Should I Eat Back The Calories?

amos127
amos127 Posts: 4
in Getting Started
Hi! I'm a newbie. This question might have been asked a thousand times. But I won't get answers if I don't ask (and I cant find any thread). So, should I or shouldn't I eat the calories back?

example of the numbers today:

goal: 1740
exercise: -1023 [i worked my *kitten* off today. spinning class is crazy! and A couple of minutes walk/sprint on the treadmill. I use HRM to calculate burned cals ]
food: +1948 [I'm 208 over my goal :( ]
net: 925

should I eat till I have a net of 0?
would I still lose weight if I did?

thanks :)

Edit: i have a sedentary lifestyle and only started working out today
«134

Replies

  • clarebear230786
    clarebear230786 Posts: 30 Member
    If your goal is 1740 you need to eat another 815 calories
    (your goal calories - your net so far)
    Hope this helps! :)
  • tesha_chandler
    tesha_chandler Posts: 378 Member
    I have read that you should eat at least 75% of your workout calories back. (Exercising off everything you eat every day is actually considered to be a form of anorexia and is unhealthy for you) BUT my Dr suggested that I have a cheat day, then fast the next day. On the days that I fast, I burn off everything I eat. So pretty much, you should eat your 1,200 (or whatever your goal is) calories + 75% of work out calories.
  • amyhoss
    amyhoss Posts: 414 Member
    I think it depends on your body. I didn't feel like I was progressing when I ate back my exercise calories. Some people, however, do just fine eating them all back and may even work out just to be able to eat more. For now, I am eating back 50% of my workout calories.
  • amyhoss
    amyhoss Posts: 414 Member
    Awesome workout btw!!
  • 2dogzrule
    2dogzrule Posts: 245 Member
    I think it depends on your body and how you lose weight best. MFP says eat them back. I rarely eat mine back and do well losing weight that way. My goal is 1500 and my net is often 900-1200.
  • tryclyn
    tryclyn Posts: 2,414 Member
    I would suggest some reading to start with.
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1187899-in-place-of-a-roadmap-short-n-sweet-reposted
    http://nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/07/21/meet-staci-your-new-powerlifting-super-hero/

    and a group to check out
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/10118-eat-train-progress
    (read all the stickies first)
  • da_bears10089
    da_bears10089 Posts: 1,791 Member
    Eat back exercise calories as long as when you calculated your intake, you did NOT include exercise. For me, my goal is 1670, and that includes my exercise.

    If you set it to sedentary, then eat back exercise calories.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • amos127
    amos127 Posts: 4
    I did 45mins of spinning class and 30 mins walk on the treadmill.

    So I should be eating it back. Thanks.
    I have a very sedentary lifestyle and I only started working out today. Yay. :)
  • swanny320
    swanny320 Posts: 169 Member
    Personally I believe in calories in, calories out. It takes 3500 calorie deficit to burn a pound. If you're eating back what you worked off, it doesn't seem to make sense that you would lose. Now, I do think that if you are feeling extra hungry and want to eat, eating them back is fine...but remember, the more of a deficit you make, the faster you will lose.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    And a spinning class doesn't burn that much. Your HRM is probably incorrect. That is too much.

    She didn't say it was all from a spinning class, but even still it is possible to burn that many calories in a spin class.
  • RGv2
    RGv2 Posts: 5,789 Member
    Personally I believe in calories in, calories out. It takes 3500 calorie deficit to burn a pound. If you're eating back what you worked off, it doesn't seem to make sense that you would lose. Now, I do think that if you are feeling extra hungry and want to eat, eating them back is fine...but remember, the more of a deficit you make, the faster you will lose.

    Then you don't understand how it all works.

    Yep. Poster has been at MFP for 4 years and still doesn't understand the deficit is built in.
  • Pirate_chick
    Pirate_chick Posts: 1,216 Member
    you can eat back some but not all.
  • scrittrice
    scrittrice Posts: 345 Member
    Personally I believe in calories in, calories out. It takes 3500 calorie deficit to burn a pound. If you're eating back what you worked off, it doesn't seem to make sense that you would lose. Now, I do think that if you are feeling extra hungry and want to eat, eating them back is fine...but remember, the more of a deficit you make, the faster you will lose.

    But MFP already builds in that deficit when it gives you a number. You are supposed to eat back your exercise calories. The whole point is to lose at a controlled pace, not as fast as possible.
  • tomwatso
    tomwatso Posts: 1,304 Member
    I eat mine back. It has not had an adverse effect.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Holly_Roman_Empire
    Holly_Roman_Empire Posts: 4,440 Member
    I think it depends on your body. I didn't feel like I was progressing when I ate back my exercise calories. Some people, however, do just fine eating them all back and may even work out just to be able to eat more. For now, I am eating back 50% of my workout calories.

    It depends on nothing. MFP is designed to eat the exercise calories. Why do you think it adds them back when you log it?
  • amos127
    amos127 Posts: 4
    I would suggest some reading to start with.
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1187899-in-place-of-a-roadmap-short-n-sweet-reposted
    http://nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/07/21/meet-staci-your-new-powerlifting-super-hero/

    and a group to check out
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/10118-eat-train-progress
    (read all the stickies first)

    Thanks :)
  • asdowe13
    asdowe13 Posts: 1,951 Member
    And a spinning class doesn't burn that much. Your HRM is probably incorrect. That is too much.

    She didn't say it was all from a spinning class, but even still it is possible to burn that many calories in a spin class.

    I don't do spin, but I ride my bike. Biking is probably the most efficient exercise in terms of it hardly burns anything. I have to ride 10 miles to match a 3 mile run. So, I doubt spinning in a 45 class plus a 30 minute walk is above 1,000 calories. But, whatever, I don't care. I'm just saying, she might be back saying it's not working, and I'd be looking at those burns as a reason.

    You don't! but you have probably been exercising longer than the OP and myself, when I first got back on to my bike i could easily burn 6-700 in 45 minutes. Now though i have that way down and yes I have to bike substantially more then running to burn more calories.

    Cardio makes the heart stronger.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • amos127
    amos127 Posts: 4
    And a spinning class doesn't burn that much. Your HRM is probably incorrect. That is too much.

    She didn't say it was all from a spinning class, but even still it is possible to burn that many calories in a spin class.

    I don't do spin, but I ride my bike. Biking is probably the most efficient exercise in terms of it hardly burns anything. I have to ride 10 miles to match a 3 mile run. So, I doubt spinning in a 45 class plus a 30 minute walk is above 1,000 calories. But, whatever, I don't care. I'm just saying, she might be back saying it's not working, and I'd be looking at those burns as a reason.

    You don't! but you have probably been exercising longer than the OP and myself, when I first got back on to my bike i could easily burn 6-700 in 45 minutes. Now though i have that way down and yes I have to bike substantially more then running to burn more calories.

    Cardio makes the heart stronger.

    Yeah, I was thinking about that too. Sometimes I forget what it's like to start.

    I'll take note of that. Thank you.
  • EmotionalEater84
    EmotionalEater84 Posts: 311 Member
    I don't. When I actually logged my exercise I didn't like the amount of calories MFP said I burnt. I'm even skeptical of my HRM. If you are hungry over your cals (when set at sedentary) and have worked out just know you can eat more and still be fine!

    Personally, I am a big believer in listening to your body. If your tummy's growling you need to feed it ;)

    You'll find what works for you soon enough!! Best of luck :)
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • GBrady43068
    GBrady43068 Posts: 1,256 Member
    I also have a sedentary lifestyle (cubicle/desk job).

    I have been losing 1-2 lbs a week since October.

    Since the MFP site tends to overstate your calorie burn, I eat back 2/3 of my calories. In other words, when I log exercise, I multiply the estimated burn MFP gives me by .666 and then enter that number manually as how much I burned:

    Example: MFP says I burn 999 calories doing Ironman Yo-Yoing for an hour. 999 * .666 = 666 calories.

    My answer is yes...eat the calories back. It fuels your workouts and then you aren't always hangry and hateful to those around you. :laugh:
  • chsa22
    chsa22 Posts: 33 Member
    I look at the calories burned from exercise as "earning back calories". But I don't necessarily eat them all back. It all depends on my appetite. I have MFP set so that I lose .5lb per week. I know that is minimal amount of weight, but I've always been happy with my body, and I have about 10 lbs to lose total. I'd rather go slow to avoid feeling like I'm depriving myself. (I love food!)

    With that said, MFP takes into account the calories I burn just by being, then takes into account how much I want to lose per week, and I came out with 1560 calories per day to lose .5lb a week. When I work out, I tend to underestimate how many calories I burned so that I don't overdo it with eating. Today, I burned a little over 100 calories in my morning workout, so technically I can 'eat that back'. I may, I may not. If I do eat them back, it still leaves me at or a little below my target of 1560 calories for the day which means I *should* still lose .5lb per week.

    Generally, it is not a good idea to go below 1200 calories in a day. So if someone's allocated 1200 calories a day to lose a certain amount of lbs per week, and they burn any number of calories working out, they need to eat it back, or otherwise they will be below 1200 calories, which again, is not healthy, especially in the long run.
  • loubidy
    loubidy Posts: 440 Member
    I don't believe you can burn that many calories. I honestly don't believe you can burn more than 10kcal a minute. Just my opinion though
  • eddiesmith1
    eddiesmith1 Posts: 1,550 Member
    because I know the workout calories burned are inaccurate at best i will eat back a portion of them, some days all but usually 50-75% (with the exception of any map my fitness measurement which is out in left field telling me i burned 657 in less than half an hour of cycling uphill to work - not likely MMFapps i eat about 30% of the calculation)
    If you are getting a tone of exercise and not maintaining a reasonable caloric intake you are losing good lean muscle as well as the fat
  • marian4marian
    marian4marian Posts: 94 Member
    a person i know (who has used this for 2 years and lost 41 lbs) says never eat back more than 25%.

Categories