Eat back half of excercise calories?

Most people only eat back half their calories because of overestimations on burns, whether the number comes from MFP/a cardio machine/a HRM.

Many have through word of mouth believed the database method is badly overestimating calories. They have nothing to base it on when pressed for why, just some idea it is.
Others wear a HRM and because it's lower they think it's correct. So apparently different is more correct, especially if lower. Who can know the ways of logic.

Rarely have any of them actually done any research.

The idea of eating back all your exercise calories is that your daily burn is made up of normal daily burn, and when you do it, exercise also.

But MFP takes a deficit off the normal stuff, no exercise expected or included, to reach your eating goal.

So to keep that same deficit amount daily, when you happen to exercise, you eat those calories back.

Some entries in the database you have no idea if you are doing it the same intensity as it may have had the studies done on.
But some are more accurate than HRM - like walking and running.
The trick is - being accurate.
Did you really walk 4.5 mph level for 60 min? Or did you work your way up to that speed eventually, but starting at 3 mph for half the time? And did you actually only reach 50 min?

Was the Zumba class really 45 min of exercise - or did it include 5 min slow warmup, and 10 min stretching at the end?
Was Spin class 50 min, or 40 min with 10 of stretching at end?

When I log my extra exercise in to MFP, I underestimate the amount that I did. (If it was 30 minutes of biking I log 15 or 20 minutes.) Then I feel like I can eat back all the exercise calories that MFP gives me.

I don't eat back any exercise calories. I've figured my workouts into my daily activity level. I work at a desk all day during the week, then work out after. And I'm fairly active on the weekends.

So I check "slightly active" for my daily activity level and don't add exercise to my log. It's just part of my regular daily activity.

Just so others reading this are aware.

Those activity levels on MFP aren't rated for exercise being included - they don't ramp up as fast as your normal TDEE with exercise included charts would.

That being said, if your workouts aren't intense and pretty easy and calm, you likely can cover them adequately with a higher level intended to just cover higher work day levels.

Of course, Lightly Active (not slightly) is what many discover they are even with what they thought was a sedentary desk job and they get a Fitbit or such and discover much more active on non-exercise days.

In your case the idea is to consume the calories you're allotted on MFP, then if you wish, eat back 1/2 of those calories burned thru exercise. MFP and other electronic devices have a history of estimating too many calories burned that's why it's never a food idea to eat them all back, as you could end up overeating your workouts.

I found that I have done better when I don't eat back my exercise calories. I give myself a range of calories I can eat (1800-2000) and if I exercise I can eat more (but still within my range). If I don't exercise I try to only eat 1800. I am using TDEE method, which means I don't add calories for working out since it is already figured into my TDEE.

Many have through word of mouth believed the database method is badly overestimating calories. They have nothing to base it on when pressed for why, just some idea it is.
Others wear a HRM and because it's lower they think it's correct. So apparently different is more correct, especially if lower. Who can know the ways of logic.

Rarely have any of them actually done any research.

The idea of eating back all your exercise calories is that your daily burn is made up of normal daily burn, and when you do it, exercise also.

But MFP takes a deficit off the normal stuff, no exercise expected or included, to reach your eating goal.

So to keep that same deficit amount daily, when you happen to exercise, you eat those calories back.

Some entries in the database you have no idea if you are doing it the same intensity as it may have had the studies done on.
But some are more accurate than HRM - like walking and running.
The trick is - being accurate.
Did you really walk 4.5 mph level for 60 min? Or did you work your way up to that speed eventually, but starting at 3 mph for half the time? And did you actually only reach 50 min?

Was the Zumba class really 45 min of exercise - or did it include 5 min slow warmup, and 10 min stretching at the end?
Was Spin class 50 min, or 40 min with 10 of stretching at end?

I base it on the fact that if I eat back ALL my exercise calories, I don't lose weight, or I lose very slowly. So it's basically trial and error. I usually estimate I burn about 10 cal/min on the elliptical, but I weigh a lot, and even this is likely an overestimation. MFP gives me 100-200 calories more than this. I'm pretty sure THAT is not correct.

When I used MFP method I ate back all my exercise calories for the first month...lost 1/2lb a week...it should have been 1lb a week...but that had nothing to do with exercise calories...it was all this fact...

I wasn't weighing my food...

I started weighing my food and continued to eat back all my exercise calories and lost 1lb a week...

I firmly believe that if you are logging accurately and being realistic with your exercise ie walking 3 mph not 4 you can eat back your exercise calories and should as you are fueling your body and your next workout..

MFP over estimates workout calories! I don' think we really burn that many calories, its misleading:mad:

My weight loss has been slow but it is happening. I try not to eat back all of my calories I earn. Some days I am really hungry, then I too make sure the calories I am eating from exercise have protein.

MFP over estimates workout calories! I don' think we really burn that many calories, its misleading:mad:

Not for everyone...

or they are kidding themselves on what they are doing

or they are under estimating intake...

Too many variables to make definitive statements like that.

My doctor told me to ignore "net" or exercise calories.
1 - most people underestimate what they eat
2 - most people, and machines, and MFP, overestimate calories burned

Just eat at your calorie goal (10x your healthy goal weight... again, what my doctor told me).
Once in a while, if you're hungry at the end of the day, have 1/3 to 1/2 of your exercise calories for a snack or larger meal, but don't make a habit of it.

If you're losing weight as expected, keep doing what you're doing.
If not, change.

Most people is the key here, although I'm not even sure that's true for people on MFP.

When I started I was doing 1250 plus exercise calories (my goal is 120) and lost about 3 lbs/week eating the exercise calories. I guess your doctor's assumptions about my logging would have been wrong, and obviously eating 1200 with eating back exercise would have been too extreme.

Now my goal is still 120, so your doctor allegedly would say I should eat 1200 no exercise calories even though I do lots of biking miles and am training for a half marathon so commonly run 6-12 miles at present. I'm reasonably sure that would be a very bad idea. I think advice like this that ignores specifics--like here the fact that what the OP is doing works--is unwise. Clearly when your doctor talked to you he or she had more specifics.

I try not to eat what I burn off at the gym. If my calorie count is 1300 and I've eaten like 400 something for lunch and burn say 500, I don't eat back what I burned and still count that i've eaten 400 something. I go on tteh idea I have 800 something left to eat. So far it's been working for me, not totally sure how healthy it is but whatever works, right?

Don't know if healthy or not, but it seems to work, therefore do it.

(I say seems, because you likely have no idea how much muscle mass you are losing, and the ill effects of that later, if not sooner).

Interesting philosophy anyway if applied to other things in life.