Should you eat back your calorie burned?
Options
Replies
-
Did not know that, I guess it's good that I asked this questionjanejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Yeah they asked how many times do I workout/week and I put 6janejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
I didn't know that it factored calories burned into the amount your able to eat, I thought it was without calorie burned.janejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Did it factor in exercise?
Edit: Looks like someone else already answered this question. If IIFYM includes exercise in your goal, don't eat them back.
When you set up your calorie goal there, did you enter in your exercise?
So it sounds like that calorie goal includes your workouts -- you don't want to eat calories back if this is the case because you would be double-counting them.
But if you went with MFP, you would get a lower calorie goal, and you could eat some calories back.
But either way, it would be pretty much the same.
I might just stick with MFP, I'm just always hungry. So I should eat 50% of my calorie burned back? MFP has me eating 1920 with being active. And burned 574 calories and ate 1887 and have 607 left. Should I eat 50% of the 607 left? Which will give me 303 calories left to eat, would I still lose weight by eating that much more?
0 -
Oh okay, that makes sense. I just hope I logged my activity level correct, I put active. Ppl told me that it means how active you are on a daily bases like work not working out. Because I know I'm active since I workout 6 days a weekcwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
So which one is more accurate/better to follow? Iifym or MFP?IIFYM gives you your total calories for the day (TDEE.) So if you calculated it using your exercise (it asks how many times you exercise each week) then you do not eat back those calories.
MFP gives you your total calories for the day without exercise figured in and with your caloric deficit figured in. If you use that number, you do eat your exercise calories.
done correctly and comparing apples to apples in RE to rate of loss goals, they are 6 of 1...the only difference between the two methods is where you account for exercise. They are just two methods of arriving at pretty much the same place.
Keep in mind that all of these calculators are estimates...they are meant to be reasonably good starting points...they aren't gospel. Nobody has a TDEE of exactly XXXX calories...you have to make adjustments per your real world results.
Gotcha, so pretty much every calculator is pretty much just a guess and isn't accurate? So I pretty much need to just see how my body reacts to how many calories I can eat and still lose weight
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a guess...they are estimates based on data for the average person of whatever stats at an estimated activity level. But yeah, your real world results are what ultimately matter, not what some calculator says.
0 -
bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Did not know that, I guess it's good that I asked this questionjanejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Yeah they asked how many times do I workout/week and I put 6janejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
I didn't know that it factored calories burned into the amount your able to eat, I thought it was without calorie burned.janejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Did it factor in exercise?
Edit: Looks like someone else already answered this question. If IIFYM includes exercise in your goal, don't eat them back.
When you set up your calorie goal there, did you enter in your exercise?
So it sounds like that calorie goal includes your workouts -- you don't want to eat calories back if this is the case because you would be double-counting them.
But if you went with MFP, you would get a lower calorie goal, and you could eat some calories back.
But either way, it would be pretty much the same. I might just stick with MFP, I'm just always hungry. So I should eat 50% of my calorie burned back? MFP has me eating 1920 with being active. And burned 574 calories and ate 1887 and have 607 left. Should I eat 50% of the 607 left? Which will give me 303 calories left to eat, would I still lose weight by eating that much more?
When you set it at "Active," is that your life without exercise or with exercise?0 -
bethanylynn101 wrote: »Its such a guessing game I've realized. When I was on MFP a couple of years ago, I ate back my calories, and I never had much trouble losing weight. This time around, I'm not just doing cardio as I have in years past, I'm doing strength training as well and haven't seen much of a drop on the scale, but know my body is thinning out a little. I actually raised my calories from 1200 to 1340 and am not eating back my calories. Maybe I should be.....maybe I shouldn't, but I was on 1200 for a few months, and thought I'd up it for a few weeks to try to see if I can get the scale to move that way. So I said all that just to say, play around with it. Go for a few weeks not eating them back and see how you do, and then you can try eating them back for a few weeks and see if there is a difference. Everyone's body is different. And what you call lightly active, might be what I consider active.
That's what I'm getting confused, some ppl say when they ask how active joy are they are saying how active your work life is not how active you are with working out. I hate guessing games lolIts such a guessing game I've realized. When I was on MFP a couple of years ago, I ate back my calories, and I never had much trouble losing weight. This time around, I'm not just doing cardio as I have in years past, I'm doing strength training as well and haven't seen much of a drop on the scale, but know my body is thinning out a little. I actually raised my calories from 1200 to 1340 and am not eating back my calories. Maybe I should be.....maybe I shouldn't, but I was on 1200 for a few months, and thought I'd up it for a few weeks to try to see if I can get the scale to move that way. So I said all that just to say, play around with it. Go for a few weeks not eating them back and see how you do, and then you can try eating them back for a few weeks and see if there is a difference. Everyone's body is different. And what you call lightly active, might be what I consider active.
Again, it's two different methods. MFP uses the NEAT method (Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)...your activity only includes your day to day general activity. That's why the descriptors don't make any mention of exercise. Most other calculators use the TDEE method (Total Daily Energy Expenditure...magic word here being TOTAL) whereby you do include exercise in your activity level as per the descriptors.
Basically, the descriptors should alleviate any confusion in RE to what you include in your activity level...use the descriptors.0 -
bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Oh okay, that makes sense. I just hope I logged my activity level correct, I put active. Ppl told me that it means how active you are on a daily bases like work not working out. Because I know I'm active since I workout 6 days a weekcwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
So which one is more accurate/better to follow? Iifym or MFP?IIFYM gives you your total calories for the day (TDEE.) So if you calculated it using your exercise (it asks how many times you exercise each week) then you do not eat back those calories.
MFP gives you your total calories for the day without exercise figured in and with your caloric deficit figured in. If you use that number, you do eat your exercise calories.
done correctly and comparing apples to apples in RE to rate of loss goals, they are 6 of 1...the only difference between the two methods is where you account for exercise. They are just two methods of arriving at pretty much the same place.
Keep in mind that all of these calculators are estimates...they are meant to be reasonably good starting points...they aren't gospel. Nobody has a TDEE of exactly XXXX calories...you have to make adjustments per your real world results.
Gotcha, so pretty much every calculator is pretty much just a guess and isn't accurate? So I pretty much need to just see how my body reacts to how many calories I can eat and still lose weight
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a guess...they are estimates based on data for the average person of whatever stats at an estimated activity level. But yeah, your real world results are what ultimately matter, not what some calculator says.
For MFP, your activity level is what you are doing outside of exercise.
For IIFYM's calculator, it includes your exercise.0 -
That's with exercise, I thought it would be entered as lightly active, since outside workout I do retail and its 4-7 hours of walking 4 days a week. I had it at lightly active but my friend changed it to activejanejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Did not know that, I guess it's good that I asked this questionjanejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Yeah they asked how many times do I workout/week and I put 6janejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
I didn't know that it factored calories burned into the amount your able to eat, I thought it was without calorie burned.janejellyroll wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Did it factor in exercise?
Edit: Looks like someone else already answered this question. If IIFYM includes exercise in your goal, don't eat them back.
When you set up your calorie goal there, did you enter in your exercise?
So it sounds like that calorie goal includes your workouts -- you don't want to eat calories back if this is the case because you would be double-counting them.
But if you went with MFP, you would get a lower calorie goal, and you could eat some calories back.
But either way, it would be pretty much the same. I might just stick with MFP, I'm just always hungry. So I should eat 50% of my calorie burned back? MFP has me eating 1920 with being active. And burned 574 calories and ate 1887 and have 607 left. Should I eat 50% of the 607 left? Which will give me 303 calories left to eat, would I still lose weight by eating that much more?
When you set it at "Active," is that your life without exercise or with exercise?
0 -
That's what I thought but my friend changed it to activebethanylynn101 wrote: »
Oh okay, that makes sense. I just hope I logged my activity level correct, I put active. Ppl told me that it means how active you are on a daily bases like work not working out. Because I know I'm active since I workout 6 days a weekcwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
So which one is more accurate/better to follow? Iifym or MFP?IIFYM gives you your total calories for the day (TDEE.) So if you calculated it using your exercise (it asks how many times you exercise each week) then you do not eat back those calories.
MFP gives you your total calories for the day without exercise figured in and with your caloric deficit figured in. If you use that number, you do eat your exercise calories.
done correctly and comparing apples to apples in RE to rate of loss goals, they are 6 of 1...the only difference between the two methods is where you account for exercise. They are just two methods of arriving at pretty much the same place.
Keep in mind that all of these calculators are estimates...they are meant to be reasonably good starting points...they aren't gospel. Nobody has a TDEE of exactly XXXX calories...you have to make adjustments per your real world results.
Gotcha, so pretty much every calculator is pretty much just a guess and isn't accurate? So I pretty much need to just see how my body reacts to how many calories I can eat and still lose weight
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a guess...they are estimates based on data for the average person of whatever stats at an estimated activity level. But yeah, your real world results are what ultimately matter, not what some calculator says.
For MFP, your activity level is what you are doing outside of exercise.
For IIFYM's calculator, it includes your exercise.
0 -
Okay I'm just making sure I'm understanding it. I just don't understand why my friend changed my activity level to active when it is asking about how active you are on a daily bases not including working out. Which I'm lightly active, I work retail so it's lightly active, I work 4 days out of the week and my normal work hours are 4-7 hours of walkingcwolfman13 wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »Its such a guessing game I've realized. When I was on MFP a couple of years ago, I ate back my calories, and I never had much trouble losing weight. This time around, I'm not just doing cardio as I have in years past, I'm doing strength training as well and haven't seen much of a drop on the scale, but know my body is thinning out a little. I actually raised my calories from 1200 to 1340 and am not eating back my calories. Maybe I should be.....maybe I shouldn't, but I was on 1200 for a few months, and thought I'd up it for a few weeks to try to see if I can get the scale to move that way. So I said all that just to say, play around with it. Go for a few weeks not eating them back and see how you do, and then you can try eating them back for a few weeks and see if there is a difference. Everyone's body is different. And what you call lightly active, might be what I consider active.
That's what I'm getting confused, some ppl say when they ask how active joy are they are saying how active your work life is not how active you are with working out. I hate guessing games lolIts such a guessing game I've realized. When I was on MFP a couple of years ago, I ate back my calories, and I never had much trouble losing weight. This time around, I'm not just doing cardio as I have in years past, I'm doing strength training as well and haven't seen much of a drop on the scale, but know my body is thinning out a little. I actually raised my calories from 1200 to 1340 and am not eating back my calories. Maybe I should be.....maybe I shouldn't, but I was on 1200 for a few months, and thought I'd up it for a few weeks to try to see if I can get the scale to move that way. So I said all that just to say, play around with it. Go for a few weeks not eating them back and see how you do, and then you can try eating them back for a few weeks and see if there is a difference. Everyone's body is different. And what you call lightly active, might be what I consider active.
Again, it's two different methods. MFP uses the NEAT method (Non Exercise Activity Thermogenesis)...your activity only includes your day to day general activity. That's why the descriptors don't make any mention of exercise. Most other calculators use the TDEE method (Total Daily Energy Expenditure...magic word here being TOTAL) whereby you do include exercise in your activity level as per the descriptors.
Basically, the descriptors should alleviate any confusion in RE to what you include in your activity level...use the descriptors.
0 -
50% is a safe bet. I use MMF to log runs and it's known for overstating the calories burnt.0
-
My goal was to eat 1650 I ended up eating 1815 calories today im always hungry lol. I burned 574 calories today and have 409 left so I should eat 50% of 409? Which I should have 204 calories left to eat? Or I should eat 50% of 574 which would be 287 calories I have extra to eat. Which means I ate over the50% is a safe bet. I use MMF to log runs and it's known for overstating the calories burnt.
0 -
bethanylynn101 wrote: »
My goal was to eat 1650 I ended up eating 1815 calories today im always hungry lol. I burned 574 calories today and have 409 left so I should eat 50% of 409? Which I should have 204 calories left to eat? Or I should eat 50% of 574 which would be 287 calories I have extra to eat. Which means I ate over the50% is a safe bet. I use MMF to log runs and it's known for overstating the calories burnt.
50% of whatever you burnt off, so 287.0 -
So I should have 147 calories left to eat?0
-
bethanylynn101 wrote: »
My goal was to eat 1650 I ended up eating 1815 calories today im always hungry lol. I burned 574 calories today and have 409 left so I should eat 50% of 409? Which I should have 204 calories left to eat? Or I should eat 50% of 574 which would be 287 calories I have extra to eat. Which means I ate over the50% is a safe bet. I use MMF to log runs and it's known for overstating the calories burnt.
50% of whatever you burnt off, so 287.
So I should have 147 calories left to eat?0 -
OP, you mention being always hungry. I can't see your diary, but how much protein are you eating. Personally, eating more protein (meats, especially) has helped a lot in curbing my hunger, especially after workouts.0
-
OP, you mention being always hungry. I can't see your diary, but how much protein are you eating. Personally, eating more protein (meats, especially) has helped a lot in curbing my hunger, especially after workouts.
My proteins are set at around 109-120 but sometimes it changes. Days I eat more I try to eat more meats.0 -
bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.0 -
Why wouldn't it be accurate?? It's more accurate then most things specially on MFPbrianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.
0 -
bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Why wouldn't it be accurate?? It's more accurate then most things specially on MFPbrianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.
Because HRMs are designed and programmed only for some steady state cardio activities. They aren't accurate for lifting, yoga, Zumba, intervals, etc.0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Why wouldn't it be accurate?? It's more accurate then most things specially on MFPbrianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.
Because HRMs are designed and programmed only for some steady state cardio activities. They aren't accurate for lifting, yoga, Zumba, intervals, etc.
That's actually something I was going to ask....I have a fitbit charge HR, and I LOVE it, but was wondering how accurate it was taking into account when I do strength training? I love it either way, and I use it for the steps, hr, cardio etc, but just wondering if I'm burning more that it actually says when I do lifting, etc.?!?!brianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Why wouldn't it be accurate?? It's more accurate then most things specially on MFPbrianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.
Because HRMs are designed and programmed only for some steady state cardio activities. They aren't accurate for lifting, yoga, Zumba, intervals, etc.
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Why wouldn't it be accurate?? It's more accurate then most things specially on MFPbrianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.
Because HRMs are designed and programmed only for some steady state cardio activities. They aren't accurate for lifting, yoga, Zumba, intervals, etc.
That's actually something I was going to ask....I have a fitbit charge HR, and I LOVE it, but was wondering how accurate it was taking into account when I do strength training? I love it either way, and I use it for the steps, hr, cardio etc, but just wondering if I'm burning more that it actually says when I do lifting, etc.?!?!brianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
Why wouldn't it be accurate?? It's more accurate then most things specially on MFPbrianpperkins wrote: »bethanylynn101 wrote: »
The goal that I got was from this website called iifym and said that suggested calorie is 1737. I have a polar watch, so I know what I'm burning is accurate.janejellyroll wrote: »If you are working from the goal MFP gave you, yes, you should eat them back. But how are you determining how many calories you've burned? Your daily average sounds a bit high. To counter over-estimation, many people eat back just a portion of the calories.
Your Polar might be accurate for steady state cardio ... nothing else .. and even that is a maybe.
Because HRMs are designed and programmed only for some steady state cardio activities. They aren't accurate for lifting, yoga, Zumba, intervals, etc.
I have the Fitbit one and I love mine too but that's not as accurate as my polar watch as in lifting and what not. I still think that my polar is pretty accurate because I go to this one website that tells you how much calories that you burn and I put how long I workout and what I did and what my polar watch says is pretty much real close to what it says on that website:)0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions