Why you over track exercise calories...

n0ob
n0ob Posts: 2,390 Member
If you recognize me, stop reading, this has been recycled a brazillion times. I just figured due to our highly effective and overworked search function that it warranted a (another) new thread.

Quite simply, if you don't subtract the calories you would have used "existing" from any exercise you did for x time, you will be over tracking by the "existing" calories every time. This may be something in the ball park of 70-85/hr for an average female and 100-120 for a man. The calories can add up in a hurry if you're one who religously tracks and eats back every calorie.

Just something to (re)consider.

Replies

  • animemoon5
    animemoon5 Posts: 55 Member
    I was really concerned with "Net calories burned" awhile ago, realizing that almost half of the calories burned don't really count, as they would have been burned anyways if I were doing nothing but sitting at the computer or watching TV.... So I did a little experiment with this...

    Using the shapesense.com calculators, including their net calories burned conversion, I customized all of my exercises to show "Net" calories burned..... what used to be 300, was now only 100... what was 200 was probably only 70 or so, some of my exercises cut down to 50.... There was a huge difference in numbers, and I did notice how this could completely add up to the 3500cals/week I was trying to lose....

    The result? I actually gained weight.....!

    You see, before, going by gross calories burned and overestimating, well, seeing those numbers add up, I was constantly motivated to get up and move, adding every little thing.... I went from being totally sedentary, to after 15 minutes sitting at the comp, suddenly wondering what I could clean, if there were errands to run, or suddenly just wanting to walk to the corner store or go up and down the stairs a few times... I was on the move!

    The moment I started tracking net calories... it was hopelessly discouraging... I'd see other people ending their days with 1100 calories burned, I'd probably have only 150.... It didn't seem worth it, I'd be working as hard as I could, and barely losing anything, as a result, I exercised less and just cut my meals back.... I stayed within my calorie goal, even without the exercise, but I still gained weight.. 7lbs It was the first time since starting this where I was beyond frustrated and just wanted to give up and quit.... I was stressed about the numbers and figures, frustrated that my exercise meant so little....

    So yeah, I ended my experiment and went back to what I was doing, when I was losing 1-2lbs a week, I overestimated my calories, and used the MFP calculators, It took awhile to get all that motivation back.... (in my mind figures were still being calculated and I was constantly aware that this wasn't "really" adding up to much) But as I started to lose the weight I gained back, I started being encouraged once more....

    I don't know exactly why I gained the weight, I don't know where I went wrong with the calculations, but I do know, is that I was happier, more motivated, losing weight and shaping up when I was exercising the most, and if being that "accurate" and fussy over the calories burned, was going to stress me out and discourage me to the point of wanting to just give up, it's not worth it... Whatever keeps me going... I need whatever morale boost I can possibly get , especially with the health issues I'm going through right now, it's so easy to get discouraged and if it motivates me to give it my all, then it's totally worth it in the end =)

    As for those who I was preaching to about "Net calories burned" before my little experiment.. lol after seeing how down and out I got, the huge drop in numbers and my weight gain, =x lol they aren't even going to try to go there..... But many people have been losing weight on MFP for quite some time now, using their calorie burned estimates..... so if it works, that's what matters right?
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    You can do whatever you want and follow whatever method makes sense. But NONE of our methods of estimating exercise calories is accurate enough or precise enough to make any significance.

    The 50-100 cals per hour of BMR is well within the standard of error for any method we use to estimate exercise calories.
  • Cait_Sidhe
    Cait_Sidhe Posts: 3,150 Member
    True. I figured that I burn ~52 calories an hour based on my BMR (I'm super tiny), so I should subtract 52 calories from my exercise calories per hour of exercise. But nothing is exact.

    This is why I've been trying to eat at TDEE and letting my exercise calories be my deficit because nothing is exact when it comes to exercise calories.
  • MyChocolateDiet
    MyChocolateDiet Posts: 22,281 Member
    Well, where would one find one's "existing" calories? Are they a function of our weight, it would seem so.

    (If this answer includes TDEE or any of that stuff forget it unless you can pm me in a very precise back and forth dialogue in which I will ask completely idiotic questions and may even end the conversation sticking to what I'm already doing, because all that stuff confuses the heck out of me and makes me feel dizzy at the comp and like giving up completely.)