Eating back exercised calories VS not: Which worked for you?

The whole "eating back my calories" thing is just too confusing to me. I actually stopped exercising several weeks ago because I was just too confusing and then lost an additional 10 lbs. Now I am at a standstill holding at 19lbs losts for the past 2 weeks.

When I was trying to eat the calories back, I had to force myself to eat because I wasn't hungry and many times, I was so miserable after eating the calories back that I felt like a pig, so I just stopped trying to eat them back. I'm not the expert and I am positive that those that encourage you to eat the calories back, know what they are talking about, but it just did not work for me.

I think if you aren't hungry then don't force it unless there is an issue there (as in you're eating so little that the body is shutting down). Some people just don't eat that much (my wife being one of them) or they drink 600 cals in coffee and cream for breakfast (hmmm sounds like my wife! lol).

For me 'eating back' what I burn isn't so much as 'eating back' as it is 'eating FOR'. What I mean by this is simple and best explain in an example:

Tonight I'll walk two hours with my wife in a 'walk for the cure' (not sure what the name is but it's a cancer charity she's doing for work and she signed me up to walk with her). We'll walk about 7 miles maybe closer to 8 depending on mood and over that period I'll burn around 1000 calories. So this morning I'll indulge a little at breakfast and add some 'crunch' to my oatmeal (an additional 140 calories). Then I'll eat my normal lunch but I'll toss back a double protein shake as a 'snack' in the afternoon (an additional 280 calories). At dinner I'll allow myself to have a little extra perhaps in the form of some home made bread with butter (guesstimate 120 calories). I'll keep my 'eating FOR' calories around 600-700 calories total and I'll burn them off during the walk.

Normally I walk at lunch and after dinner so on days I walk I allow a little extra throughout the day. I ride at lunch and on days I'm going to ride, since I know I burn around 1100 calories on my current 13 mile rides I'll add a double shake about an hour after breakfast (maybe two but not closer then one hour before my ride) which gives me 280 calories and 54grams of protein and then I'll have something for a snack after lunch (either more protein or nuts, an energy bar -- something) and at dinner I'll allow a little indulgence.

I try to manage this pretty closely so i don't abuse it and if I think I'm abusing it a little (hey I was pretty big at 282 lbs so clearly I abused my eating before and can do it again!) then I'll go for a two mile walk after dinner to burn an additional 300 calories so I'm not overdoing the food :d

I'm 235.0lbs today (my lightest so far this year is 234.4 which was the start of the week) and after 7 months (5 since I changed my diet) I've found this method produces a steady, albeit somewhat slow, weight/fat loss and prevents muscle soreness (I suffered with sore legs constantly until I upped my protein and allowed more of it when I worked out hard) due to over training.

My advice, and I'm no expert, is to find what works for you by reading what others have done to overcome similar issues and to be patient. Losing weight requires changing your life.

Dieting is temporary -- changing your life isn't

You have a point, but I already said that I was confused, so I can't answer your question.

I'm sorry Didn't mean to sound like I was asking a question. Was just trying to help by showing what I do.

Good luck

Yes hang in there! and a week without change is nothing...heck I went 3 weeks without much change recently but I knew it was my own fault so I dropped my sodium intake (I'd been abusing sodium) and BAM! 5 pounds down almost overnight (ok in a week).

Another thing to consider is that you've lost (according to your ticker at the bottom of your posts) 19lbs which means things have changed. Have you re-adjusted your goals? I do for every 5 pounds I lose. I just go in, adjust my goals using the auto feature (it's easier this way) and then go back and adjust again to change my fiber to 38grams (that's really what I need for a full diet but since I'm on a reduced cal diet I know I won't get that much), 55/25/20 (carbs, protein, fat) and 1500mg's of sodium and then go to my foods page and adjust as needed.

When I started with MFP I was already down about 20lbs and my goal was about 1600 for the day, today another 25 pounds down and my goal is 1450 for the day....had I stuck with the 1600 I'd likely not have dropped the entire 25lbs.

So be sure to adjust those numbers and religiously stick to the diary and if you do cardio, eat a little extra on the days you do Track it and heck, even sometimes add a little more if you want, or as I like to say 'splurge' on those days

I agree. I never feel comfortable with my calorie burn estimation. This includes walking and my elliptical machine in particular (it grossly overestimates in my opinion based on what I've read about the Gazelle on the internet. That's the main reason I stopped exercising weeks ago (it was interfering with my ability to calculate my calories).

I also use the fitbit, but have not worn it in a couple of days. At the end of my days, I always question the accuracy of the Fitbit's reading. In the end, I am just counting calories consumed until I can figure out what other system will work for me.

I have to question what kind of workouts are people doing that don't eat their calories back? There's no way my body could survive on 1200 calories when we do 5 mile hikes. I also wonder if in fact you're losing mostly fat or if there's a lot of muscle being lost their too.

The question isn't whether someone else should or shouldn't eat back their exercise calories. The question is should the OP eat them back.

Completely agree

If you are close to goal and you are only currently eating 1200 calories then definitely eat them back. At least eat back a reasonable amount. If you only have 200 exercise calories then eat back 100, if you have 500 then eat back 300 or 400 and so on, it really depends on how many you have and how accurate your intake and burn levels are both are estimations unless you have a fit bit a food scale and time everything to the minute. I don't see any reason a person should eat fewer than 1500 calories. That is really amazing to me if someone says they can't lose weight on that few.

Completely disagree

I have to question what kind of workouts are people doing that don't eat their calories back? There's no way my body could survive on 1200 calories when we do 5 mile hikes. I also wonder if in fact you're losing mostly fat or if there's a lot of muscle being lost their too.

Exactly!

My wife and I did a nice 4.2 mile hike this morning (walk really) and I burned 625 calories on that. Because of this I added 1/4 cup of milk (3.5%), 1/4 cup of bran and 1/4 of bear naked granola (to my 1/2 cup of oatmeal and 1/4 cup of wheat berries with agave necter (3/4th TBS) and cinnamon.

I'm 'eating back' about 300 of the calories I burned when my metabolism is running full steam from the walk.

I don't mind losing some muscle on my way to achieve my goal because I know the muscle is easier to replace then it is to lose fat (I've spent years in gyms over my life) but I prefer to limit that so up my protein (that will be the rest of the days cardio cals I add back) to mitigate that as much as I can while maintain 1000 calories or more, per day, in deficit.