Eating back exercise calories made me gain - so confused

I do not follow that silly idea. Why would you eat back what you worked so hard to burn?

Because MFP has you at a deficit already with your daily calorie goal - meaning you could eat to goal, do zero exercise, and you're at a deficit and will lose weight. Exercising and burning more calories creates an even larger deficit, which can lead to problems - that's why they add those burned calories back into your daily goal - you are supposed to eat them back.

Now this is assuming you entered all your info correctly when you set up MFP, going for a reasonable weight loss goal (as in, not 2lbs a week unless you've got 100+ pounds to lose, etc), and that all the food consumed is measured and accounted for correctly - the system works.

OP - as for the six pound gain - how long has it been since to switched to eating back exercise cals? Do you also take measurements and progress photos? Do you lift heavy? And how often do you weight - the body can easily fluctuate 6lbs in a week due to a new or harder workout, too much sodium & water retention, hormones, time of the month, etc.

Hard to offer more advice without more info - if you could make your diary public that might help. Hang in there - with only 17 pounds to lose, it's a pretty slow process anyway, and hard to be patient!

My current settings are to lose 1lb a week. I have myself set to 'sedentary' since I work a desk job.

I do lift, and it's pretty heavy for me. Normal weight session would be deadlifts 60lbs, squats 90lbs, power cleans 45lbs. I also do kettlebells and generally use the 25 - 35lb weights.

I run 3x a week now, since I'm training for a half. At this point it's 3.5 miles 2x a week and then a long run (6miles this week, 7. this upcoming).

I weigh in about once a week. Although now that I'm now obsessing about it, I've started weighing in every day. I thought it might be water retention, but a few weeks ago I posted about gaining 6lbs of water weight in a short period of time. Apparently, that's never gone away..:(

Maybe it's water retention? I don't really know anymore.

Yeah, with that workout schedule, I would definitely say you need to be eating more. Food is fuel! Especially with the lifting you want to be getting good fuel and plenty of protein. Have a look at the link I posted - great info and links to tools to calculate your numbers & see how much you should be eating. I dropped my last 10lbs after following those guidelines.

I do not follow that silly idea. Why would you eat back what you worked so hard to burn?

Because MFP has you at a deficit already with your daily calorie goal - meaning you could eat to goal, do zero exercise, and you're at a deficit and will lose weight. Exercising and burning more calories creates an even larger deficit, which can lead to problems - that's why they add those burned calories back into your daily goal - you are supposed to eat them back.

Now this is assuming you entered all your info correctly when you set up MFP, going for a reasonable weight loss goal (as in, not 2lbs a week unless you've got 100+ pounds to lose, etc), and that all the food consumed is measured and accounted for correctly - the system works.

OP - as for the six pound gain - how long has it been since to switched to eating back exercise cals? Do you also take measurements and progress photos? Do you lift heavy? And how often do you weight - the body can easily fluctuate 6lbs in a week due to a new or harder workout, too much sodium & water retention, hormones, time of the month, etc.

Hard to offer more advice without more info - if you could make your diary public that might help. Hang in there - with only 17 pounds to lose, it's a pretty slow process anyway, and hard to be patient!

My current settings are to lose 1lb a week. I have myself set to 'sedentary' since I work a desk job.

I do lift, and it's pretty heavy for me. Normal weight session would be deadlifts 60lbs, squats 90lbs, power cleans 45lbs. I also do kettlebells and generally use the 25 - 35lb weights.

I run 3x a week now, since I'm training for a half. At this point it's 3.5 miles 2x a week and then a long run (6miles this week, 7. this upcoming).

I weigh in about once a week. Although now that I'm now obsessing about it, I've started weighing in every day. I thought it might be water retention, but a few weeks ago I posted about gaining 6lbs of water weight in a short period of time. Apparently, that's never gone away..:(

Maybe it's water retention? I don't really know anymore.

MFP's numbers are so ridiculously flawed. I follow a nutritionist for my numbers....

Honestly, the silly statements on this thread make my head hurt and are going to require a third cup of coffee.

So, eating back exercise calories is useless, counterintuitive, there is no such thing as slow metabolism or starvation mode?

Hmmm... I am sensing a lot of people on here with MAGIC bodies that don't require fuel to operate. Apparently for them, the same meal that can fuel sitting on your *kitten* watching TV can also fuel running a marathon. Well in that case, since there is no relationship between the energy your body expends and fuel you eat, then why eat at all? Just give up food altogether! After all, there is no "starvation mode," right? Why bother with silly food at all? :indifferent:

Come on people, use some common sense! If you eat exactly what you burn, you will keep your weight the same, if you eat more you will gain, if you eat less you will lose. How much you exercise affects how much you burn and THEREFORE how much you need to eat. And if there was no way to "slow" your metabolism, then you need to go and correct a bunch of scientific and scholarly research studies and scientists who have published papers because you apparently know better that all the PhDs out there *rolls eyes*

Honestly, the silly statements on this thread make my head hurt and are going to require a third cup of coffee.

So, eating back exercise calories is useless, counterintuitive, there is no such thing as slow metabolism or starvation mode?

Hmmm... I am sensing a lot of people on here with MAGIC bodies that don't require fuel to operate. Apparently for them, the same meal that can fuel sitting on your *kitten* watching TV can also fuel running a marathon. Well in that case, since there is no relationship between the energy your body expends and fuel you eat, then why eat at all? Just give up food altogether! After all, there is no "starvation mode," right? Why bother with silly food at all? :indifferent:

Come on people, use some common sense! If you eat exactly what you burn, you will keep your weight the same, if you eat more you will gain, if you eat less you will lose. How much you exercise affects how much you burn and THEREFORE how much you need to eat. And if there was no way to "slow" your metabolism, then you need to go and correct a bunch of scientific and scholarly research studies and scientists who have published papers because you apparently know better that all the PhDs out there *rolls eyes*

I never eat my exercise calories back. I think it's counterintuitive.

It's only counterintuitive if you view exercise as purely a means of weight loss. The average person without other health/metabolism issues can lose weight without exercise purely by eating at a calorie deficit. Exercise is to improve your cardiovascular health, prevent you from losing lean muscle when you are losing weight, etc. Ask any personal trainer and they will tell you that people who don't have their diet under control and exercise to "lose weight" will not be successful.

I don't understand the raging debate over this. It is simple:

MFP asks for an activity level. Either you set it to sedentary and then log your exercise and "eat back" your calories (meaning you eat however many calories puts you at 0 calories left at the end of the day); or, if you exercise very consistently, you set your activity level to what your activity level actually is and then you DON'T log your exercise and you eat whatever amount of calories has you reach 0 calories left at the end of the day. Voila.

This! Well said!!!

I do not follow that silly idea. Why would you eat back what you worked so hard to burn?

Because MFP has you at a deficit already with your daily calorie goal - meaning you could eat to goal, do zero exercise, and you're at a deficit and will lose weight. Exercising and burning more calories creates an even larger deficit, which can lead to problems - that's why they add those burned calories back into your daily goal - you are supposed to eat them back.

Now this is assuming you entered all your info correctly when you set up MFP, going for a reasonable weight loss goal (as in, not 2lbs a week unless you've got 100+ pounds to lose, etc), and that all the food consumed is measured and accounted for correctly - the system works.

OP - as for the six pound gain - how long has it been since to switched to eating back exercise cals? Do you also take measurements and progress photos? Do you lift heavy? And how often do you weight - the body can easily fluctuate 6lbs in a week due to a new or harder workout, too much sodium & water retention, hormones, time of the month, etc.

Hard to offer more advice without more info - if you could make your diary public that might help. Hang in there - with only 17 pounds to lose, it's a pretty slow process anyway, and hard to be patient!

My current settings are to lose 1lb a week. I have myself set to 'sedentary' since I work a desk job.

I do lift, and it's pretty heavy for me. Normal weight session would be deadlifts 60lbs, squats 90lbs, power cleans 45lbs. I also do kettlebells and generally use the 25 - 35lb weights.

I run 3x a week now, since I'm training for a half. At this point it's 3.5 miles 2x a week and then a long run (6miles this week, 7. this upcoming).

I weigh in about once a week. Although now that I'm now obsessing about it, I've started weighing in every day. I thought it might be water retention, but a few weeks ago I posted about gaining 6lbs of water weight in a short period of time. Apparently, that's never gone away..:(

Maybe it's water retention? I don't really know anymore.

Good god woman, if you think that running three times a week and lifting heavy weights twice a week is "sedentary," then what category are people supposed to use if they sit on their *kitten* all day and don't move and dont EVER EXERCISE AT ALL????

YOU ARE NOT SEDENTARY and you will never get the results that you want at that setting. If you wear a BodyMedia Fit all day long, then at the end of the day, the total number is gives you is the total number that you burned that day. I bet it's close to 3000 calories some days, right? So you need to eat that, minus 10%. If you eat too big of a deficit, you will mess up the weight loss hormones and you will gain not lose.

And you can't go by your hunger. Not a reliable indicator. Remember, if you shock your poor body by giving it radically less calories that it requires, it will take drastic measures to adapt, including dialing your metabolism way back, which dials back your hunger too. And which primes you to gain like crazy with small increases in calories.

Take it from a girl who is eating an average of 2400-2600 calories a day and who lost 1 pounds last week (and who btw only exercises a small FRACTION of the amount that you do) that you need to eat MORE. Not just more in general, but the correct amount. You need to eat your total daily burn minus 10%.

But eating back calories has made Donna put on weight. So what should she do? It's too easy to say that it should work so if it isn't you must be writing it down wrong

Honestly, the silly statements on this thread make my head hurt and are going to require a third cup of coffee.

So, eating back exercise calories is useless, counterintuitive, there is no such thing as slow metabolism or starvation mode?

Hmmm... I am sensing a lot of people on here with MAGIC bodies that don't require fuel to operate. Apparently for them, the same meal that can fuel sitting on your *kitten* watching TV can also fuel running a marathon. Well in that case, since there is no relationship between the energy your body expends and fuel you eat, then why eat at all? Just give up food altogether! After all, there is no "starvation mode," right? Why bother with silly food at all? :indifferent:

Come on people, use some common sense! If you eat exactly what you burn, you will keep your weight the same, if you eat more you will gain, if you eat less you will lose. How much you exercise affects how much you burn and THEREFORE how much you need to eat. And if there was no way to "slow" your metabolism, then you need to go and correct a bunch of scientific and scholarly research studies and scientists who have published papers because you apparently know better that all the PhDs out there *rolls eyes*

Love it!

How are your measurements looking? You might be building muscle.

she is most definitely not building any muscle netting 1000 calories or less a day. In fact, she's probably losing muscle given her workout regimen and improperly fueling her body.

Try drinking more water too. I'm pretty sure you should be drinking about a gallon of water a day, especially if you are working out the way you do. Also, I have been trying to eat every 2-3.5 hours and I feel more hungry and full after than I ever have. I'm hoping it is helping my metabolism start up again. My weight has been at a standstill for months now and I guess we just have to keep trying different things to find what works but I would rather eat more than screw up my metabolism more. I always thought eating less was the key but I was always tired and felt dizzy and gained more, but now I am starting to feel more normal. Good Luck!!

But eating back calories has made Donna put on weight. So what should she do? It's too easy to say that it should work so if it isn't you must be writing it down wrong

But there's no way she should be putting on this amount of weight with the amount of calories she's eating. Something is screwy. Either her metabolism is totally screwed (possible) or the food entry is wrong (more likely).

nobody ever wants to hear this, but based on what you are saying, I am pretty certain you are either over-estimating your activity level or under estimating our food or both.

You have to be meticulous in logging your food - especially you women that don't have that much to lose because you guys have such a small window of opportunity between your bmr and tdee. I'd recommend getting a digital food scale and measure EVERYTHING you eat for a couple of weeks and see if it makes a difference.

A little game you can play during that 2 weeks is to try to estimate the portion first, then weigh it and see how close you are. This will help you get better at estimating at restaurants and stuff since you really can't take your scale with you everywhere!

GauchoMark has got it going on! Nailed it!

That's what I've been saying re: weighing the food, too. You are probably not logging accurately--it is impossible to *gain* weight while eating at a deficit if you are indeed exercising as much as you say you do. You are probably overeating and don't realize it.

As for logging activity, err on the side of underestimating caloric burn. You aren't using as much energy as you probably think you do.

The main reason to eat back exercise cals is that for most people 1200 a day just doesn't cut it. You get hungry and are far more likely to eat rubbish and go over becaue you feel deprived and 'on a diet'. If I do exercise I can eat 1600 cals, don't get hungry or feel deprived and so I stick with it in the long term and still lose the same amount I would if I was eating 1200 and not exercising. And I feel healthier for exercising.

eating back calories is stupid and useless.

Not if you're trying to maintain or avoiding huge calorie deficit.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition