Calories burned during exercise misleading?

Options
wherescara
wherescara Posts: 7 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Hello! This question has been on my mind for a while. Our recommended calorie intake is based on how many calories we burn throughout the day-- for instance, I might burn 100 calories/ hr just by sitting. So if you exercise, you can extra calorie allowance for that day.

But here's the thing, if I do an hour-long aerobics class, it'll tell me I burned 300 calories or something, and I get to eat 300 extra calories. But in reality, I would've burned 100 calories during that hour ANYWAY, so those first 100 calories are already accounted for in my normal daily allowance. Therefore, I should only get to eat 200 extra calories that day. Does that make sense? I think I'm allowing myself to eat back too many calories from exercise, because I really should be counting the ADDITIONAL, not total, calories I burn during that workout.

Thoughts?

Replies

  • QueenofCups
    QueenofCups Posts: 365 Member
    Options
    If you were eating the amt of calories to maintain weight and then ate back exercise calories, I would agree.But since (depending on how much you want to lose a week) you start off with a deficit, I think its a good idea to eat back most if not all your exercise calories.
  • HolleeERL
    HolleeERL Posts: 313 Member
    Options
    I think you are over thinking this. No, you burn an EXTRA 300 calories by exercising. The calories you burn during a normal day are already accounted for.
  • jrich1
    jrich1 Posts: 2,408 Member
    Options
    People that use HRMs are told to factor in those calories anyway, I think 100cals an hour just sitting to be kinda high, but if you wanted to be exact you log the exercise as the net of the two, I never have and had never a problem losing.
  • abdilla1
    abdilla1 Posts: 10
    Options
    I use a GoWearFit armband that actually tracks how many calories I burn doing anything - and it will always say I burned more calories than MyFitnessPal or the treadmill might. I'm pretty sure the 300 calories is in addition to whatever you would burn anyway.
  • annacataldo
    annacataldo Posts: 872 Member
    Options
    you are over thinking... You burn 300calories by excercise... youve already aco****ed for what u burn just sitting there. in your calorie allotment for the day. Ive had no trouble losing for 80+days and ive eaten all my excercise calories back.
  • rgutie1
    rgutie1 Posts: 84 Member
    Options
    I have been wondernig the same thing. I had never really looked through the excercise database but there is some weird stuff in there.

    Fishing from shore (standing) is one of the options and they say that burn 40 calories/10 minute interval. I did that for 15 hours straight this weekend...I dont think I can assume I burned 3,600 calories in the process unless your figuring in all the calories that I the body just burns existing, but if that the case then it shouldnt effect my net calories
  • pkpzp228
    pkpzp228 Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    I understand the question and I agree but in terms of caloric expenditure and overall weight loss I think we're talking too small of difference to really matter all that much.

    Say your BMR is 2400 kcals a day and for the sake of math assume that's 100 an hour consistently, if you exercise for 1 hour a day and burn 300 kcals, your total expendature for the day is not 2700 it's 2600... this because that 300 kcals for the hour includes 1/24 of your standard BMR.

    Again this is small beans, unless your trying to manage body fat down in the ultra elite athletic range the difference in deficit should have no bearing. You want to lose a pound per week than you need a 500 kcal deficit a day, that can mean 400 one day and 600 the next, factor in hydration variance from day to day and all you're going to end up with frustration over counting beans.

    So you're a little over maybe under just keep with program and things will work.


    EDIT: also wanted to mention that if you're not using a heart rate monitor than you're really wasting your time worrying about +/- 100-200 calories. Everything is a guestimation when it comes to this sites ability to calculate your BMR or calorie expendature. Don;t take the numbers like they're scripture, use this site as a tool for understanding how diet and exercise work for you.
  • lclarkjr
    lclarkjr Posts: 359 Member
    Options
    I agree with you and I'm surprised it hasn't really been talked about much. The calories you burn during exercise include a portion of your survival (BMR) calories for that time as well. So I burn about 1,000 calories in an hour while running. But my BMR during that hour is about 77 calories. So I did burn 1,000 calories but only 923 of them were exercise calories. It really is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. But some people on here are so meticulous about calorie expenditures that they log everything from standing, to walking around their house, to sitting on the toilet, etc. To me I figure they are already included in the 478 calories or so I get above my BMR based on the sedentary setting I selected. But if you are counting all your exercise calories without subtracting your BMR calories for that time, then you are going to be a little off. Small potatoes.
  • hellen72
    hellen72 Posts: 144 Member
    Options
    I have adjusted calories burned to take into account what I would have burnt anyway. So instead if taking 100 cal per mile i use 80.
    That is one approach or you could maybe record less time for the exercise or make sure you dont eat back all your exercise cal.
    I used my own exercise rather than those from the database that way i can set the cal to take off what I would have burnt sitting around. When u have put it in once mfp remembers it and when u lose weight it reduces the cal burned per time period, that is the bit I don't like about losing weight!!!
  • srp2011
    srp2011 Posts: 1,829 Member
    Options
    You are correct - BMR calories do need to be deducted from the 'calories burned while exercising'. Plus, the calories burned figures given by MFP or any other counter are really just estimates, and often overestimates. HRMs give you a better idea of what you are really burning.
  • llkilgore
    llkilgore Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    I brought up this issue a couple of months ago here:
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/202466-yet-another-exercise-calorie-issue?hl=yet+another+exercise+issue#posts-2675718

    The 2/3rds fudge factor I've applied to my exercise calories since then is working out for me. Weight loss has been steady and pretty much on target with my goals.
  • wherescara
    wherescara Posts: 7 Member
    Options
    Thanks for all the responses! It seems like there are mixed opinions but I have a better idea about how it works now.

Categories