Calories In vs. Out + Exercise Debate!! HELP!!!
Replies
-
Thank you
I may be out of the loop... but what is VLCD?What you're advocating is a VLCD, you're not going to find much support for that around here. In fact, it's against the community guidelines.
Very Low Calorie Diet.0 -
So, please let me ask all of you. My calories that I can eat each day, is 1900. I am very active all day and I cycle, and I can exercise and burn up to 2500 calories a day in addition. Are you saying that I should be eating the 1900 calories and whatever I exercise, in order to retain my muscle and burn fat? That would be over 4000 calories some days. Please explain
4000 is a lot
So just make sure you are accurate in the calories burned area.....
Cause if you aren't, and you pound down 4000 calories.....that could be bad
Agreed. I mean I would doubt your burn calc there but to directly answer your question if you burned 2500 calories in exercise and your goal was 1900 calories then that day you should eat 4400 calories yes.0 -
Alright so me and my girlfriend have been debating on this topic for a few weeks now and I would love to get some sort of confirmation on it from some of you folks. I've been dieting for almost a month now and I've been seeing great results and weight loss. I put my target calorie intake goal at 1,200 (I know its far below the standard male intake). I also have been jogging and lifting every other day. Since the start of the diet I have lost 20 pounds. I have had cheat days on which my weight will go up a couple lbs for a day or two then it drops right down. My girlfriend on the other hand has lost some weight but not as fast and not as much as shes's wanted.
Here's the debate/disagreement/headache me and my girlfriend have been having since the start:
I've been saying that if my calorie intake goal is hit, that's it. Whether I've exercised and earned more calories is immaterial. I shouldn't eat more or use exercise as an excuse to eat more. For instance if my calorie intake goal is 1,200 and I burn 600 calories jogging, MFP tells me I've "earned" 600 calories extra for the day. Keep in mind there's an asterisk next to that announcement when MFP places it. But I've been telling her not to eat back the calories shes been burning because having that deficit is really important. She says that she should eat the calories back because more exercise = more nutrients and calories needed for the body.
Bottom line/question: should you eat calories back that you burn from exercise? Or are those calories burned essential to weight loss? Once you've hit your calorie intake goal should you stop whether you've exercised or not?
Answers please!! Friend requests as well please! I need more motivation!!
Depends on how you come up with your caloric numbers
Do you go w/ MFP or TDEE
If you calculate using TDEE method, then your exercise calories are part of that number
So you don't eat them back
If you go w/ MFP, it gives you your baseline numbers as if you did no exercise.
Then when you exercise, it adds those calories to your baseline number.....
So you "could" eat them back.....or eat half of them back, or none
Your call.
Regarding if you exercise or not, see above.
Your call.
With MFP, if you have not exercised, then you have no calories added to your base number.
Honestly when you go with TDEE you ARE eating your exercise calories back because your exercise calories are part of the calculation to determine your goal based on your desired deficit. You just don't eat back your exercise calories again on top of that because that would be double dipping.
Isn't that what I said?0 -
Alright so me and my girlfriend have been debating on this topic for a few weeks now and I would love to get some sort of confirmation on it from some of you folks. I've been dieting for almost a month now and I've been seeing great results and weight loss. I put my target calorie intake goal at 1,200 (I know its far below the standard male intake). I also have been jogging and lifting every other day. Since the start of the diet I have lost 20 pounds. I have had cheat days on which my weight will go up a couple lbs for a day or two then it drops right down. My girlfriend on the other hand has lost some weight but not as fast and not as much as shes's wanted.
Here's the debate/disagreement/headache me and my girlfriend have been having since the start:
I've been saying that if my calorie intake goal is hit, that's it. Whether I've exercised and earned more calories is immaterial. I shouldn't eat more or use exercise as an excuse to eat more. For instance if my calorie intake goal is 1,200 and I burn 600 calories jogging, MFP tells me I've "earned" 600 calories extra for the day. Keep in mind there's an asterisk next to that announcement when MFP places it. But I've been telling her not to eat back the calories shes been burning because having that deficit is really important. She says that she should eat the calories back because more exercise = more nutrients and calories needed for the body.
Bottom line/question: should you eat calories back that you burn from exercise? Or are those calories burned essential to weight loss? Once you've hit your calorie intake goal should you stop whether you've exercised or not?
Answers please!! Friend requests as well please! I need more motivation!!
Depends on how you come up with your caloric numbers
Do you go w/ MFP or TDEE
If you calculate using TDEE method, then your exercise calories are part of that number
So you don't eat them back
If you go w/ MFP, it gives you your baseline numbers as if you did no exercise.
Then when you exercise, it adds those calories to your baseline number.....
So you "could" eat them back.....or eat half of them back, or none
Your call.
Regarding if you exercise or not, see above.
Your call.
With MFP, if you have not exercised, then you have no calories added to your base number.
Honestly when you go with TDEE you ARE eating your exercise calories back because your exercise calories are part of the calculation to determine your goal based on your desired deficit. You just don't eat back your exercise calories again on top of that because that would be double dipping.
Isn't that what I said?
What you said was correct I was just attempting to clarify because a lot of people get confused when they here that "Using TDEE method you don't eat your exercise calories back" because they think that means they aren't eating their exercise calories back using TDEE...and they are.0 -
Personally, I think everybody has an individual fuel mix. This 'fuel mix' includes Total number of calories as well as what the fuel consists of. That said, when you set up your Goals in MFP. Read what it says on the screen. I took it to mean that the 1200 calories, was the total that I should end up with as a minimum after I've backed out my exercises calories. To me, that meant, NO LOWER THAN 1200 calories.
Now to my fuel mix theory. We're all different. Some of us might get stuck at 1200 Net calories. Some of us may find out at some point that our magic number for weight loss is actually higher than that. If you don't log what you eat, and don't log your exercise, or take a look at the Reports once in awhile you'll never notice this. The 1200 calories a day is a safe starting point, but be open that your number could be different.
Another note on the fuel mix. The Calories in/Calories out crowd will defend themselves to the death. Again, log your food and check out the Reports once in awhile. You might just discover that your fuel mix for weight loss may consist of more veggies vs. starchy carbohydrates. That's the beauty of logging what you eat. When you've had a good week, you can repeat that week because its recorded! To some extent you can eat what you want and lose as long as there's a calorie deficit. The trick is moderation! Personally, I don't want to be the one that tries to live off of brownies and donuts to see if I can lose weight that way!0 -
What you said was correct I was just attempting to clarify because a lot of people get confused when they here that "Using TDEE method you don't eat your exercise calories back" because they think that means they aren't eating their exercise calories back using TDEE...and they are.
Rgr that0 -
I cycle and track my calorie burn with a heart rate monitor. It typically varies from 360-540 calories per hour over a long ride depending on terrain and how hard I push myself. A day when I really work on speed or hill climbing could be more than 540/hour but still would not equal the burns you're estimating.
Sorry forgot to use the quote - this was for Nancytyc0 -
I may be out of the loop... but what is VLCD?What you're advocating is a VLCD, you're not going to find much support for that around here. In fact, it's against the community guidelines.
I didn't understand this either0 -
MFP calculates it for me. I use a stop watch on my bike odometer to count the time cycling. I also use a cycling website that has a calculator based on your speed, time, and weight. Both are within 25 calories of each other (the two sites, that is). www.bicycling.com says 75 minutes at 16 - 20 mph at my weight is 1735 calories. I also walk and do other exercises some days. I am a truck driver and when I am out for three hours lugging around 100 pound tarps to tap a load, I add that in too. There are days that I actually have very high exercise numbers (according to MFP). So, I am supposed to eat all those calories, the 1900 and the (whatever I burn). How could I possibly do that? I could barely get in 1500 calories today.Generally 60 - 75 minutes cycling at 16-18 mph, current weight is 254. Please tell me what that burns according to your figures. Please. Thanks.So, please let me ask all of you. My calories that I can eat each day, is 1900. I am very active all day and I cycle, and I can exercise and burn up to 2500 calories a day in addition. Are you saying that I should be eating the 1900 calories and whatever I exercise, in order to retain my muscle and burn fat? That would be over 4000 calories some days. Please explain
Assuming your numbers are correct, yes. But I am guessing that your exercise calories may be inflated
I can't tell you what your burns are. But 2500 calories in 75 minutes is about 33 calories a minute. That is pretty extreme.
What are you using to estimate these?0 -
OP here is my take on this.
To lose weight you eat at a caloric deficit. That is it.
To get fit (cardiovascular and strength) you exercise which requires fuel for intensity and repair.
These are two separate goals with two separate requirements. Weight loss requires you control your intake and ensure you are eating below your caloric need. Exercising to be fit requires that you provide your body with sufficient fuel to maintain a level of intensity during exercise.
These are separate goals but you can do both at the same time provided that you eat back calories burned from exercise to maintain your deficit at a constant level while supplying extra fuel for your exercise to keep up the intensity and repair necessary. If you don't eat them back you short-change the benefits of exercise while making your caloric deficit much larger than your target deficit. Neither of these things are good.
Most people don't actually want to simply lose weight. They want to lose fat and get fit to look and feel better. You do not accomplish that by trying to make your caloric deficit as large as you possibly can.0 -
Another note on the fuel mix. The Calories in/Calories out crowd will defend themselves to the death. Again, log your food and check out the Reports once in awhile. You might just discover that your fuel mix for weight loss may consist of more veggies vs. starchy carbohydrates. That's the beauty of logging what you eat. When you've had a good week, you can repeat that week because its recorded! To some extent you can eat what you want and lose as long as there's a calorie deficit. The trick is moderation! Personally, I don't want to be the one that tries to live off of brownies and donuts to see if I can lose weight that way!
You could live off brownies and lose weight.
You however may not be "healthy" in the end from doing this.
But no one that does IIFYM ever advocates eating only food like that for every meal.
It should only make up about 20% of your calories
The other 80% should be whole foods0 -
www.bicycling.com says 75 minutes at 16 - 20 mph at my weight is 1735 calories.
That is insane. There are limits to how much a body can burn calorically. At your maximum heartrate you might push 700 calories an hour....but 1500 calories an hour? No way in hell.
I do 70 minutes of plyometric cardio that has my heart pounding out of my chest for about 50 minutes straight and I estimate that burn at about 550 calories.0 -
MFP calculates it for me. I use a stop watch on my bike odometer to count the time cycling. I also use a cycling website that has a calculator based on your speed, time, and weight. Both are within 25 calories of each other (the two sites, that is). www.bicycling.com says 75 minutes at 16 - 20 mph at my weight is 1735 calories. I also walk and do other exercises some days. I am a truck driver and when I am out for three hours lugging around 100 pound tarps to tap a load, I add that in too. There are days that I actually have very high exercise numbers (according to MFP). So, I am supposed to eat all those calories, the 1900 and the (whatever I burn). How could I possibly do that? I could barely get in 1500 calories today.
See my previous reply about the burn I get based on heart rate (360-540/hr). I bought a HRM mostly for cycling, because all the speed based calculators were so far off. They think my downhill commute to work burns all sorts of calories because I cruise along at 20 mph. They also think the hard, sweaty, uphill commute home burns far fewer calories because I'm going slow.0 -
As far the water goes, like I said in the post I drink nearly a gallon everyday.
As far the muscle goes, my bootcamp uses this method: http://www.military.com/military-fitness/weight-training/5-easy-steps-to-see-if-your-gains-are-muscle-or-fat0 -
She's right. I only eat a portion of my excercise calories back, just because mfp is too generous with amounts burnt. I don't ALWAYS eat them back but usually over the week it balances out. But if after excercise, your net is 600 cals, you're way under eating. Plus, 1200 is too low anyway unless you're super morbidly obese and your doctor has set you at that0
-
MFP calculates it for me. I use a stop watch on my bike odometer to count the time cycling. I also use a cycling website that has a calculator based on your speed, time, and weight. Both are within 25 calories of each other (the two sites, that is). www.bicycling.com says 75 minutes at 16 - 20 mph at my weight is 1735 calories. I also walk and do other exercises some days. I am a truck driver and when I am out for three hours lugging around 100 pound tarps to tap a load, I add that in too. There are days that I actually have very high exercise numbers (according to MFP). So, I am supposed to eat all those calories, the 1900 and the (whatever I burn). How could I possibly do that? I could barely get in 1500 calories today.Generally 60 - 75 minutes cycling at 16-18 mph, current weight is 254. Please tell me what that burns according to your figures. Please. Thanks.So, please let me ask all of you. My calories that I can eat each day, is 1900. I am very active all day and I cycle, and I can exercise and burn up to 2500 calories a day in addition. Are you saying that I should be eating the 1900 calories and whatever I exercise, in order to retain my muscle and burn fat? That would be over 4000 calories some days. Please explain
Assuming your numbers are correct, yes. But I am guessing that your exercise calories may be inflated
I can't tell you what your burns are. But 2500 calories in 75 minutes is about 33 calories a minute. That is pretty extreme.
What are you using to estimate these?
I got 1440 calories for 14-16mph. And the 1700 number for 16-20mph on the same site. Based on the 16-18, I wouldn't say to go for the top number of 1700.
Even then, it is still an estimate and that is still quite a high calorie burn.
I believe strongly in accounting for your activity level, but that has to be balanced with the fact that we don't know exact calorie burns and when we are dealing with huge numbers, you need to be more careful.
As to how can you eat more, there are plenty of people who eat 2500-3000 calories. I don't know what you eat or how you eat, but it can be done easily.0 -
Your caloric burn per hour can be calculated pretty accurately by VO2 max which is basically the volume of oxygen you exchange during the exercise.
Here is an example VO2 exercise measure with a 27 year old 6'1'' tall 257 pound man, so a big big guy.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2yJSORL-oeYJ:korr.com/wp-content/uploads/9FG0131_Rev_A_CardioCoach_Printout_Sample.pdf+&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=usf
So there we are talking 900 calories burned at the peak of aerobic range. He can get up to 1300 burned an hour but only at his maximum heart rate and there is NO WAY anyone can sustain that for an hour, that is like the fastest sprint you can muster with jumping up and down.
The idea of burning 2500 calories in 75 minutes is just not going to happen. Maybe if you are 700 pounds and yet able to sustain a max heartrate for the entire duration.
Don't put your faith into online calculators.0 -
As far the water goes, like I said in the post I drink nearly a gallon everyday.
As far the muscle goes, my bootcamp uses this method: http://www.military.com/military-fitness/weight-training/5-easy-steps-to-see-if-your-gains-are-muscle-or-fat0 -
What you're advocating is a VLCD, you're not going to find much support for that around here. In fact, it's against the community guidelines.
To clarify, I'm not advocating a very low calorie diet. I'm just saying that my calorie intake goal has worked. I'm definitely going to up my calorie intake goal based on what everyone has just told me. That is why I was posting. For advice. Thanks everyone so far and friend request/support is appreciated. Thanks everyone so far!!!0 -
What you're advocating is a VLCD, you're not going to find much support for that around here. In fact, it's against the community guidelines.
To clarify, I'm not advocating a very low calorie diet. I'm just saying that my calorie intake goal has worked. I'm definitely going to up my calorie intake goal based on what everyone has just told me. That is why I was posting. For advice. Thanks everyone so far and friend request/support is appreciated. Thanks everyone so far!!!
But you never did answer - were you logging? How do you measure your food?0 -
Hello everyone , this is the girlfriend in the debate, lol
Just to clarify, I am not for eating back your exercise calories just for the sake of eating. I'm talking about if you're hungry, why not eat some of the calories back. My point here isn't, well you exercised off 600 calories, so now eat it all back just to stuff your face. That would be silly of course.
My point is, however, that if you are at such a low calorie goal already, and you exercise and burn that 1200 right back off, it seems to me that you should eat some of those calories back in order to maintain wellness and energy throughout your day. Not to say go eat fries and a shake, but healthy whole foods.
I believe that when you are talking about a calorie deficit which is necessary for weight loss, you have to consider your entire day. And I believe that MFP already allows for this deficit when they set your calorie goal based on your activity level, current weight, age, etc. So yes, while I feel that a deficit is necessary, I feel that the deficit shouldn't come from his 1200 goal, but from his overall day. That is where we disagree. Because he also projects this onto me. I have a 1200 calorie goal as well, and if I consume the 1200 and exercise to bring it down a great deal, he cheers me on if I have a large deficit from my goal. While I love to make him proud, I don't feel it is healthy to have a large deficit from your goal.
I don't mind the results not happening as quickly for me because I know this is a lifestyle change. However, I tell him I feel he is being a bit intense with this as he does weigh himself at least twice a day and feels he has hit a plateau because the scale hasn't moved in three days. Thank you guys so much for your input!
I also am welcoming friend requests! I promise we don't always go on these rants and debates. Lol 0 -
Thanks for the advice! your weight loss pic is awesomeShe's right. I only eat a portion of my excercise calories back, just because mfp is too generous with amounts burnt. I don't ALWAYS eat them back but usually over the week it balances out. But if after excercise, your net is 600 cals, you're way under eating. Plus, 1200 is too low anyway unless you're super morbidly obese and your doctor has set you at that0 -
She is correct you are wrong...Esp if you are using MFP (NEAT) vs TDEE...
and dude you are eating less than me and I workout as much as you...and I am a 41 year old woman.
I do hope you take these people seriously when they say eat more food.0 -
What you're advocating is a VLCD, you're not going to find much support for that around here. In fact, it's against the community guidelines.
To clarify, I'm not advocating a very low calorie diet. I'm just saying that my calorie intake goal has worked. I'm definitely going to up my calorie intake goal based on what everyone has just told me. That is why I was posting. For advice. Thanks everyone so far and friend request/support is appreciated. Thanks everyone so far!!!
There you go man. You may lose weight at a slower rate but you will feel better, you will be able to sustain your weight loss and best of all you can lose only fat that way. Don't just bump it up a few hundred calories either, chances are you should be eating close to 2000 cals to lose weight.0 -
Did you ever consider that you may have grown since high school? You would be an unusual man if you haven't. And, what's the rush? I suggest you see a nutritionist before you cause harm to your body and possibly develop an eating disorder.My goal is to be in the 220's. I did so in high school. I've tried so many times to do the diet of 1,500 to 1,800 per day and i didn't ever get nearly the results that I'm finally getting now. I'm now seeing the results as well as feeling them. I run for longer periods (2 miles straight on average). My arms are more ripped, my stomach is flat and I'm seeing my abdominal muscles clearly. Am i really dieting wrong even with these seemingly great results?0 -
My point here isn't, well you exercised off 600 calories, so now eat it all back just to stuff your face. That would be silly of course.
That isn't "silly" that is EXACTLY what you should do. The point of consistent healthy weightloss is to maintain a constant deficit long-term and you cannot do that if you go exercise and not eat those calories back. The point of exercising isn't to accelerate weightloss because all that amounts to is taking your reasonable calorie deficit goal and making it unreasonably large. No, the point of exercise is to improve your fitness and your strength and you should fuel that if you want the best results you can get.
My goal is 1800 calories net per day. That goal is to maintain a steady 600 calorie daily deficit for weightloss. If I go do P90X plyo and burn 500 calories then damn straight I am going to go "stuff my face" with 500 calories extra to make up for it and maintain my 600 caloire daily deficit rather than an overblown 1100 calorie deficit that risks muscle loss.
I eat those calories back whether I am hungry or not because my goal with exercise is to improve my fitness. After 60 minutes of intense cardio I do not tend to be hungry either so most times I just "eat to eat" as you put it.0 -
Hello everyone , this is the girlfriend in the debate, lol
Just to clarify, I am not for eating back your exercise calories just for the sake of eating. I'm talking about if you're hungry, why not eat some of the calories back. My point here isn't, well you exercised off 600 calories, so now eat it all back just to stuff your face. That would be silly of course.
My point is, however, that if you are at such a low calorie goal already, and you exercise and burn that 1200 right back off, it seems to me that you should eat some of those calories back in order to maintain wellness and energy throughout your day. Not to say go eat fries and a shake, but healthy whole foods.
I believe that when you are talking about a calorie deficit which is necessary for weight loss, you have to consider your entire day. And I believe that MFP already allows for this deficit when they set your calorie goal based on your activity level, current weight, age, etc. So yes, while I feel that a deficit is necessary, I feel that the deficit shouldn't come from his 1200 goal, but from his overall day. That is where we disagree. Because he also projects this onto me. I have a 1200 calorie goal as well, and if I consume the 1200 and exercise to bring it down a great deal, he cheers me on if I have a large deficit from my goal. While I love to make him proud, I don't feel it is healthy to have a large deficit from your goal.
I don't mind the results not happening as quickly for me because I know this is a lifestyle change. However, I tell him I feel he is being a bit intense with this as he does weigh himself at least twice a day and feels he has hit a plateau because the scale hasn't moved in three days. Thank you guys so much for your input!
I also am welcoming friend requests! I promise we don't always go on these rants and debates. Lol
No worries you are correct...was there any doubt?:bigsmile:
and a plateau is not 3 days...try 4-6 weeks...I personally have gone 3 weeks without losing..then whooshed 3lbs..
Nice to see a couple here btw...0 -
Hello everyone , this is the girlfriend in the debate, lol
Just to clarify, I am not for eating back your exercise calories just for the sake of eating. I'm talking about if you're hungry, why not eat some of the calories back. My point here isn't, well you exercised off 600 calories, so now eat it all back just to stuff your face. That would be silly of course.
My point is, however, that if you are at such a low calorie goal already, and you exercise and burn that 1200 right back off, it seems to me that you should eat some of those calories back in order to maintain wellness and energy throughout your day. Not to say go eat fries and a shake, but healthy whole foods.
I believe that when you are talking about a calorie deficit which is necessary for weight loss, you have to consider your entire day. And I believe that MFP already allows for this deficit when they set your calorie goal based on your activity level, current weight, age, etc. So yes, while I feel that a deficit is necessary, I feel that the deficit shouldn't come from his 1200 goal, but from his overall day. That is where we disagree. Because he also projects this onto me. I have a 1200 calorie goal as well, and if I consume the 1200 and exercise to bring it down a great deal, he cheers me on if I have a large deficit from my goal. While I love to make him proud, I don't feel it is healthy to have a large deficit from your goal.
I don't mind the results not happening as quickly for me because I know this is a lifestyle change. However, I tell him I feel he is being a bit intense with this as he does weigh himself at least twice a day and feels he has hit a plateau because the scale hasn't moved in three days. Thank you guys so much for your input!
I also am welcoming friend requests! I promise we don't always go on these rants and debates. Lol
So this is a girl and a guy???
Well I do believe that men are more apt to lose weight quicker than women.....but I could be wrong.
But weight loss can't be compared against another person, everyone is different.
The only thing that is the same (usually) is that a caloric deficit is needed to lose weight.
If 1200 calories is your goal (too low I think), and you exercise....then yes, some of those calories, if not all should be eaten back.
Staying at 1200 or going below is not a good idea, unless you are really overweight....then you can get away with it.0 -
Following:)0
-
Well I do believe that men are more apt to lose weight quicker than women.....but I could be wrong.
I tend to believe men and women lose weight the same if you look at weight loss as a percentage of total weight. It is just that men on average tend to weight more than women so they tend to lose pounds faster. Just convert pounds to "percent of total mass" though and weight loss tends to be the same between men and women.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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