whats the point of excercise if I eat back the calories?
Replies
-
maybe I should start a new thread on for this question but What is considered "TOO FAST" for those of you here?
is it more than 2 pounds per week?
Your missing the point, this isn't about speed, this is about the journey, learning from your mistakes, setting reasonable goals and reaching them, figuring out how you got there and make sure you never go back there again.... I have spent 4 years doings this, getting in a therapy pool to use water displacement to be able to stand (couldn't even walk at 560 lbs.) so that I could exercise, spent 17 months in the pool before I could get fitted with braces to be able to get out of the pool and on solid ground, work through my addictions, learn from them and over come them.... I was in weightloss mode for 3 years, just finished 1 year of maintenance, and am back in weightloss mode to push through the last 20 lbs. I want to lose.... It was the journey that made me who I am today and I wouldn't want to rush any of it, this is my life and I am in no hurry for it to end.....0 -
I never eat back my exercise calories and I lose weight just fine. I am on a 1200 calories diet and my workouts are about 400 calories. and I feel perfectly fine, I sleep 8 hours, go to work, do all the things and feel full of energy.
I mean. Not to get all 'mean' or whatever (heaven forbid) but all the pro-ana types thing they feel fine and full of energy.
Just putting that out there.
This is why we're friends.0 -
I'm sorry but if one has lost 153 lbs I'm sure they know quite a bit. Its ok, keep doing what you're doing, we'll see you back in the forums in a month, whinning about how you aren't losing and asking. ? Why?0
-
maybe I should start a new thread on for this question but What is considered "TOO FAST" for those of you here?
is it more than 2 pounds per week?
Listen, there's not a person on this site that would not LOVE to lose weight as fast as possible. These are the SAME people that have lost/gained/lost/gained/lost/gained and are tired of that crap. People with lots of weight to lose need to learn to do things completely different. It's a fact.
Nothing you say will change the minds of people like me who are finally feeling success after years of wanting to do it fast. It's a slow process. So ask away, but I'm out.0 -
I never eat back my exercise calories and I lose weight just fine. I am on a 1200 calories diet and my workouts are about 400 calories. and I feel perfectly fine, I sleep 8 hours, go to work, do all the things and feel full of energy.
I mean. Not to get all 'mean' or whatever (heaven forbid) but all the pro-ana types thing they feel fine and full of energy.
Just putting that out there.
This is why we're friends.
Wait. You mean it's not because of my boobs and ever growing collection of pretty skirts and dresses?
I've been misled.0 -
I do strength training, squats, abs, and cardio. I eat half of my calories back and have never hit a plateau, as of yet. So...0
-
maybe I should start a new thread on for this question but What is considered "TOO FAST" for those of you here?
is it more than 2 pounds per week?
Your missing the point, this isn't about speed, this is about the journey, learning from your mistakes, setting reasonable goals and reaching them, figuring out how you got there and make sure you never go back there again.... I have spent 4 years doings this, getting in a therapy pool to use water displacement to be able to stand (could even walk at 560 lbs.) so that I could exercise, spent 17 months in the pool before I could get fitted with braces to be able to get out of the pool and on solid ground, work through my addictions, learn from them and over come them.... I was in weightloss mode for 3 years, just finished 1 year of maintenance, and am back in weightloss mode to push through the last 20 lbs. I want to lose.... It was the journey that made me who I am today and I wouldn't want to rush any of it, this is my life and I am in no hurry for it to end.....
:drinker: 0 -
wut...? :explode: ok, no one is saying that 600 calories of food would suddenly disappear from your body after exercise. We seem to be using 1300 cals so let's be consistent. You eat 1300 calories in a day. You exercise to burn 600. Your body is then left with 700 calories to use to carry out daily functions. And most people need more than that to function properly.
No, that's not how it works at all (esp. if you have a high bodyfat %) - your body feeds off the stored glycogen (or the carbs stored in your muscle & liver) + your bodyfat for energy during exercise
BONUS TIP: if you exercise fasted or first thing in the morning you'll burn MORE FAT and less carbs (glycogen)
:noway: Ok, let me put it another way. My 1 year old is 3 feet tall and weighs 22 lbs. SHE eats more than 700 calories per day. So you're saying thag an adult who exercises off 600 calories should be able to carry out the remainder of their day on LESS than a toddler eats?0 -
the point I'm trying to make about "FAST" is that it's okay if you lose over 2 pounds a week and if you happen to lose 5 pounds in a week then that's okay and no need to panic about that or vice versa...
if you lose under 2 pounds a week that is also okay.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding here but I getting the feeling here that some of you think losing over 2 pounds a week is dangerous or unhealthy. It's perfectly fine to lose way over 2 pounds in your first weeks (or months) just starting a new diet + workout0 -
I do enjoy working out, but should I skip cardio until I loose the weight that I want to loose?
The more you exercise, the bigger the caloric deficit you can safely support. MFP in its natural state isn't set up to do that, unless you actively choose to only eat back up a percentage of exercise calories. If you use MFP in the "TDEE-X%" mode, then it happens automatically.
To put the exercise in perspective, a person with a 2500 cal daily burn could afford a 500 calorie deficit, or roughly 1 lb a week. Add in 1200 calories a day of exercise (which is a commitment, esp. for someone not fit!), and the same 20% deficit is 900 calories a day, or nearly 2 lbs a week.0 -
My pants will be LOOSE when I LOSE weight. Just sayin'...0
-
My pants will be LOOSE when I LOSE weight. Just sayin'...
Yes!!!! This ^^^ :drinker:0 -
the point I'm trying to make about "FAST" is that it's okay if you lose over 2 pounds a week and if you happen to lose 5 pounds in a week then that's okay and no need to panic about that or vice versa...
if you lose under 2 pounds a week that is also okay.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding here but I getting the feeling here that some of you think losing over 2 pounds a week is dangerous or unhealthy. It's perfectly fine to lose way over 2 pounds in your first weeks (or months) just starting a new diet + workout
Sweet baby JC. The reason people lose 10 lbs in the first week is because their glycogen stores are depleted and they're losing almost entirely water weight.0 -
BONUS TIP: if you exercise fasted or first thing in the morning you'll burn MORE FAT and less carbs (glycogen)
That's not correct, especially for anything even remotely cardio. The body is not capable of metabolizing fat stores quickly enough to support any serious level of activity, so pretty much all exercise in a fasted state will hit your glycogen stores. Even a person with very high body fat percentage will have trouble metabolizing more than 100 calories/hour from fat.0 -
the point I'm trying to make about "FAST" is that it's okay if you lose over 2 pounds a week and if you happen to lose 5 pounds in a week then that's okay and no need to panic about that or vice versa...
if you lose under 2 pounds a week that is also okay.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding here but I getting the feeling here that some of you think losing over 2 pounds a week is dangerous or unhealthy. It's perfectly fine to lose way over 2 pounds in your first weeks (or months) just starting a new diet + workout
Sweet baby JC. The reason people lose 10 lbs in the first week is because their glycogen stores are depleted and they're losing almost entirely water weight.
Yup!!!:drinker:0 -
wut...? :explode: ok, no one is saying that 600 calories of food would suddenly disappear from your body after exercise. We seem to be using 1300 cals so let's be consistent. You eat 1300 calories in a day. You exercise to burn 600. Your body is then left with 700 calories to use to carry out daily functions. And most people need more than that to function properly.
No, that's not how it works at all (esp. if you have a high bodyfat %) - your body feeds off the stored glycogen (or the carbs stored in your muscle & liver) + your bodyfat for energy during exercise
BONUS TIP: if you exercise fasted or first thing in the morning you'll burn MORE FAT and less carbs (glycogen)
:noway: Ok, let me put it another way. My 1 year old is 3 feet tall and weighs 22 lbs. SHE eats more than 700 calories per day. So you're saying thag an adult who exercises off 600 calories should be able to carry out the remainder of their day on LESS than a toddler eats?
Of course not, but you're not eating ONLY 700 cals. - you ate 1300
if your 1 year eats 700 calories and let's say (for sake of arguement) that your toddle burns another 100-to-200 calories exercising or their normal daily activity is She only eating 500 calories per day? of course not.
but look - let's not let me and you get off on the wrong foot here. WE BOTH agree that 1200-to-2000 cals per day is reasonable for MOST people to lose weight.
I think are main struggle here is to figure out where those DAMN exercise calories go - LOL.
but i say (and I know this) they are used mostly for burning extra FAT with the assitance of a calorie restrited diet.0 -
The question was What's the point of exercise if I eat back the calories? Not how many pounds can I safely lose a week.
MFP became my saving grace after decades of yo yo dieting and getting skinny fast. MFP is BASED on the premise that it gives you the deficit and if you CHOOSE to exercise you eat back those calories.
Other sites count that in when you say "I exercise 60 minutes, high intensity, 5 days a week" Then they give you 1700 calories a day and you cannot figure out why you are not losing. Well, you forgot to exercise! Or work got in the way or you are not working at high intensity.
So MFP puts in in YOUR lap. For me it is 1350 a day no exercise to lose 1/2 lb a week. It is enough for me, but if I burn 400 I eat them back because just like I fuel up my car, I fuel up my body.
What I don't get is this: Do you go to Weight Watcher's meetings and tell people not to count points??
:flowerforyou: Peace0 -
I am really fat, I have been here for 7 weeks, I have lost 11Kg. I am a 32yo male and MFP gave me 1850Kcal per day as a goal. That is quite a lot, so it might have a bearing on how i go about it... but
I dont pay too much attention to net or gross calories. I work out a few days a week and in those days I burn about 4to700 Kcal. I dont add walking... I always net less then my goal, sometime incl, sometimes not the exercise Kcals... I dont really bother about it.
I havent feel as well as these days for a decade... I guess trying to be too scientific about this is probably not necessary.
Now a question (PS I dont side either way).
What happens when someone does not eat back exercise calories, BUT hits his pre target goal and gets all the required nutrients from it... does the additional energy need come from carbs or good nutrients depriving the body? Or does the body attack the crappy fat reserves? Genuine question...0 -
I usually burn 1500-2200 calories at the gym because when you are 271lbs... Doing 1 hour on the ellipital alone burns ~1000cal.
I feel that if I just do 30-45, I feel that I am not even breaking a sweat. I know what people are thinking, your not breaking a sweat then your not working hard enough. I was using it figurative and not literary.
I keep raising the levels and putting resistance everyday I go so I know that my body is adjusting, but personally I like doing cardio. It relaxes me.
but like the other guy says... the more you burn the more you can eat which is exactly what I do. I am finding it hard at first to give up the "good, bad" food at first. I am sure when I am dropping weight then I will start to readjust.
but I have been burning lots of calories in the gym and I go out and pig out on anything I want and still loose weight. I just make sure I don't go overboard on carbs, fats, sugars. I just make sure I am within a good calorie deficient.
recently, I have been dropping inches, but not the weight. So, I take it that maybe everything that I am putting into my body is being converted.
sorry about just rambling on... I am sure there is something in these sentences people will find useful.0 -
This!!!0 -
What I don't get is this: Do you go to Weight Watcher's meetings and tell people not to count points??
:flowerforyou: Peace
*cough cough*
^^ That up there0 -
wut...? :explode: ok, no one is saying that 600 calories of food would suddenly disappear from your body after exercise. We seem to be using 1300 cals so let's be consistent. You eat 1300 calories in a day. You exercise to burn 600. Your body is then left with 700 calories to use to carry out daily functions. And most people need more than that to function properly.
No, that's not how it works at all (esp. if you have a high bodyfat %) - your body feeds off the stored glycogen (or the carbs stored in your muscle & liver) + your bodyfat for energy during exercise
BONUS TIP: if you exercise fasted or first thing in the morning you'll burn MORE FAT and less carbs (glycogen)
:noway: Ok, let me put it another way. My 1 year old is 3 feet tall and weighs 22 lbs. SHE eats more than 700 calories per day. So you're saying thag an adult who exercises off 600 calories should be able to carry out the remainder of their day on LESS than a toddler eats?
Of course not, but you're not eating ONLY 700 cals. - you ate 1300
if your 1 year eats 700 calories and let's say (for sake of arguement) that your toddle burns another 100-to-200 calories exercising or their normal daily activity is She only eating 500 calories per day? of course not.
but look - let's not let me and you get off on the wrong foot here. WE BOTH agree that 1200-to-2000 cals per day is reasonable for MOST people to lose weight.
I think are main struggle here is to figure out where those DAMN exercise calories go - LOL.
but i say (and I know this) they are used mostly for burning extra FAT with the assitance of a calorie restrited diet.
But if you filled up your gas tank with just enough fuel to get to a destination, and drove farther than expected, you would NEED to refuel the car.
You also need to refuel your BODY.
I have yet to meet a doctor who disagreed with this premise. As a matter of fact, I ask ANY doctor that I see about MFP and the calorie counting and eating back the calories and every one of them has said it is perfect! As a matter of fact one of my doctors gives the MFP info to his patients because he wants them to eat ENOUGH.0 -
I usually burn 1500-2200 calories at the gym because when you are 271lbs... Doing 1 hour on the ellipital alone burns ~1000cal.
To burn 1000 calories at that weight in one hour requires an exertion level equivalent to running 6 miles at a 10 min/mile pace. If you don't have the aerobic fitness for a run like that, you almost certainly are burning a lot less on the elliptical than the machine or your HRM says you're burning....recently, I have been dropping inches, but not the weight
That would be consistent with eating back a percentage of over-estimated exercise calories.0 -
wut...? :explode: ok, no one is saying that 600 calories of food would suddenly disappear from your body after exercise. We seem to be using 1300 cals so let's be consistent. You eat 1300 calories in a day. You exercise to burn 600. Your body is then left with 700 calories to use to carry out daily functions. And most people need more than that to function properly.
No, that's not how it works at all (esp. if you have a high bodyfat %) - your body feeds off the stored glycogen (or the carbs stored in your muscle & liver) + your bodyfat for energy during exercise
BONUS TIP: if you exercise fasted or first thing in the morning you'll burn MORE FAT and less carbs (glycogen)
:noway: Ok, let me put it another way. My 1 year old is 3 feet tall and weighs 22 lbs. SHE eats more than 700 calories per day. So you're saying thag an adult who exercises off 600 calories should be able to carry out the remainder of their day on LESS than a toddler eats?
Of course not, but you're not eating ONLY 700 cals. - you ate 1300
if your 1 year eats 700 calories and let's say (for sake of arguement) that your toddle burns another 100-to-200 calories exercising or their normal daily activity is She only eating 500 calories per day? of course not.
but look - let's not let me and you get off on the wrong foot here. WE BOTH agree that 1200-to-2000 cals per day is reasonable for MOST people to lose weight.
I think are main struggle here is to figure out where those DAMN exercise calories go - LOL.
but i say (and I know this) they are used mostly for burning extra FAT with the assitance of a calorie restrited diet.
But if you filled up your gas tank with just enough fuel to get to a destination, and drove farther than expected, you would NEED to refuel the car.
You also need to refuel your BODY.
I have yet to meet a doctor who disagreed with this premise. As a matter of fact, I ask ANY doctor that I see about MFP and the calorie counting and eating back the calories and every one of them has said it is perfect! As a matter of fact one of my doctors gives the MFP info to his patients because he wants them to eat ENOUGH.
Great analogy but your body is way more complex than a car and here's why...
the car does not have a HUGE ENERGY Reserve like our bodies do.
You see, all the excess energy (calories) we eat get stored as fat. You can't put too much gas in a car without it spilling out. Your body takes the excess and it turns it into FAT (a backup energy source) so when you exercise or eat less your body burns the stored fat for energy = weight loss.
but let's go back to the car analogy to someone who is under 5,4 or 3% bodyfat - then we may have a more accurate analogy.0 -
I have a heart rate monitor that states ~1000... The elliptial machine states around 875-910 depends on the resistance. Then, MFP runs about 1,150... so i will just average it at ~1000.
My heart rate stays above 155 to 172 at most times during this exercise.
How can I have 3 things telling me something to an average of ~1000 and yet still have the calories really be under.
So, I am 271 29 years of age. I have a body fat of 32.2%. I am 5'9.
MFP: 1106 Calories/per hour
HRM: 1012 Calories/per hour
Machine: ~945 calories per hour.
So what exactly am I burning if all three have all around the same idea calorie burn for my stature?0 -
wut...? :explode: ok, no one is saying that 600 calories of food would suddenly disappear from your body after exercise. We seem to be using 1300 cals so let's be consistent. You eat 1300 calories in a day. You exercise to burn 600. Your body is then left with 700 calories to use to carry out daily functions. And most people need more than that to function properly.
No, that's not how it works at all (esp. if you have a high bodyfat %) - your body feeds off the stored glycogen (or the carbs stored in your muscle & liver) + your bodyfat for energy during exercise
BONUS TIP: if you exercise fasted or first thing in the morning you'll burn MORE FAT and less carbs (glycogen)
:noway: Ok, let me put it another way. My 1 year old is 3 feet tall and weighs 22 lbs. SHE eats more than 700 calories per day. So you're saying thag an adult who exercises off 600 calories should be able to carry out the remainder of their day on LESS than a toddler eats?
Of course not, but you're not eating ONLY 700 cals. - you ate 1300
if your 1 year eats 700 calories and let's say (for sake of arguement) that your toddle burns another 100-to-200 calories exercising or their normal daily activity is She only eating 500 calories per day? of course not.
but look - let's not let me and you get off on the wrong foot here. WE BOTH agree that 1200-to-2000 cals per day is reasonable for MOST people to lose weight.
I think are main struggle here is to figure out where those DAMN exercise calories go - LOL.
but i say (and I know this) they are used mostly for burning extra FAT with the assitance of a calorie restrited diet.
But if you filled up your gas tank with just enough fuel to get to a destination, and drove farther than expected, you would NEED to refuel the car.
You also need to refuel your BODY.
I have yet to meet a doctor who disagreed with this premise. As a matter of fact, I ask ANY doctor that I see about MFP and the calorie counting and eating back the calories and every one of them has said it is perfect! As a matter of fact one of my doctors gives the MFP info to his patients because he wants them to eat ENOUGH.
Great analogy but your body is way more complex than a car and here's why...
the car does not have a HUGE ENERGY Reserve like our bodies do.
You see, all the excess energy (calories) we eat get stored as fat. You can't put too much gas in a car without it spilling out. Your body takes the excess and it turns it into FAT (a backup energy source) so when you exercise or eat less your body burns the stored fat for energy = weight loss.
but let's go back to the car analogy to someone who is under 5,4 or 3% bodyfat - then we may have a more accurate analogy.
Learn a bit about the NEAT method, and then criticize. It is simply one approach to calculating your calories, and differs from the TDEE calculation. After that, if you want to use TDEE, then use TDEE, but at least understand them first. The point is that if you don't eat back exercise calories while using the NEAT method, then you are eating less than what you are (should) be targeting. If you are obese, it won't matter as much, but you still need to be getting sufficient nutrition and that gets progressively harder the fewer calories you eat.0 -
They are all wrong. Not a single one of those things actually measures calorie burn.I have a heart rate monitor that states ~1000... The elliptial machine states around 875-910 depends on the resistance. Then, MFP runs about 1,150... so i will just average it at ~1000.
Heart rate based devices are notorious for over-estimating calorie burn in people with below-average cardiovascular fitness.My heart rate stays above 155 to 172 at most times during this exercise.
Because they're all doing the same math from similar assumptions. It's not three voices - it's one voice, in three dialects.How can I have 3 things telling me something to an average of ~1000 and yet still have the calories really be under.
I would start by cutting the numbers in half. You'll have to track for a few weeks to see if actual weigh loss matches the assumption (this of course requires diligent food logging). Adjust from there, as cutting by half may well still be a considerable over-estimate. If you want to be super-conservative, cut the reported number by 75%, as that may give you room to adjust upwards later, which may be lighter mental load (it would be for me, anyway!)So what exactly am I burning if all three have all around the same idea calorie burn for my stature?
Good luck!0 -
Hi OP hopefully you have had your question answered now. My advice is not about eating back calories but, ironically, about advice. There is a multi-billion dollar weight loss industry out there from Weight Watchers down to independent P.Ts who know that if they get people to lose weight quickly the same people will gain it back a short time later. they then go straight back to the same people who helped them lose the first time. The business model is about revolving doors, it's not in their interest to sell sustainable life long weight loss. The people on the MFP boards are not in the business. Look at the length of time some of them have been here, look at their tickers and hear their stories. They have got there by the long road of hard work and sensible eating. They also have nothing to gain from sharing their advice.
Just something to consider when you read back over your thread. Good luck on your journey0 -
unsure whether it's gone off topic now but in answer to your question, and in agreement with the first few answers, yes you're already in deficit and when you burn calories you're increasing the deficit.. too much and your body can enter starvation mode and will essentially hold onto your fat making it harder to budge it.
let's say you need 1800 per day to maintain weight, so mfp tells you to eat, not exercise, just eat 1300.. that's a 500kcal deficit and you're body is essentially in weight loss mode
say like you burn 300kcal at the gym, your body is in 800kcal deficit which is a bit too much so you eat the calories back giving your body the energy. The exercise you have just done though has still been beneficial to your body, toning up muscle, burning fat etc so you havent just wasted your time.
0 -
never "eat back" your exercise calories UNLESS you want to lose weight slower OR if for some reason you are hungier (which happens with increased activity) but my advice is to NOT eat those calories back. If defeats the purpose of exercise.
You should exercise to burn extra fat, calories or lose weight faster.
You shouldn't exercise just so you can eat more
This is terrible advice, I advise no one to follow it. Losing weight as fast as possible to the point of endangering your health is NOT the way to go.
QFT!
The point of exercise should be fitness, not burning a certain amount of calories.
That's why I eat TDEE-%. I keep my exercise goals completely separate from weight loss goals.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions