Eating Back Exercise Calories

ossentia · November 2013

How many of you are eating back your exercise calories? In full or partial?

When I started MFP last month, I was not exercising. Since then, I have started walking a few miles a day (which burns very little thanks to an 18 min/ mile pace :frown: ) and doing strength training and cardio a few times a week. I really don't feel that I'm burning enough right now to justify eating extra calories, but I've never been this motivated to lose the weight, and I really want to make sure I'm going about it the "right" way.

Stats (if it helps): I am 5' 2.5" (yes that half is important). My weigh-in this morning was 181 lbs (though I my official weigh day is Tuesday). I started at 190 and change. I have 1370 calories for the day, and I use them all.

SezxyStef · November 2013

MFP is setup to eat your calories back. As long as you don't fall below 1200 consistently you should be fine.

Pearsquared · November 2013

My philosophy is that the bigger deficit you create through exercise, the more you should consider eating those back. I wouldn't worry about it too much with your walking, but I wouldn't feel guilty at all for eating back those calories if you have a day where you feel you need some extra calories. If you start doing more intense exercises, however, I would recommend eating those back at least partially so you're not fatiguing your body through not giving it enough energy (in the form of calories).

Rosannajo88 · November 2013

Its all trial and error and finding what works for you personally. Maybe eat back your exercise calories for the next four weeks and if you are not happy with the results try eating back only half for the following four weeks. Everyone responds differently, its about finding what works for you xx

CharlotteAnneUK · November 2013

I was eating my fitness calories, but only because I love to eat.... a lot...

At the weekend I was watching the biggest looser couples that is running on a Sunday morning and one of the guys on there put two pounds on and the trainer suggested it was because he was eating his exercise calories.

This might be why I have not really moved much in my weight. This week I have not exercised and I am trying to stay in my calories and my plan it to try not eating them and see what happens then.

jacksonpt · November 2013

257_Lag · November 2013

I always eat at least half and usually most of them.

If your car gets 30 MPG and you put 1 gallon of gas in it you are going to be hard pressed to drive 40 miles

ossentia · November 2013

Thank you all for your suggestions.

ossentia · November 2013

Thanks for the links. Clearly this question is asked a lot, but I do appreciate the responses. I've been fat for a long time. There's a big learning curve to getting in shape, much bigger than expected, and the more info I get, the better I feel. Thanks again!

sijomial · November 2013

From someone else who was fat for a long time.....
Yes please do eat back your exercise calories - I've eaten mine back at an average of 5,400 calories a week.
The method does work.

Be patient, go for slow, sustainable, weight loss and use it as a motivator to get fitter and healthier.
I would always choose lots of food, lots of exercise over being starving hungry and less active.

farniente8 · November 2013

Honestly I would never have started to exercise as much as I do if it were not for the fact that I get to eat those calories back. Now I just love to exercise, so really a win win.

ShannonMpls · November 2013

At the weekend I was watching the biggest looser couples that is running on a Sunday morning and one of the guys on there put two pounds on and the trainer suggested it was because he was eating his exercise calories.

If an individual gains weight after starting to eat calories burned through exercise, that is because: (1) the individual was miscalculating his or her maintenance needs; (2) the individual was failing to properly log his or her intake; and/or (3) the individual overestimated calories burned during exercise.

I blame a combination of (2) and (3) primarily.

OP, it's really pretty easy. You're probably lightly active now. Look up what the lightly active TDEE is for your size, age, and sex. http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html

Now subtract some calories from that. You have 70 to lose, so you can have a pretty big deficit. Adjust your intake based on scale trends over time (using more data points than one week, especially if you are female). If you follow this method, ignore calories burned when planning your intake.

ShannonMpls · November 2013

If your car gets 30 MPG and you put 1 gallon of gas in it you are going to be hard pressed to drive 40 miles

This analogy makes no sense at all for someone losing weight.

Cars do not have an extra fuel tank; your body does. It's called body fat.

The entire goal of weight loss is to force your body to, to use your analogy, drive 40 miles instead of 30 miles on 1 gallon of gas. A deficit is required.

Since your body is quite different than a car, you do require fuel (food) regularly. You can't, again keeping with the analogy, expect to drive 80 miles on 1 gallon regularly without experiencing ill effects. But you cannot lose weight if you give your body exactly what it needs in a day. That would be maintenance.

WalkingAlong · November 2013

I always eat at least half and usually most of them.

If your car gets 30 MPG and you put 1 gallon of gas in it you are going to be hard pressed to drive 40 miles

But if your car's gas tank was 'healthy' holding 110 'gallons' but was holding 180, you could and probably should drive that 40 miles without adding more gas on top of the minimum daily requirement.

jacksonpt · November 2013

If your car gets 30 MPG and you put 1 gallon of gas in it you are going to be hard pressed to drive 40 miles

This analogy makes no sense at all for someone losing weight.

Cars do not have an extra fuel tank; your body does. It's called body fat.

The entire goal of weight loss is to force your body to drive 40 miles instead of 30 miles on 1 gallon of gas. That's precisely what a deficit does.

Since your body is quite different than a car, you do require fuel (food) regularly. But you cannot lose weight if you give your body exactly what it needs in a day. That would be maintenance.

That's true... but there is a limit as to how much fat the body can metabolize, and how quickly. So relying heavily on fat stores for fuel isn't always the best approach.

ShannonMpls · November 2013

If your car gets 30 MPG and you put 1 gallon of gas in it you are going to be hard pressed to drive 40 miles

This analogy makes no sense at all for someone losing weight.

Cars do not have an extra fuel tank; your body does. It's called body fat.

The entire goal of weight loss is to force your body to drive 40 miles instead of 30 miles on 1 gallon of gas. That's precisely what a deficit does.

Since your body is quite different than a car, you do require fuel (food) regularly. But you cannot lose weight if you give your body exactly what it needs in a day. That would be maintenance.

That's true... but there is a limit as to how much fat the body can metabolize, and how quickly. So relying heavily on fat stores for fuel isn't always the best approach.

That's why I said you do require food regularly. Body=car is not an apt analogy. We lose weight by using our fat stores to fuel activity.

Francl27 · November 2013

I always did. Now I just do TDEE-20% though... but definitely factor in my walks in there.

It doesn't burn 'very little' though. At 170 lbs I was burning 200-250 calories walking for 45 minutes. It's not negligible on a 1200/1400 calories diet.

heybales · November 2013

I was eating my fitness calories, but only because I love to eat.... a lot...

At the weekend I was watching the biggest looser couples that is running on a Sunday morning and one of the guys on there put two pounds on and the trainer suggested it was because he was eating his exercise calories.

This might be why I have not really moved much in my weight. This week I have not exercised and I am trying to stay in my calories and my plan it to try not eating them and see what happens then.

Well, they finally ate enough carbs for the body to store more, which always stores with water.

For you, you will lose weight.

But what is the weight that you lose?
Fat, muscle, or glucose with water?

Guess which is the only one to very minorly affect your metabolism?

So I'm guessing you blindly accepted MFP's calorie suggestion for eating level.
So why are you going to now not accept their higher eating level when you actually do more?

jacksonpt · November 2013

If your car gets 30 MPG and you put 1 gallon of gas in it you are going to be hard pressed to drive 40 miles

This analogy makes no sense at all for someone losing weight.

Cars do not have an extra fuel tank; your body does. It's called body fat.

The entire goal of weight loss is to force your body to drive 40 miles instead of 30 miles on 1 gallon of gas. That's precisely what a deficit does.

Since your body is quite different than a car, you do require fuel (food) regularly. But you cannot lose weight if you give your body exactly what it needs in a day. That would be maintenance.

That's true... but there is a limit as to how much fat the body can metabolize, and how quickly. So relying heavily on fat stores for fuel isn't always the best approach.

That's why I said you do require food regularly. Body=car is not an apt analogy. We lose weight by using our fat stores to fuel activity.

In the most literal sense, you're right. But it's still a good, albeit it very general, analogy for people who gravitate towards very large (i.e. unhealthy) deficits.

Yes, you can metabolize fat for energy, but at some point you have to put some gas in the tank.

heybales · November 2013

That's why I said you do require food regularly. Body=car is not an apt analogy. We lose weight by using our fat stores to fuel activity.

Well, that is a gross over simplification too that is not correct either.

Your activity is going to be fueled by some ratio of carbs to fat depending on how intense it is, more intense, more carbs. In fact until you get to higher reaches you burn the same quantity of fat, until none going anaerobic.

You not eating enough to have enough carbs available doesn't change that ratio in any substantial way, all it causes is protein to be converted to glucose to be used as fuel along with the fat.

Hence the reason you lose muscle mass when you diet, unless you do several things right to prevent or minimize it.

Your phrase would be closer to reality to say we use our fat stores to fuel inactivity.

Blokeypoo · November 2013

I'm a maintainer. Rightly or wrongly I eat 1500 in week regardless of cals burned then I eat pretty much what I like at the w/e. I did the same when dieting but was a little less "free" at the w/e to make sure I still lost.

Eating Back Exercise Calories

Replies

Categories