Eating back exercise calories

I eat no more than 50 % of my exercise calories back because I dont trust the input of calories burned . This is working for me

I think the calorie burn estimates for physical activity are WAY off so I don't eat my calories back rather thikn of it as an extra bonus. That being said, if I worked out super hard, say 60 minutes hardcore cardio, 60 minutes with trainer and a bike ride, I may eat an additional 150-300 calories, as days I'm that active I am actually hungrier and usually need it.

Also, if I know I will likely be over my calorie total(party, dinner out with friends), I'll try to add some extra physical activity to the day to help offset the added calories. This makes me feel better and makes me feel like there is some consequence for going over, not to shame me but to keep me from doing it mindlessly.

Eating back calories is the point of the site. It figures out the calorie goal you need to have a big enough deficit to meet your loss goal you entered. It does all of this assuming you will do no exercise on top of that. When you eat the calories back, you end the day with the exact same deficit if you would not have done exercise at all.

With that said, this is an estimation. You're really estimating your intake on your diary, and really estimating your burn by using this site. The burns on this site are usually pretty high, so the stance is to eat back 50-75% of your calories and tweak your system from there.

I don't consistently, I swim a hundred lengths three times a week and hill walk 5-7 miles 5 days a week, I consider them banked and it enables me to have guilt free days where I can "treat" myself.

I eat the calories burned otherwise I feel like I'm STARVING.

Even though I'm new here, I've been eating my calories back...and not regretting it one bit

I'm generally not eating back my calories, but then I'm not weighing my food entries either so I consider it an additional safeguard against my calorie entries being too low. I also estimate higher amounts of food than I am actually eating and I average about 200 calories a day less than the 2020 MFP is suggesting, to add to the safeguard. I'm a big guy though with a high BMR, so it's a little less of a risk for me. The chances of me eating too little or too much at this point without knowing it are fairly small. I'm choosing to err on the side of additional weight loss so that on the occasions where I do go over the MFP recommendation, I'm not shooting myself in the foot.

I don't think my way of doing it is recommended though, especially if you weigh your food. It sounds to me like you're doing just what you should be. You can always tweak it a little bit if you find that you're not losing weight.

I wear a HRM with chest strap during all my workouts and eat back 100% of exercise calories. No problems

Everything is an estimate. You can't know precisely how many calories your body actually takes out of the food or how much a given exercise burns. MFP makes a prediction, but if you are consistent with whatever you do, you should be able observe exactly what does happen and tweak things to sustain the loss you want.

I log as accurately as possible everything I eat. I use an HRM for cardio, log and eat back 100% of my calories. I don't log my couple of weekly weight/resistance sessions as burns would be a total guess. That plus perhaps an underestimate of my basic metabolism (I use sedentary but maybe I'm not!) means I actually lose MORE quickly than MFP would predict. So eating half my exercise back would not help at all! So I don't bother with the MFP goals, but set my calories a little higher to achieve my weight loss target.

EDIT: Oh and I eat to a weekly goal rather than a daily one. It means if I have a really high burn one day I don't have to eat it all then but spread the love across the week!

You have to make some allowance for estimation error. It's all an estimate, but some estimates are better than others. Online databases and calculators are generally the least accurate...a HRM with a chest strap is the most accurate (but I still knocked off 20%) but only for an aerobic event.

Yes, you are supposed to eat back exercise calories with MFP, that is how it is designed...but it's difficult because it's so hard to estimate calories burned...to boot, most people underestimate intake as well and end up with a combination of overestimating their burn and underestimating their intake and voila...they don't lose weight.

Ok, so I have been dieting/logging my calories for the past little over 3 weeks now and so far so good! I have lost 16 lbs but still have a very long way to go.
(snipped)
I am concerned if I consume too little calories that I will put my body into starvation mode and will stop losing and conversely I am worried that I am consuming TOO much back and I will stop losing!!

I don't mind losing at a rate of 1.5-2 lbs a week but I want to make sure that I am at least losing!

HELP PLEASE!!!

Sacto;
As you can see from the variety of "I do...", "I don't...", and "I do some, but not all..." responses you've received so far there is NO "right" answer to your question.

Most of those who have offered "advice" and explanations of how "they do it" have been at it long enough to know what "works" for them and THAT is what really matters - what works for THEM.

It will take you some time, and in the meantime as you "learn" more and expose yourself to more "opinions" as to why "my" method is "better" than someone else's it will provide you with more "options" than you likely can count. Take them each for what they are worth, try another if whatever it is you are currently doing isn't "working" the way you'd like, and eventually you'll find what "works" for YOU.

Sounds like a daunting task, it's really not. More of a natural progression as long as you keep an open mind and don't buy in to the various "myths" and "dogma" many are wont to proffer.

My two cents, you are off to a good start (maybe a "too good" start @ almost 5lbs/week) but I'm sure you know that the first couple weeks almost always consist of a fair amount of "water weight" loss and shortly you'll want to settle in at something closer to 1.5 -2#/wk.

Assuming your current "exercise" routine (walking) is fairly constant (week to week), why make things more "complicated" than they need to be?

Track your daily cal intake "religiously" and as accurately as humanly possible (yes, it "requires" weighing stuff and not "guesstimating"). Track too your weight daily (some have "issues" with daily, but it really does give you the best and most accurate data). But DO NOT obsess over day to day fluctuations (almost "nothing" happens as a result of what you did "yesterday"), as a previous poster said, think in terms of WEEKLY averages, NOT one day.

As long as you are reasonably close to your total weekly cal IN number, AND your average weekly weight loss is "close" to your goal - leave "well enough" ALONE and keep on trucking.

If "average" weekly weight loss begins to decline (and it WILL as you lose) you should gradually change your "goal" down from 1.5 - 2lb/wk, maybe 1/2#/wk at a time (every 30 days or so). You (probably) will also have to reduce total cals IN as time goes on and you get closer and closer to your goal weight.

The "final 10" are, for almost everyone, the most difficult (and take the longest) to lose - perfectly normal.

Many (not all, but "many") hit "plateaus" along the trip where weight loss just seems to stop for no reason at all. Once again, perfectly normal, expect that it "will" happen and, if it doesn't, be thankful. If, OTOH it "does" happen, it won't be a surprise and you can either just "wait it out" or change up your routine some to try and "kick start" the loss.

Opinions vary across the board as to which method is better (as they do with almost EVERYthing else in the "diet" world, but there is simply no clear cut (or scientifically documented) "right answer". In any case, as long as you don't give up, you WILL resume losing as long as Cals IN, remain lower than Cals OUT - it really is that simple.

So, for me, all the "trick", hi-tech, "stuff" really isn't necessary. Heart Rate Monitors certainly have their place for those involved in high intensity workouts or even those seeking to hit the "sweet spot" for both the specific exercise they are doing, or for heart health in general if that is of concern, but the the "average/everyday" person just looking to lose weight - "nice" but not "necessary" (again, IMO), spend the money on better quality food.

Some will argue for the "psychological" and/or "motivational" benefits and if, for them that's what "works" then I'm all for it - whatever WORKS!

But back to the original question, I'm a firm believer in the KISS theory and would rather spend my time ensuring that calorie (IN) and nutrition numbers are accurate and in the "healthy" range and that the IN number I'm using is producing the desired results that I would worrying about if a fitbit is more accurate than the treadmill at the gym when they "guesstimate" cals burned.

Ignore the "starvation mode" BS because that's what it is. As long as you are close to the recommended 20% you'll be just fine. You'll know "for sure" by accurately tracking Cals IN, weight, and the loss rate and trend.

I usually eat all of them. Sometimes more.

I don't eat them back because if I do the weight won't budge. When you're heavier and starting out you can do some of that but once you hit the halfway point not so much. IDK.... I might not even be the best person for advice because I'm plateaued. I count every calorie religiously and I work out like a dog but it ain't moving.... and I'm still kinda fat. so um.... You don't want to go overboard of course, but I would always err on the side of eating fewer cals I guess.