Why eat the extra calories you burn?

MFP works out how how many calories you burn in a day according the information you entered (age, weight, height, activity level, etc.). It then subtracts 500 calories a day for every pound a week you set it to lose (if you set it to lose 1/2 pound a week it will subtract 250 calories, for instance). That's your goal UNLESS that calculation gives a number under 1200, in which case your goal will be 1200 (because MFP sets that as a minimum.

Suppose you burn 1700 calories before exercise. You've set MFP to lose 1lb a week, so MFP subtracts 500 calories. Your goal is 1200. (1700 - 500 = 1200). Suppose you then do 200 calories of exercise. Instead of the 1700 calories you burn without exercise, you've now burnt 1900 calories. To keep the same deficit of 500 calories a day, your goal is now 1400 (1900 - 500 = 1400).

That's the way MFP is designed to work. If you eat back your exercise calories, you should have steady weight loss.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories you can end up with a bigger deficit than you intended (which will make the diet harder to stick to, amongst other things).

1200 is a low calorie intake and you really shouldn't go below that as a net amount. You'll lose weight eating 1200 and if you eat back burned calories your net amount is still 1200. I always eat back all my exercise calories and net 1200 and have been losing weight consistently that way. You need at least 1200 to function properly. Just try to eat healthy calories and especially protein to repair muscle after working out - you'll see that when you add a workout your protein goal increases as well as your calorie goal so if you don't eat back the calories you're also likely not eating enough protein.
Hope that makes some sense. Of course people have different opinions on here but that's mine and it's worked for me
Also sometimes I work with weekly calories rather than daily and can save some calories from exercise that way to have a treat at the weekend or for a special day (this is easy to do if you have the phone app.)

MFP works out how how many calories you burn in a day according the information you entered (age, weight, height, activity level, etc.). It then subtracts 500 calories a day for every pound a week you set it to lose (if you set it to lose 1/2 pound a week it will subtract 250 calories, for instance). That's your goal UNLESS that calculation gives a number under 1200, in which case your goal will be 1200 (because MFP sets that as a minimum.

Suppose you burn 1700 calories before exercise. You've set MFP to lose 1lb a week, so MFP subtracts 500 calories. Your goal is 1200. (1700 - 500 = 1200). Suppose you then do 200 calories of exercise. Instead of the 1700 calories you burn without exercise, you've now burnt 1900 calories. To keep the same deficit of 500 calories a day, your goal is now 1400 (1900 - 500 = 1400).

That's the way MFP is designed to work. If you eat back your exercise calories, you should have steady weight loss.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories you can end up with a bigger deficit than you intended (which will make the diet harder to stick to, amongst other things).

/end thread

My point is, I am burning calories to lose weight

You're not burning calories to lose weight. You're eating at a deficit to lose weight. You're exercising to not look horrible once the weight is off, and to try to keep some of your muscles from melting away during the process and to work on your metabolism.

You need a calorie deficit of -500 from your maintenance to lose weight at a healthy 1 lb a week. There are two ways you can do this calculation. If you figure out your -500 WITHOUT exercise, you would eat those back because it's going to give you an even greater deficit. and guess what, you NEED ENERGY to work out. If you calculate that -500 WITH exercise you would not eat the calories back, because they're already in the equation.

MFP works out how how many calories you burn in a day according the information you entered (age, weight, height, activity level, etc.). It then subtracts 500 calories a day for every pound a week you set it to lose (if you set it to lose 1/2 pound a week it will subtract 250 calories, for instance). That's your goal UNLESS that calculation gives a number under 1200, in which case your goal will be 1200 (because MFP sets that as a minimum.

Suppose you burn 1700 calories before exercise. You've set MFP to lose 1lb a week, so MFP subtracts 500 calories. Your goal is 1200. (1700 - 500 = 1200). Suppose you then do 200 calories of exercise. Instead of the 1700 calories you burn without exercise, you've now burnt 1900 calories. To keep the same deficit of 500 calories a day, your goal is now 1400 (1900 - 500 = 1400).

That's the way MFP is designed to work. If you eat back your exercise calories, you should have steady weight loss.

If you don't eat back your exercise calories you can end up with a bigger deficit than you intended (which will make the diet harder to stick to, amongst other things).

Well Said!

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

You've already had good advice. Regardless, eat at least 1200 calories.

THEN ... if you are trying to GAIN muscle, eat at least 100+ more (high protein). If you don't work to gain muscle, you will simply be small ... but not toned. Also by building muscle your metabolism will increase ... you'll loose more fat, but need more calories to maintain the muscle.

Use mfp calories earned from exercise only as a guideline to eating ENOUGH (1200+100is) and as a guideline of what to stay UNDER to maintain the goal you inputted.

Also, consider going back to the goal setting and change it to reflect your newer activity level.

Stop. Just stop.

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

It it SAD that you would even think about those 42 calories. I know you are new and am not trying to be a jerk, but you are unknowingly being restrictive.

Exactly why I was questioning the whole formula...I was confused about the Net, etc. And no, it isn't sad in my opinion, it is me not knowing. But in my previous posting, I said "Thanks for the clarification", meaning that I understood how net works, food is fuel for exercise, etc.

I don't think that was directed at you, but at the other poster.

Stop. Just stop.

1,200 is the bare minimum you should NET -- if you burn 200 calories walking and you don't eat them back, you are netting 1,000. Long term under eating isn't sustainable and it is completely unnecessary.

It it SAD that you would even think about those 42 calories. I know you are new and am not trying to be a jerk, but you are unknowingly being restrictive.

Exactly why I was questioning the whole formula...I was confused about the Net, etc. And no, it isn't sad in my opinion, it is me not knowing. But in my previous posting, I said "Thanks for the clarification", meaning that I understood how net works, food is fuel for exercise, etc.

I clicked reply and then answered a text, you will see my post was about 3 minutes after you post, I didn't see it. But am glad you got the clarification you needed.

The sad comment is specifically directed to the following:

So in total, 1242 was my intake. I feel guilty for those additional 42 calories.

GUILT over 42 calories?! :noway: That's not a healthy mindset and is sad. I get it was coming from a lack of understanding, but you'd have to consume about 3,500 OVER the total number of calories you burn through basic body functions like breathing (BMR) and any additional activity to gain a single pound.42 calories isn't ANYTHING in the long run -- it's just sad to me that anyone would have guilt about that.