Net Calories, workout calories earned- question

Meganne1982 · January 2011

Ok, I'm a little confused.
So my daily calorie goal before working out is 1200. I, on average, earn an additional 1000 calories from exercise. That bumps my goal up to 2200 calories. I know I "can" eat those calories- and I usually do, but I know it would make me more successful at weight loss if I still only ate 1200 cal a day, and that would make my net calories only 200 - but I know eating below 1200 can put you in starvation mode and mess with metabolism. So, I guess my question is that the case for net calories? Do my net calories need to be at 1200 or is it okay (healthy) for me to have low or even negative net calories if I'm just excersizing a lot but I am eating an actual 1200 cal a day?
I hope I explained that well enough.
Seems clear as mud to me

jaycee76 · January 2011

Are you sure about your calorie burn? Are you using a HRM? The reason I ask is the online estimates can be way out from what I hear.
I think if you are not using a HRM I would say its not as bad to not eat all the calories you are logging iygwim?

Hope that makes sense x

britia1 · January 2011

I am confused about this also. I look forward to seeing the answers to your question.

jenifer4 · January 2011

From what I've been told your supposed to make sure your net calories are at least 1200 cal's per day.

morganadk2_deleted · January 2011

Please read this

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/10589-for-those-confused-or-questioning-eating-your-exercise-calo

Good luck !

Meganne1982 · January 2011

Are you sure about your calorie burn? Are you using a HRM? The reason I ask is the online estimates can be way out from what I hear.
I think if you are not using a HRM I would say its not as bad to not eat all the calories you are logging iygwim?

Hope that makes sense x

Most of my workout comes from my elliptical machine, which has a HRM connected with its computer. It says I burn about 1400 calories an hour with my HR and my personal info. MFP says I burn about 700 an hour on an elliptical. I always go with the MFP because it's the lower of the two and I'd rather be underestimating. But this is always a source of confusion for me too.

RMinVA · January 2011

Are you sure about your calorie burn? Are you using a HRM? The reason I ask is the online estimates can be way out from what I hear.
I think if you are not using a HRM I would say its not as bad to not eat all the calories you are logging iygwim?

Hope that makes sense x

I completely agree. While it is a caloric equation, it's just not that cut and dry. I have so say MFP is the first website I have been on where everyone is actually preaching to eat your exercise calories. I am not advocating starvation, but rather reasonable, healthy eating. And I also want to preface this by saying I have maintained a 50# loss for amost 3 years now, so there has been a LOT of trail and error.

Here's my issue with eating exercise calories based on your journal alone. "Calorie burn" from machines is notoriously innacurate. In my short time on MFP, I have seen more than a few posts from people that think the calorie burn is really high when they enter an exercise from the database...and my feeling is if you think it's high, it probably is. Additionally, over time, muscle memory leads to greater efficiency, which means less calorie burn. Then there are things like heat, humidity, wind (if you are outside), and the list goes on.

Then there is the issue of eating more than you think even if you are measuring everything. Calorie counts on food products, by law, can vary by as much as 20%. (here is a link that talks about one exampe http://www.suite101.com/content/nutritional-labels-calories-hiding-behind-fiber-a201939). Additionally most nutrition labels have a cup measurement and a weight measurement. Most people use cups vs. weighing. You can get a serving that is up to 30% larger if you use a cup. There is a great video by Leigh Peele that illustrates this. I quickly tried to find it this morning, but I couldn't. Will look for it later today and post it if I do.

Anyway, burn less than you think + eat more than you think = no weight loss or maybe even a bit of gain over time. Even when you think you are doing everything right!!

A long time ago I figured my sweet spot for weight loss was 1400-1600 calories. If I eat well, and stay in that zone, I am not hungry, have the energy I need, and lose weight. I will bump it up to 1800 max when I am in the heart of a training program for a big race. I got away from that, and a few other things, and the scale went up this past year.

So, I stopped eating my exercise calories, got back to weighing my food, and have already dropped 6#. And I am by no means starving.

alantin · January 2011

Most of my workout comes from my elliptical machine, which has a HRM connected with its computer. It says I burn about 1400 calories an hour with my HR and my personal info. MFP says I burn about 700 an hour on an elliptical. I always go with the MFP because it's the lower of the two and I'd rather be underestimating. But this is always a source of confusion for me too.

I think that the MFP is quite accurate here and the machine is way off! There's no way any normal person would burn 1400 Kcal per our like that! You'd have to have your HR over 90% all the time for that and even peak athletes can't do that for long! 700 sounds reasonable for a harder exercise and 400 for a light one.

Just remember about the exercise calories; the whole point is to fuel your body enough for the exercise and for recovery while still maintaining a reasonable negative calorie balance. If you feel strong and energetic throughout the day and your weight is dropping at the rate of about 1 lbs a week, then you are eating enough. If not, then there is some tweaking to be done.

stormieweather · January 2011

Personally, I recommend eating 1/2 of your exercise calories. Leave a small cushion for inaccurate burn measurements and/or underestimation of food intake.

Now that I have a FitBit (measures movement, steps and calories burned), I've found that I burn a lot less than I would have thought (or the machines/MFP tells me).

melusinagr · January 2011

I am in total agreement with RMinVA. I know what the "experts" say on the boards here but it is hard to be completely accurate about calories burned and calories eaten. I found an amount of calories per day that works for me (around 1300) and stick to that, regardless of exercise, and that has worked well for me for the past year. But, every person is different, so use a lot of trial and error to see what works best for you. Maybe try upping your calorie limit a bit and stick with that for awhile and see how that works, instead of eating exercise calories.

RMinVA · January 2011

Now that I have a FitBit (measures movement, steps and calories burned), I've found that I burn a lot less than I would have thought (or the machines/MFP tells me).

Second post today that I have read about burning a lot less then you thought when you got some sort of personal monitor.

stormieweather · January 2011

Now that I have a FitBit (measures movement, steps and calories burned), I've found that I burn a lot less than I would have thought (or the machines/MFP tells me).

Second post today that I have read about burning a lot less then you thought when you got some sort of personal monitor.

Actually, overall, I burn what I thought (2k per day), but exercises don't give me huge chunks of extra calories. Ie: Walking for an two hours at a slow pace burns 400 calories per MFP. Per my FitBit, it adds a little over 200 calories, depending on how slow a pace I'm actually moving.

stormieweather · January 2011

double post-deleted

Net Calories, workout calories earned- question

Replies

Categories