Beating a Dead Horse

No opinion really - just curious to finally see the other side of the argument. All I ever see is eat them. Good post!

You make a good point babe, as always. I would believe that you need to eat back part of the exercise calories to return you to your RMR (the point below which your body technically enters starvation mode). That's just my opinion because the science all seems to point to the fact that you need to be fueling your body with what it needs to work properly in order for any type of benefits to be seen.

That said the trainer I worked out with last night told my that unlike the info often bandied around MFP the less you eat and the more you work out the more you will lose. Simple as. No she agreed you can't sustain a volume of weightloss by just dropping your calories to 1200 a day and working out like a fiend and doing that day in day out, but if you change it up, exactly the same principles as interval training, then your body will become much more responsive and work harder.

Simple - Calories in vs. Calories out!

Since I started counting using MFP I've had trouble eating even the 1200 minimum even before "exercise calories". This is due to the fact I'm eating a lot of veggies and fruits with very little bread and meat. I stopped ordering take-out and no more fast food. In 2.5 months I've lost 13 pounds. I feel that if I had eaten all my "exercise calories" I would not have had such a quick drop.

I think this is a very worthy question that deserves a cogent and direct answer. I hope somebody steps up.

My friends and I have debated the Biggest Loser weight loss program we see on tv many times. Interesting isn't it?

Here is what I know (for me personally)
-I tracked and worked my *kitten* off at the gym for 7 weeks, not eating back my work out cals and didn't see an ounce of weight come off at the scale. Sure my body shape changed and I gained muscle, but no weight loss or inches off.
-Once i started eating my work out cals back I started losing weight. In 3 weeks I think I've lost 4-5 lbs. I am pretty sure that I was starving my body even though I hate that stupid term.

I can only guess that since they are in controlled environment - doctors, personal trainers, etc. and that is all they do day in and day out is work out and learn better eating habits, then obviously it can work. But I have to wonder if it is more about the setting and environment they are in more than anything. If all I did all day was work out, I am sure that I too could burn more than I ate and lose weight, gain muscle, etc.
I feel like there are 4 kinds of living when it comes to weight loss/gain/maintain....
1. maintain - eat what you want, work out or don't
2. gain - overeat bad foods, don't work out
3. general "normal" weight loss using whatever method you find that works
4. BL style weight loss. Weight loss on proverbial steriods. Controlled environment heavily monitored by doctors and PT's, sole focus is weight loss, etc.

And unfortunately very few of us are lucky enough to be able to just solely focus on weight loss. Or we'd all not be here!

Those are my theories on the subject anyways.

I mean, I don't know what else to say to you, you say you've read all the stuff posted, and much of that is mine, and is based on solid scientific fact and known trails conducted by very respectable universities and metabolic labs so I won't go further into it.

Here's the thing about the biggest loser. The people on that show are doing extremely long workout intervals, they are well over 35% body fat, and they have doctors watching their every step. So of course they can perform at a higher deficit.

What you have to remember is, the more fat you have relative to your weight and height, the bigger the deficit you can have.

the other thing to remember is IT'S A SHOW. They are looking for super dramatic weight loss so they will push their contestants to lose more weight than is usually acceptable to do. Why do you think the show is so popular. They wouldn't draw anywhere near the same numbers if they had everyone on for a year, and had them work a full time job with stress, and obligations, and kids, and in-laws...etc. and they had them trying to lose at about 2 lbs a week. That just isn't "show worthy"

Generally, for the smaller contestants, you'll see weight loss on average between 3 and 6 lbs. Sure once in a while they'll get a 10 or 12, and that's fine for them, but it doesn't mean that's a safe, sustainable loss. So as you can see, the less you have to lose, the smaller amount you will lose per week.

The real question is this: Are you looking to lose weight, or are you trying to become healthy. losing a large amount of weight is great if it's done healthy, but that's not what the site is about.

Here is my opinion:

There are good reasons to eat them and there are good reasons not to eat them.

Good reasons not to:

1) Most people underestimate what they eat and overestimate how much they burn in exercise (this has been established through clinical studies even; it's not just someone's opinion). If you set up your goals here on MFP to have a 500 calorie a day deficit, it would be really easy for these calculations to completely wipe out any deficit that you have set up.

2) Unless you wear a HRM or Bodybugg/GowearFit every time you exercise, the amount of calories MFP or the machines at the gym or any other source says you burn is only an estimate. This estimate may be right on for you, but more likely it's high or low. If it's high, then, again, you are eating more than you should to maintain your deficit

3) If your deficit is higher, you'll lose weight faster and that can be motivating for people

4) Our bodies don't turn on a dime. Just because you burned an extra 300 calories today, doesn't mean your body will be hungry for an extra 300 calories today. In fact, it's quite likely that you won't be extra hungry today but will be extra hungry tomorrow. Forcing yourself to eat extra calories on the day you burn them when you aren't hungry for them and not eat them the next day when you are hungry for them is not the way to long term success IMO. Most dietitians recommend you think of yourself as a calorie bank and make sure you stay in balance over a period of several days. An example of this would be to eat 100 of the exercise calories today, 100 tomorrow (on your day off from exercise) and not eat 100 at all as a cushion.

Good reasons to eat them:

1) If you work out a lot, you may not have enough energy if you don't eat at least some of your exercise calories. Being tired and grumpy and not recovering well from exercise kind of defeats the point of trying to get healthy, right?

2) Eating your exercise calories is closer to what you'll do in maintenance so it's good practice

3) It will cause you to lose weight slower and that can prevent certain health problems such as developing gallstones.

It's really up to you and works for you. When I was losing my weight, I was on a doctor-supervised program so I did what my doctor told me. That did not include eating my exercise calories. However, as my workouts increased over the minimum they recommended, he did have me increase my protein, which had me eating more calories. But it wasn't a direct 1-to-1 correspondence.

Last year, I started doing the Biggest Loser @ my church and dropped about 35 pounds in 3 months. I was NEVER eating my exercise calories, always sticking in the 1200-1400 calorie range.
Of course, when the contest was over, I returned to my way of eating prior to the Biggest Loser and gained all my weight back and then some.
I started back on the calorie counting/workout about 2 weeks ago, and started going to the gym again. This time, to make sure that I don't have the rebound that I did last year, I started eating some (but not ALL) of my exercise calories. The results have not been quite as dramatic, but I can definitely guarantee that I am not hungry most of the day like I was last year.

So, my take on it is, yes eat some of your exercise calores, as a kind of a reward for your hard work. Don't have any empirical evidence to back it up, but that is the way that I feel!

So I'm confused what your looking for? You don't want people posting who agree with the eating your exercise calories correct? because you make it clear you don't want to hear about that. The posts about it are not just someone oppinions but serious mechanical step by steps on why it works...so you don't want that right? Instead of saying how do you feel about eating your exercise calories... I think your question should be that you are looking for solid evidence other than biggest loser results on why you shouldnt eat them? Correct? Just checking...I'm curious to hear this myself......