say you're running along, eating 1200 calories a day, and exercising 400 calories a day, so net is 800. You're losing, you think this is great. You keep doing it, but after a while you stop losing. hmmmmm. One weekend you go out to a special event and have a slice of pizza and a beer. 1 slice of pizza and 1 beer. So you ate maybe 2000 calories that day and exercised off 400, so net 1600. BOOM! You gain 3 lbs! What?!

Next, you freak out and restrict yourself down to 1000 calories a day and work out extra hard, burning 500 calories. Great, netting 500 now. You don't lose any weight, but you sure feel tired. Better get some red bull.

Are you getting the picture?

EDIT: When you work out, you need fuel. Food is fuel. If you don't eat back those exercise calories, you will not only have a big calorie deficit, you will have an ENERGY deficit. Remember, the calorie deficit for weight loss is built in when you use MFP. Exercising basically earns you more calories because you must refuel.
--

There are many people who will tell you not to eat exercise calories. Before you take their advice, you might want to see whether they are at goal, have EVER been at goal, or have ever been able to maintain at goal. If anyone says to you 'THE LAST TIME I LOST WEIGHT", just stop listening right there.

Ask some athletes whether or not they replenish their bodies with food equal to the calories they burn. Ask people who are fit and have achieved and maintained a healthy weight for some years. Don't ask people who count walking across a parking lot as exercise.

Here's an interesting case study about how to stay fat while consuming only 700 calories a day. Take a moment, you'll be glad you did:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

blessings.

This... There are a lot of people on MFP who simply have no idea what they are doing or what they are talking about but they still try to give advice. Find someone you trust, who has a similar body to that you are after and who has maintained it for a while. You wouldnt take investment advice from a homeless guy, dont take dietary advice from a fat person.

I would recommend NOT EATING THEM BACK.

Here's why: All of the diet logging places I have seen, have been vastly over-estimating the caloric burns of exercises. If you want to slightly increase your caloric intake to refuel yourself after a long workout, that is one thing. But I DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT think it is a good idea to eat back the whole deficit. I was actually losing, quite easily, about 2 lbs a week...

UNTIL I STARTED EATING BACK CALORIES THAT WERE CALCULATED BY THE WEBSITES. Then my weight loss came to a crawl. It still happened, but it was going intensely slow, and I am very overweight. This week, I switched back to my old model. 1600 calories, and don't eat any extra on account of exercise. PERIOD. What do you know? Three pounds fell off. A little more than I hoped, I don't try to lose too fast, but as I am 240 lbs, three pounds isn't really in dangerous territory for me. But I went from losing about 2 lbs a week, to losing less than a pound a week for a whole MONTH. Then when I go back on doing it my way, it's suddenly 3 lbs lost. And I think this has to do with calorie burns being way, way off on these food logging websites. I was using Calorie Count before, and the same thing was going on. So... it's not just MFP. Just a thought. Eating them back could sabotage you, if you over-estimate the calories burned. And it's way, way easy to do that.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

No offense to this poster, but again, if you want to reach and maintain goal, take your advice from people who HAVE reached and maintained goal.

I love it when people say "no offense" and then make an offensive/ irrelevant statement. I don't see how my not being at goal weight is relevant. I can read, and am very intelligent. This is my first time losing, and I plan to make it the only time. I like to read things that don't have a confirmation bias built in... unlike most of the people here who still buy into the starvation myth. Besides, I have successfully lost weight. I am not a yoyo dieter, and I am using conventional methods. I was just pointing out a flaw in these websites that could make "eating back" problematic.

Also, the "study" you cited is ANYTHING BUT a study. It does not give any citation of any source in any way. It's a ****ty repost that pushes the myth of 'starvation mode', which is utter BS. Whereas, starvation mode is just something fad diets want you to believe, so that you will buy into the system of the moment. They will twist this in whatever way they choose. Low carb diets use it to convince you that it's not about calories, but it's about carbs. (Even thought is is always about calories.) Paleo, vegan, and raw diets all do the same thing. Anyway, real, documented, objective studies have shown that these people who say they are not losing weight on low caloric intakes, are under-estimating their intake, or just not reporting it. Even this report says she was binging/ starving. What are the odds that she was vastly under-reporting the number, frequency, and severity of her binges? I would say, UM... 101%. Meaning, not only is it occurring, but it's blatantly apparent that it is occurring.

You know, I think I'm going to type up a post that I can use every time I see one of these posts where people sling around this absolute MUCK. Here have some links from reliable sources:

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501
That's the short explanation of why starvation mode and metabolic slowing are crap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment
And here is the wiki for the military study that everyone has misinterpreted. Frankly, this is people losing 25% of their IDEAL weight, which is drastic, and was done specifically to study the effects of real and actual starvation.

Unless you are under 5% bodyfat or so, this isn't something you have to worry about. All of the effects described from eating too little, don't come from caloric restriction. They come from vitamin and nutrient deficiencies, electrolyte imbalances, etc. That's why you have to eat a bare minimum of calories, because it's difficult to get all those nutrients, protein, potassium, b-vitamins, vitamin c, and so on... on an extremely low calorie diet. It would even be kind of hard to get them from multivitamins and protein powder.

Thank you, and goodnight.

I would recommend NOT EATING THEM BACK.

Here's why: All of the diet logging places I have seen, have been vastly over-estimating the caloric burns of exercises. If you want to slightly increase your caloric intake to refuel yourself after a long workout, that is one thing. But I DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT think it is a good idea to eat back the whole deficit. I was actually losing, quite easily, about 2 lbs a week...

UNTIL I STARTED EATING BACK CALORIES THAT WERE CALCULATED BY THE WEBSITES. Then my weight loss came to a crawl. It still happened, but it was going intensely slow, and I am very overweight. This week, I switched back to my old model. 1600 calories, and don't eat any extra on account of exercise. PERIOD. What do you know? Three pounds fell off. A little more than I hoped, I don't try to lose too fast, but as I am 240 lbs, three pounds isn't really in dangerous territory for me. But I went from losing about 2 lbs a week, to losing less than a pound a week for a whole MONTH. Then when I go back on doing it my way, it's suddenly 3 lbs lost. And I think this has to do with calorie burns being way, way off on these food logging websites. I was using Calorie Count before, and the same thing was going on. So... it's not just MFP. Just a thought. Eating them back could sabotage you, if you over-estimate the calories burned. And it's way, way easy to do that.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/3047-700-calories-a-day-and-not-losing

No offense to this poster, but again, if you want to reach and maintain goal, take your advice from people who HAVE reached and maintained goal.

I love it when people say "no offense" and then make an offensive/ irrelevant statement. I don't see how my not being at goal weight is relevant. I can read, and am very intelligent. This is my first time losing, and I plan to make it the only time. I like to read things that don't have a confirmation bias built in... unlike most of the people here who still buy into the starvation myth. Besides, I have successfully lost weight. I am not a yoyo dieter, and I am using conventional methods. I was just pointing out a flaw in these websites that could make "eating back" problematic.

Also, the "study" you cited is ANYTHING BUT a study. It does not give any citation of any source in any way. It's a ****ty repost that pushes the myth of 'starvation mode', which is utter BS. Whereas, starvation mode is just something fad diets want you to believe, so that you will buy into the system of the moment. They will twist this in whatever way they choose. Low carb diets use it to convince you that it's not about calories, but it's about carbs. (Even thought is is always about calories.) Paleo, vegan, and raw diets all do the same thing. Anyway, real, documented, objective studies have shown that these people who say they are not losing weight on low caloric intakes, are under-estimating their intake, or just not reporting it. Even this report says she was binging/ starving. What are the odds that she was vastly under-reporting the number, frequency, and severity of her binges? I would say, UM... 101%. Meaning, not only is it occurring, but it's blatantly apparent that it is occurring.

You know, I think I'm going to type up a post that I can use every time I see one of these posts where people sling around this absolute MUCK. Here have some links from reliable sources:

http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=35501
That's the short explanation of why starvation mode and metabolic slowing are crap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment
And here is the wiki for the military study that everyone has misinterpreted. Frankly, this is people losing 25% of their IDEAL weight, which is drastic, and was done specifically to study the effects of real and actual starvation.

Unless you are under 5% bodyfat or so, this isn't something you have to worry about. All of the effects described from eating too little, don't come from caloric restriction. They come from vitamin and nutrient deficiencies, electrolyte imbalances, etc. That's why you have to eat a bare minimum of calories, because it's difficult to get all those nutrients, protein, potassium, b-vitamins, vitamin c, and so on... on an extremely low calorie diet. It would even be kind of hard to get them from multivitamins and protein powder.

Thank you, and goodnight.

okay! retraction: please take all of your advice from this woman. she obviously knows everything.

btw "case study" = evaluation of a case.

I have found that I don't need to eat my exercise cals if its a small burn (200-300cals) but if I've had a tougher workout (500cals+) then the following day I am really hungry. I haven't done this yet as its a new discovery, but as from next week I will be eating at least half of my Bootcamp or Zumba calories the following day.

The different variations people talk about comes down to honesty. I really believe that. I think if you were absolutely dead on with the calories you consumed, and you were absolutely dead on with calories burned, and you had your TDEE and BMR and RMR down to absolute precision, then, the system works well and you should eat back every single last calorie.

However, the truth is, many people lie to themselves a lot. They lie about their portions, they lie about what they actually eat, they lie about how many calories they burned cleaning the house, etc. I've even heard of people that go over their calories, and then go for a walk or something to burn it off so the end the day at a small deficit. It's silly.

Mainly, I try to eat around 2000 cals a day in maintenance. I generally do nto log any exercise, unless it's really extreme. If I was building a brick wall, I'd probably log that and eat more that day, for instance. But, if I just go for a jog, or a short run (3 miles or less), or lifted weights, I likely wouldn't log that because you don't burn as much as you think you burn. And, within the calories I eat, I think that's covered anyway.

There are variations. If you're trying to build up. Then, you gotta eat mass amounts of good clean food. But, other than anamolies, I generally don't recommend eating back calories if you have your TDEE set up properly for a healthy weight loss.

I'm failrly sloppy. I don't count coffee, I dont count condiments usually (I dont' really eat much of them anyway), and I don't count certain things. So, I might swing 50 to 100 calories either way in a day depending on the day. If I do some exercise, that's great and adds theoretical calories to my daily amount, but if I'm not hungry, i don't eat them.

People who have achieved their goal and maintain their goal are qualified to discuss, at a minimum, how they got there and what worked for them. You dont' have to agree with it, but I would prefer to listen to 10 or 15 people that did it, and can explain how they did it, rather than listen to 10 or 15 people that are still trying to figure out how to get to their goal.

I don't think it is that big of a deal, but everyone makes it one and people seem to be passionate about the topic, which makes it ridiculous. But, if you want to eat them back for a while, try it and see if you get good results. If you are not losing, stop eating them back and see how that works for you. In the end, although, we are all exactly the same, there are mental and truthful issues at play here. And, based on your lifestyle and how honest you are with yourself will depend on what works for you.

Everyone seems to have slight variations on what works for them. Just try it different ways. The most popular ways are, eat them all back, eat half back, or eat none back. If you can eat them all back and still lose weight, why would you not do that? But, if that doesn't work, change it and try something else. It's kind of easy and I don't know why people get so weird about it.

Thank you everyone! I am really concerned because I might burn 500-700 calories a day and will not eat them back. I just started working out 5 days a week since I feel I have my eating under control and my calorie goal is always met. I think I may need to eat my exercise calories but I will look at all information and websites posted. THANKS FOR THE FEEDBACK.

With another ~70 lbs you'd like to lose you can go for quite awhile without concerning yourself with eating them back. I use them as a buffer. If I'm hungry I will usually eat at least some of them and if not I don't sweat it. Listen to your body and it will guide you accordingly. At some point you WILL likely need to eat them back to continue losing but that's likely a lot closer to the "vanity" phase when you're approaching your goal weight. Also doing it this way allows you to be a lot more flexible for life's events that ultimately get in the way.

Only rule I live by is to at least consume what MFP says without exercise calculated in. As you become more accustomed to working out you will be hungry so the eat/not eat equation usually takes care of itself (at least in my experience). As I exercise more my body tells me I'm hungry so I eat but there are definitely days when I just don't have the appetite.

That's been my experience.

The different variations people talk about comes down to honesty. I really believe that. I think if you were absolutely dead on with the calories you consumed, and you were absolutely dead on with calories burned, and you had your TDEE and BMR and RMR down to absolute precision, then, the system works well and you should eat back every single last calorie.

However, the truth is, many people lie to themselves a lot. They lie about their portions, they lie about what they actually eat, they lie about how many calories they burned cleaning the house, etc. I've even heard of people that go over their calories, and then go for a walk or something to burn it off so the end the day at a small deficit. It's silly.

Mainly, I try to eat around 2000 cals a day in maintenance. I generally do nto log any exercise, unless it's really extreme. If I was building a brick wall, I'd probably log that and eat more that day, for instance. But, if I just go for a jog, or a short run (3 miles or less), or lifted weights, I likely wouldn't log that because you don't burn as much as you think you burn. And, within the calories I eat, I think that's covered anyway.

There are variations. If you're trying to build up. Then, you gotta eat mass amounts of good clean food. But, other than anamolies, I generally don't recommend eating back calories if you have your TDEE set up properly for a healthy weight loss.

I'm failrly sloppy. I don't count coffee, I dont count condiments usually (I dont' really eat much of them anyway), and I don't count certain things. So, I might swing 50 to 100 calories either way in a day depending on the day. If I do some exercise, that's great and adds theoretical calories to my daily amount, but if I'm not hungry, i don't eat them.

People who have achieved their goal and maintain their goal are qualified to discuss, at a minimum, how they got there and what worked for them. You dont' have to agree with it, but I would prefer to listen to 10 or 15 people that did it, and can explain how they did it, rather than listen to 10 or 15 people that are still trying to figure out how to get to their goal.

I don't think it is that big of a deal, but everyone makes it one and people seem to be passionate about the topic, which makes it ridiculous. But, if you want to eat them back for a while, try it and see if you get good results. If you are not losing, stop eating them back and see how that works for you. In the end, although, we are all exactly the same, there are mental and truthful issues at play here. And, based on your lifestyle and how honest you are with yourself will depend on what works for you.

Everyone seems to have slight variations on what works for them. Just try it different ways. The most popular ways are, eat them all back, eat half back, or eat none back. If you can eat them all back and still lose weight, why would you not do that? But, if that doesn't work, change it and try something else. It's kind of easy and I don't know why people get so weird about it.

Yes yes yes.....this makes perfect sense to me....and can't we just respect that we all have different views on the subject and that YES different things do work for different people....