Is better to not "eat back" your exercised calories?

Actually, since I started eating a portion of my exercise calories, I started feeling better because I could eat more, and the weight seems to come off easier. Probably because I'm happier.

In general I find it most effective to eat 500 fewer calories per day then I burn to lose 1 pound of fat per week.

cosmo_momo wrote: »

Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. If I'm hungry afterwards I eat. I usually workout in the evening before dinner and I use a heart rate monitor to more accurately measure my calorie burn. Not that it's fool proof, but it's as accurate as I can get.

Which HRM do you use? I'm in the market for a good one.

I don't, but if I was lifting or doing more strenuous activites other than walking I would probably have to.
A few years ago I was training for a half marathon (before this, I had never ran any distance after high school, 10 years prior) and found that if I ate back my cals, I could perform better for longer. Its a trade off, I think.
Right now I am just focusing on slow and steady weightloss and creating an addiction for daily walking.
Oh, I use a FitBit Charge, I've only had it for about 3 weeks, but I love it

At first I did, now I don't.

Follow your intuition! But usually if I just finished a draining workout or a long run, I'd incorporate an extra few hundred calories to my day, dependent on how intense the workout was, (mostly from carbohydrates) to refuel.

I would say to eat no more than 1/4 to 1/2 of exercise calories back for a month or so unless you really feel the need. Then if you have kept meticulous food logs you can calculate your actual energy expenditure to see how it compares to MFP. Last time I ran the numbers, I found that my fitbit overestimates my calorie burn by 269 calories per day. So either my food logs have bad data, my metabolism is slower or the fitbit just gives too high of a burn. So, if I want to lose two pounds per week, I need a calorie deficit of 1269 (on the fitbit).

It depends on the method you follow (MFP assumes you will eat them back), your total deficit, and how much exercise you are talking about, and of course how much you have to lose.

MFP considers 2 lbs/week the max safe deficit (it's probably higher for heavier people, but you might want to look into a doctor-monitored plan then). For many people, 2 lbs/week gives them very few calories (the standard 1200). To then exercise on top of that and not eat it back in theory increases your deficit below the 2 lbs/week (although seems to correspond a lot with people losing less since their compliance or daily activity suffers), so would not be a good idea.

On the other hand, if you have a less aggressive deficit like .5 lb/week or even 1 lb/week with lots to lose and start doing some lighter exercise, you probably don't need to eat it back, but it's not counterproductive to do so--you will still lose at your goal if you are doing it right and simply also be able to eat more/make fitness gains.

The goal of exercise ideally shouldn't be losing weight faster, but losing weight in a healthier way and while minimizing muscle loss and getting fitter. And for some of us making fitness gains (like running faster or farther, lifting heavier weights, being able to attack hills when biking) is a huge motivation to eat better/lose weight. If I then refuse to eat to fuel the activity and prevent myself from making the gains I should and can (even while losing weight at a reasonable rate), THAT's what seems to me counterproductive.

But in any case I prefer the TDEE method, where you include exercise in your upfront calculations so don't need to mess with logging it.