My doctor vs MyFitnessPal and calories

No. I'm saying that despite your quasi disclaimer, the entire question was framed in the title and OP as doctor vs MFP. That's why people are talking about it that way.

To answer your question ... I rarely eat my exercise calories back. I try not to since when I do I don't seem to lose anything. I have lost 74 pounds so far and while I have had a couple of frustrating plateaus I have found that if I just keep at it I tend to average 1.5 - 2 lbs per week lost with eating 1100-1200 calories a day and not eating back the exercise calories.

Good luck!

If what your Doctor suggested isn't working, and following the MFP setup potentially will help you get out of your stall... why don't you just try it?

Neither your Dr. or MFP are you, and at the end of the day you need to make the judgement.

True, true indeed my question simply was how not eating all the exercise calories was working for others. I have been on the site for a little over a month and have seen several 100 posts about the "dangerous" of not eating bac your exercise calories and the risks of starvation mode. So I just wanted to know what "real" people experieance I wasn't looking for advice or others to tell me what to do. Lol, I am adult I make my own choices but I wanted information to make an informed decision based on real results not scare tactics.

From what I can tell:
1. everyone is different.
2. MFP is not medical advice
3. MFP is generic not specific to individual needs
4. Not eating ALL of your exercise calories WILL create stalls but your body will eventually adjust you just have to be prepared for them and nor freak out when you hit a plateau and know your body will eventually catch up.

I weighted today and lost another 3 pounds so I think it will all level out in the end.

I think everyone pretty much understood what your question was, but with the added info about eating less than 1200 calories a day and adding the exercise on top of it, people were just being concerned, not rude, etc. I gave my example of doctors not always being 'right' all of the time just because they are 'experts' or have a medical degree. It almost seemed that you only wanted to hear what you wanted to hear, not additional advice, etc. that others may have had from past experiences. Again, good luck to you on your weight loss journey...

The 1200 number is a mere invention of the CYA (cover your *kitten*) variety. It has no basis in medical fact, and cannot cover the enormous range in individuals, their sizes and activities.

All of my weight loss has been under medical supervision. I have weighed and logged every bit of food for over nine months. I am 6'3" tall, and currently weigh 203 pounds, only three pounds over a normal BMI. My highest weight was 475. For eight months, I averaged 1,040 calories per day. According to my activity log and fitbit, for more than half of that time I exercised considerable more, and so my daily net was below zero. This was what my doctors told me to do, and everyone should listen to their own physician. I never ate back any exercise calories. According to many on this thread, I couldn't possibly be alive from eating negative calories. So why am I? Because I was fat, and fat is energy. Anyone who is obese can do so, as long as a qualified doctor says it is ok.

I can show you charts and graphs. I never went into starvation mode, stalled, held onto fat, or any of that foolishness. My weight loss graph is a perfect, smooth, curve, utterly predictable, because I weigh all my food, honestly and precisely, and work out religiously. The past month or so I have, under doctor's recommendation, slowly increased calories to about 1600 per day, still less than most 6'3" men, and am still losing a little. I will gradually get to a normal daily intake, and weight, and fitness.

I have far more energy and activity than I have in years, in spite of eating less than those more than a foot shorter than me. How? Because I spent years eating far more than I should. You store energy so it can be used later. It's an ingenius creation, really. And if you are 70 or 100 pounds overweight, you can do what your doctor suggests, and eat less, without eating back your exercise calories. In that regard, your doctor knows what they are talking about.

If you have 75+ pounds to lose and are considered morbidly obese (which 75+ extra pounds puts one in that category -- I am there and hate that term), doctors will usually put you on an 800 cal diet for 3-4 months because the benefit (NEED) to lose the weight outweighs the risk. However, this requires WEEKLY supervision at the very least. That being said, they usually have you take extra B vitamins and a vitamin supplement.

If you are not in the morbidly obese category, you need to decide WHICH plan you are going to use (your doctors vs. MFP) and stick with ONE to follow. Some clinicians recommend patients use MFP as a free tracking tool just to make them aware of what they are eating and what the macros are.

That being said, when on an 800 cal diet, doctors usually advise clients to take it easy on the exercise and focus on taking a 30 minute daily walk.

****I AM NOT A DOCTOR, DON'T PRETEND TO BE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM.**** One has to consider medical circumstances, how many pounds they need to lose, etc. If you are female, are you menopausal? Pregnant? Breastfeeding? It's not as simple as just counting calories in certain situations.

I would get a second opinion, honestly. Your body needs calories just to function properly. And 1200 is the amount of calories recommended for a 7-year old boy to put that in perspective!

Oh, one more thing. Many people warn you about eating low calories, because it's not sustainable, that you can't "do it for life." No one expects you to do it forever. It's a means to get rid of extra weight, which will increase activity, health, and fitness, after or during which you will slowly increase calories to a normal, sustainable level, which I'm sure is what your doctor is doing. The problem that people who do VLC diets have, unsupervised, is they starve themselves, and then binge like crazy and gain everything back. Do it right, under medical supervision, increase slowly, weigh everything, keep careful, honest track, and you won't regain. If you can leave emotional eating out of the equation, it's just simple math. That's a lot more easily said than done, but true nonetheless.

Here is the question -- if exercise is going to make you hungrier (which it will), and you can't eat even part of those calories back to compensate, how often will you exercise?
I went from 3 times a week to 5 or 6 consistently and I credit the MFP system for it.
At your calorie level, you have more than enough deficit to lose 2 pounds a week on average for a long time, even eating back your exercise calories?
At first, I did it ONLY when I was really hungry -- I resisted it.
Then I got more lenient, and now I usually eat most of them.
My rate of weight loss is the same, actually.
I think that long-term adherence to healthier habits is a really important element of this. And I want somewhere to "go" if the weight loss slows, if that makes sense.
And at the rate you're losing, you could reach your goal this year with no surgery

Ok, to directly answer the question at the end of your post :

I always, always eat back my exercise calories, in order to maintain a 500 calorie deficit. If I didn't, my deficit would increase, and I'd be losing weight faster than I want to.

Ultimately, to follow the MFP plan, you should choose the speed at which you want to lose weight, then figure out the deficit required to do that. Then eat to whatever calorie amount gives you that deficit.

Exercise calories burned aren't magically somehow different from any other calories burned during the day, and shouldn't be considered differently just because you add them into MFP manually.

I've always lost weight at the precise rate predicted by my calorie deficit. When I had a 1000 a day deficit, I lost 2 pounds a week. When I have a 750 deficit, I lost 1.5 pounds a week. Now I'm at a 500 deficit, I lose 1 pound a week.

I don't eat mine back either, granted my calorie intake is higher than the one alotted by your doctor. however just because you are on a low calorie diet does not mean it has to be low nutrition diet. If youre eating a lot of greens and vegetables they fill you up without significantly impacting your calories. I do agree that 1200 seems to be a general guideline thrown out there but if your doctor is specializing in weightloss and nutrition he or she obviously has some training or experience and maybe the goal is to gear you towards nutrient rich foods that arent so calorie dense.
but to answer ur original question, i usually meet my calorie goal which is currently 1450 give or take 50 or so calories over i calculated my basic metabolic rate to determine my caloric needs and i burn between 500-700 calories on my workouts 5-6 days a week. i do not eat back my calories and have been successful thus far

FWIW, I do the same as stumblin.

I eat my exercise calories back in order to strictly maintain a certain calorie deficit. If I lost weight faster than that, which I would be doing by deciding not to eat back exercise calories, I would be losing a higher percentage of my weight as lean mass.

Hunger is irrelevant.