Eating exercise calories

firestorm0007
firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
I'm a tad confused.
Over eating is bad but under eating can be as destructive. I exercise 5-6 times per week and my MFP calorie goal is 1348 even without exercise.

So the question is this....if I burn 1300 kcal a day in the gym and consume 1300 kcal do I eat an additional 1300 kcal to keep functioning?

Cheers peeps :)

Replies

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    MFP gives you a goal that doesn't include exercise. You should eat those calories back. However, 1,300 sounds like a really high burn. Many people find that machine/MFP burns are over-estimated, so they only eat back a portion of the calories.
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    If you're REALLY burning 1300 a day, then yes. Though I would question what the heck you're doing that you burn that many calories.
  • firestorm0007
    firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    If you're REALLY burning 1300 a day, then yes. Though I would question what the heck you're doing that you burn that many calories.

    I'm in the gym for a minimum of 3 hours a day....and I weigh a lot! Lol
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,342 Member
    Eat back at least 50% :smile: that'll keep you right.
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    If you're REALLY burning 1300 a day, then yes. Though I would question what the heck you're doing that you burn that many calories.

    I'm in the gym for a minimum of 3 hours a day....and I weigh a lot! Lol

    Yes...but what are you DOING for that three hours?

    Just being there doesn't burn calories yanno?? :)
  • firestorm0007
    firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    Eat back at least 50% :smile: that'll keep you right.

    Thanks for that. It's the only reason I can think of as to why I'm not losing weight because I do everything right (most days I'm not perfect). I'll give it a whirl :)
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,864 Member
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    I'm a tad confused.
    Over eating is bad but under eating can be as destructive. I exercise 5-6 times per week and my MFP calorie goal is 1348 even without exercise.

    So the question is this....if I burn 1300 kcal a day in the gym and consume 1300 kcal do I eat an additional 1300 kcal to keep functioning?

    Cheers peeps :)

    Yeah...you need energy (calories) just to function...merely existing burns an *kitten* ton of calories. Just be very careful with your burn estimates as well as with your intake estimates. The MFP method requires a good deal of accuracy...you can never be 100%, but you have to be as accurate as possible.

    I also question the sustainability of your workout regimen...working out 3 hours per day, day in and day out isn't sustainable long term...hell, I don't even train like that day in and out when I'm actually getting ready for an event.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,321 Member
    As stated, yes, you should be eating those back. That being said, your calorie counts sound pretty high on the burn side so I'm not sure I would trust them.
  • firestorm0007
    firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    If you're REALLY burning 1300 a day, then yes. Though I would question what the heck you're doing that you burn that many calories.

    I'm in the gym for a minimum of 3 hours a day....and I weigh a lot! Lol

    Yes...but what are you DOING for that three hours?

    Just being there doesn't burn calories yanno?? :)

    Well naturally I spend 3 hours on a bike, playing with my phone, while wearing a full face of make up, occasionally getting up to use the mirrors to make sure my hair is perfect for the selfies of my "workin hard in the gym" face.

    Texting and logging into community chat rooms burns mega kcal! Fact.....
  • jaga13
    jaga13 Posts: 1,149 Member
    edited May 2015


    Texting and logging into community chat rooms burns mega kcal! Fact.....

    OK, that was funny!
  • juggernaut1974
    juggernaut1974 Posts: 6,212 Member
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    ceoverturf wrote: »
    If you're REALLY burning 1300 a day, then yes. Though I would question what the heck you're doing that you burn that many calories.

    I'm in the gym for a minimum of 3 hours a day....and I weigh a lot! Lol

    Yes...but what are you DOING for that three hours?

    Just being there doesn't burn calories yanno?? :)

    Well naturally I spend 3 hours on a bike, playing with my phone, while wearing a full face of make up, occasionally getting up to use the mirrors to make sure my hair is perfect for the selfies of my "workin hard in the gym" face.

    Texting and logging into community chat rooms burns mega kcal! Fact.....

    Well then in that case I'd say 2000 calories! :)
  • firestorm0007
    firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
    Thanks guys I have a tendancy to go all out and become obsessed with the need to exercise so I'll split my three hours over the day with an hour cardio (HI intervals, spinning, running, boxing), an hour weights working my different muscle groups and an hour class at night like body combat. I work hard because only I can get the weight off and no one else is effected if I don't put the effort in. It also helps that my hubby is my personal trainer
  • firestorm0007
    firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
    P.s. He doesn't agree with the hours I train either or how I refuse to eat my exercise kcal. This was a great way to be wrong without admitting it publicly!
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,458 MFP Moderator
    Just gonna say, you do realize that your body makes progress with rest right? That is a lot of exercise to do in a day and over time that can wear you down.
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,342 Member
    psulemon wrote: »
    Just gonna say, you do realize that your body makes progress with rest right? That is a lot of exercise to do in a day and over time that can wear you down.

    ^^ valid point and I agree with this. I have a cap on my own daily exercise of 90 mins max and 1 day rest per week. I know everyone is different but I've found in the past when I did way more working out I was hungrier which led to eating more which stalled the scale.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,321 Member
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    Thanks guys I have a tendancy to go all out and become obsessed with the need to exercise so I'll split my three hours over the day with an hour cardio (HI intervals, spinning, running, boxing), an hour weights working my different muscle groups and an hour class at night like body combat. I work hard because only I can get the weight off and no one else is effected if I don't put the effort in. It also helps that my hubby is my personal trainer

    I would guess that to be in the 800 cal range. I'm figuring 400 for an hour of cardio, 200 for an hour of strength training, and 200 for that combat class.

  • shaunte92
    shaunte92 Posts: 127 Member
    edited May 2015

    I would guess that to be in the 800 cal range. I'm figuring 400 for an hour of cardio, 200 for an hour of strength training, and 200 for that combat class.

    I think her numbers are more accurate. I wear a Polar hrm, and while I'm not arguing it is 100% accurate it's a great tool. With only 10 minutes of hitt cardio for a warm up I burn 150+ calories. And the cardio hitt based exercise classes I do at the gym give me a 500-600 burn for a 55 minute class, and for the classes based on incorporating "toning" with hand weights with cardio about a 400 calorie burn. I don't lift so I have no comparison. And don't forget, she said she weigh a lot.


    Obviously I did that "quote" wrong lol.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,321 Member
    HRMs are not designed to track HITT cardio, classes, or strength training. It's no wonder you are getting those inflated numbers.
  • shaunte92
    shaunte92 Posts: 127 Member
    edited May 2015
    Hornsby wrote: »
    HRMs are not designed to track HITT cardio, classes, or strength training. It's no wonder you are getting those inflated numbers.

    Where is your proof behind this? If I take a 55 minute spin class, where my heart rate fluctuates between 145 and 175-180. 500 calories is completely reasonable. If I did 5 miles steady state running the average is about 100 calories a mild. Why are suggesting I burn less calories doing HITT when I burn more?

    I'm flabbergasted right now lol. I have never once heard that heart rate monitors designed to calculate heart rate and calories burned "aren't designed for classes" ... Okayyyyy. You can't just magically guess this womens caloric burn.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,321 Member
    I didn't suggest you are burning less when doing HITT. I was suggesting that HRMs are not designed to track anything except Steady State Cardio. Your spin class would likely fall in that and 500 cals is probably reasonable. You did not mention spin classes in your post though. You mentioned cardio classes with weights. An HRM wouldn't be accurate for that on the calorie burn side.

    One thing to remember is heart rate monitors were invented to monitor heart rate for training purposes. HR does not directly correlate to calories burned so once you start doing something that an HRM isn't designed for (anything outside of steady state cardio), the accuracy of the estimations can be way off.
  • weavingtheweb
    weavingtheweb Posts: 135 Member
    edited May 2015
    Edited as misunderstood OP, carry on :)
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,646 Member
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    Eat back at least 50% :smile: that'll keep you right.

    Thanks for that. It's the only reason I can think of as to why I'm not losing weight because I do everything right (most days I'm not perfect). I'll give it a whirl :)
    You aren't failing to lose weight because you aren't eating exercise calories. If you aren't losing weight you aren't in a caloric deficit.
  • ASKyle
    ASKyle Posts: 1,475 Member
    Hornsby wrote: »
    I didn't suggest you are burning less when doing HITT. I was suggesting that HRMs are not designed to track anything except Steady State Cardio. Your spin class would likely fall in that and 500 cals is probably reasonable. You did not mention spin classes in your post though. You mentioned cardio classes with weights. An HRM wouldn't be accurate for that on the calorie burn side.

    One thing to remember is heart rate monitors were invented to monitor heart rate for training purposes. HR does not directly correlate to calories burned so once you start doing something that an HRM isn't designed for (anything outside of steady state cardio), the accuracy of the estimations can be way off.

    This. A heart rate monitor is a heart rate monitor.
  • firestorm0007
    firestorm0007 Posts: 7 Member
    edited May 2015
    Come on folks in fairness I used 1300 as an example to make my point and you've all been fab in answering my question....and many more I may have asked in future like am I REALLY doing three hours exercise, whether fitness monitors are effective and if body combat only burns 145 kcal an hour why bother when I'd burn 75% of that amount sitting my *kitten* typing this!
    Many thanks folks
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,864 Member
    shaunte92 wrote: »
    Hornsby wrote: »
    HRMs are not designed to track HITT cardio, classes, or strength training. It's no wonder you are getting those inflated numbers.

    Where is your proof behind this? If I take a 55 minute spin class, where my heart rate fluctuates between 145 and 175-180. 500 calories is completely reasonable. If I did 5 miles steady state running the average is about 100 calories a mild. Why are suggesting I burn less calories doing HITT when I burn more?

    I'm flabbergasted right now lol. I have never once heard that heart rate monitors designed to calculate heart rate and calories burned "aren't designed for classes" ... Okayyyyy. You can't just magically guess this womens caloric burn.

    google is your friend. your calorie burn is not directly correlated to your HR...if it was, I'd just have someone come and scare me every few minutes...and I would have been a calorie burning machine pre beta blockers. A HRM simply uses your HR in an algorithm to estimate what level of VO2 max you are working...this also assumes a steady state cardio event given that is the only way to get a reasonable estimate of VO2 max...anaerobic activities are not good indicators of VO2 max and thus the calorie burn would be artificially inflated when your HR spikes during an anaerobic event.
  • weavingtheweb
    weavingtheweb Posts: 135 Member
    DeguelloTex wrote: »
    firestorm0007 wrote: »
    RunRutheeRun wrote: »
    Eat back at least 50% :smile: that'll keep you right.

    Thanks for that. It's the only reason I can think of as to why I'm not losing weight because I do everything right (most days I'm not perfect). I'll give it a whirl :)
    You aren't failing to lose weight because you aren't eating exercise calories. If you aren't losing weight you aren't in a caloric deficit.

    This is part of what I posted earlier but then thought I misunderstood and she meant that she ate all of her exercise calories back instead of only a portion of them hence not losing weight *confused*
This discussion has been closed.

Categories