Lost 5kg by not eating back exercise calories!
Replies
-
Not eating exercise doesn't make sense?
Say you burn 2500 calories with out exercise. You eat 1500 because your trying to lose 2 pound a week. That's a deficit of 1000 calories.
Say you do an hours exercise and burn 500 calories. You burn 3000 total, eat 1500. Now your deficit is 1500 which would likely result in 3 pound loss.
But if you ate an additional 500 calories your deficit would be back to 1000 and your original goal.
So like someone else mentioned, unless you have a lot of weight to lose, 3-5 pounds a week is likely unhealthy and losing muscles instead of fat.
Does eating exercise calories still sound confusing or pointless?
A 1000 calorie deficit does seems pointless and confusing.
I've managed to lose the weight and not the muscle, something I was worried about at first, but not so much now (after the last week's gym visits).
I've managed to eat well with healthy portion sizes, no junk, lots of filling fruit and veg, and have not felt hungry enough to worry, which to me is the key. If I do not feel well or lack energy, I have a problem.
My goal is to lose 20 kilos of fat, not muscle, so I've kept my protein levels high (which helps to starve off hunger).
To each their own, but this has worked for me, so worth sharing with others!
Unless you did bodpop to calculate your body fat, there is no way to know that you didn't lose muscle. Gym tests are not accurate at all. You probably DID lose some, sorry to tell you, and will lose more if you keep going.
I measure arm circumference and track all my lifting on excel. I've increasing my max load and volume as per normal over the last few weeks while I've lost the weight. I continue to increase my lifts by small degrees and my arms are more or less the same size as a month ago, maybe a tiny bit larger. If I feel myself getting weaker I will up the calories to compensate. I don't think it is impossible to get stronger while at the same time burn fat/lose weight.
Getting stronger and gaining muscle mass are 2 different things.
Almost no one gains muscle while eating at a deficit, and even then gains are minimal. Your personal arm measurement is hardly proof of any kind of muscle gains.
I am able to lift more weight on specific machines and dumbbells then I could 3 weeks ago. Whether it is as a result of increased strength or muscle mass is debatable. All I know is my clothes feel loser, I feel healthier and I am measurably stronger. My calorie deficit is mainly due to cutting out junk and booze. I am still eating 2200/2400 calories a day, so not exactly starving.
Just sharing my experience, not fuelling a debate!
No, it's not really debateable. Strength gains in a defict, with heavy lifting is common. It called neuroadaptation. Strength gains don't necessarily come from added mass, as much as it comes from your body becoming more efficient. You're not going to "pack on" muscle in 3 weeks that would assist with these lifts if you were bulking, let alone in the deficit you claim.
0 -
I've never liked adding exercise to MFP as it adjusts my food goals according to calculated calories burned. Additionally, we burn calories regardless of what we are doing, so eating back the exercise calories completely makes little sense IMHO.
Recently, I started adjusting the exercise calories to 1from whatever the number of calories attributed to the exercise. Example: 100 calories for 15 minutes bike riding; I adjust manually to 1 calorie.
In this way, I can still record my workout times (hrs, mins) but MFP does not adjust my food calorie goals.
I've stuck as best as possible to my calorie goals for the last 3 weeks using this approach, and have managed to lose 5 kilos (11 lbs)!
I should also mention that I have been sober in October and eating very clean, both of which have helped me to lose the weight!
That's all fine and well if you're just doing 15 minutes or if you're only talking about 150 calories but this isn't sustainable if you're doing much over warming up. My morning workouts burn 1000 - 2400 calories. If I ignored that loss for more than a couple days I'd be unable to continue my workouts.
More than 2 lbs a week isn't a healthy loss rate unless you're obese.
Funnily, no one has asked me how much exercise I actually do! I normally warm up for 15 on indoor bike, then 32 sets of weights, pyramid sets, on 8 machines. This normally takes an hour. When I swim it is normally 500 metres to cool off/stretch after lifting, so again another 15 minutes of cardio. So, in total 30 mins cardio and 1 hour weights three times a week. A total of 4.5 hours exercise a week.0 -
I have a question related to this... I don't eat back my exercise calories BUT I have MFP set to lose 1 pound a week. I don't exercise everyday. Since you can safety lose 2 pounds a week, isn't it OK to not eat them back? Because if I had set it to 2 pounds a week, it would have me eating less net calories anyway.0
-
CFrancine88 wrote: »I have a question related to this... I don't eat back my exercise calories BUT I have MFP set to lose 1 pound a week. I don't exercise everyday. Since you can safety lose 2 pounds a week, isn't it OK to not eat them back? Because if I had set it to 2 pounds a week, it would have me eating less net calories anyway.
How many calories is mfp giving you?0 -
1660, but that's because I have it set to "sedentary" at the moment. This week at work I am just sitting down all day. I usually would be in the lightly active category. MFP is estimating my workouts are about 400 calories.0
-
I have my goal set at losing 1kg per week, where in reality I've lost around 1.6kilos a week.0
-
Technically you could eat back 50-75% of those calories and still be in the same deficit.
The biggest thing to remember is, the bigger the deficit, the more lean muscle mass you will lose.0 -
Lifting burns relatively few calories, though.I've never liked adding exercise to MFP as it adjusts my food goals according to calculated calories burned. Additionally, we burn calories regardless of what we are doing, so eating back the exercise calories completely makes little sense IMHO.
Recently, I started adjusting the exercise calories to 1from whatever the number of calories attributed to the exercise. Example: 100 calories for 15 minutes bike riding; I adjust manually to 1 calorie.
In this way, I can still record my workout times (hrs, mins) but MFP does not adjust my food calorie goals.
I've stuck as best as possible to my calorie goals for the last 3 weeks using this approach, and have managed to lose 5 kilos (11 lbs)!
I should also mention that I have been sober in October and eating very clean, both of which have helped me to lose the weight!
That's all fine and well if you're just doing 15 minutes or if you're only talking about 150 calories but this isn't sustainable if you're doing much over warming up. My morning workouts burn 1000 - 2400 calories. If I ignored that loss for more than a couple days I'd be unable to continue my workouts.
More than 2 lbs a week isn't a healthy loss rate unless you're obese.
Funnily, no one has asked me how much exercise I actually do! I normally warm up for 15 on indoor bike, then 32 sets of weights, pyramid sets, on 8 machines. This normally takes an hour. When I swim it is normally 500 metres to cool off/stretch after lifting, so again another 15 minutes of cardio. So, in total 30 mins cardio and 1 hour weights three times a week. A total of 4.5 hours exercise a week.
0 -
I've never liked adding exercise to MFP as it adjusts my food goals according to calculated calories burned. Additionally, we burn calories regardless of what we are doing, so eating back the exercise calories completely makes little sense IMHO.
Recently, I started adjusting the exercise calories to 1from whatever the number of calories attributed to the exercise. Example: 100 calories for 15 minutes bike riding; I adjust manually to 1 calorie.
In this way, I can still record my workout times (hrs, mins) but MFP does not adjust my food calorie goals.
I've stuck as best as possible to my calorie goals for the last 3 weeks using this approach, and have managed to lose 5 kilos (11 lbs)!
I should also mention that I have been sober in October and eating very clean, both of which have helped me to lose the weight!
That's all fine and well if you're just doing 15 minutes or if you're only talking about 150 calories but this isn't sustainable if you're doing much over warming up. My morning workouts burn 1000 - 2400 calories. If I ignored that loss for more than a couple days I'd be unable to continue my workouts.
More than 2 lbs a week isn't a healthy loss rate unless you're obese.
Funnily, no one has asked me how much exercise I actually do! I normally warm up for 15 on indoor bike, then 32 sets of weights, pyramid sets, on 8 machines. This normally takes an hour. When I swim it is normally 500 metres to cool off/stretch after lifting, so again another 15 minutes of cardio. So, in total 30 mins cardio and 1 hour weights three times a week. A total of 4.5 hours exercise a week.
I just assumed it was 15 minutes at a time since you didn't specify otherwise.
You can't reliably add in calories burned for weight lifting exercise so there's that. Of course it adds to your daily calorie burn but you can't typically say "burned X calories lifting weights". The amount of cardio you're doing can be ignored if you're eating a fair amount of calories each week. Not at all terrible.
You can honestly disregard all of the calories burned and just say you're active and adjust your calorie goals if you like. There's no need to track calories if you're doing pretty much the same routine each week. I only log mine because there's such a huge swing from one day to the next depending on what plan I'm following.
I still think over 2 lbs. a week is a bit too much to drop. As you get closer to your goal you'll need to feather this out so you have a soft landing for maintenance.0 -
CFrancine88 wrote: »I have a question related to this... I don't eat back my exercise calories BUT I have MFP set to lose 1 pound a week. I don't exercise everyday. Since you can safety lose 2 pounds a week, isn't it OK to not eat them back? Because if I had set it to 2 pounds a week, it would have me eating less net calories anyway.
I think this is a decent way to do it, unless you are at a place where you get 1200 even aiming for one lb (which you are not). Like you said, it's similar to going for 2 lb/week and then exercising and eating back exercise calories.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »CFrancine88 wrote: »I have a question related to this... I don't eat back my exercise calories BUT I have MFP set to lose 1 pound a week. I don't exercise everyday. Since you can safety lose 2 pounds a week, isn't it OK to not eat them back? Because if I had set it to 2 pounds a week, it would have me eating less net calories anyway.
I think this is a decent way to do it, unless you are at a place where you get 1200 even aiming for one lb (which you are not). Like you said, it's similar to going for 2 lb/week and then exercising and eating back exercise calories.
I almost feel like eating back exercise calories will trigger me to exercise JUST so I can eat more junk. I know that's what I did when I was on weight watchers. I know it may not "hurt" things but my goal is to lose weight, not figure out how to eat more. So I purposely set myself at only 1 lbs a week just as a safegaurd to prevent undereating.0 -
CFrancine88 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »CFrancine88 wrote: »I have a question related to this... I don't eat back my exercise calories BUT I have MFP set to lose 1 pound a week. I don't exercise everyday. Since you can safety lose 2 pounds a week, isn't it OK to not eat them back? Because if I had set it to 2 pounds a week, it would have me eating less net calories anyway.
I think this is a decent way to do it, unless you are at a place where you get 1200 even aiming for one lb (which you are not). Like you said, it's similar to going for 2 lb/week and then exercising and eating back exercise calories.
I almost feel like eating back exercise calories will trigger me to exercise JUST so I can eat more junk. I know that's what I did when I was on weight watchers. I know it may not "hurt" things but my goal is to lose weight, not figure out how to eat more. So I purposely set myself at only 1 lbs a week just as a safegaurd to prevent undereating.
An approach to losing weight that makes sense to me is to start with a moderate deficit (say cut calories by 500) and then try to work up to a sustainable exercise level of maybe a similar amount. I like that, because it doesn't make you think the best thing to do is eat super low and focusing on making exercise a regular part of life. That was basically what I tried to do, and what it sounds like you are doing too.0 -
CFrancine88 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »CFrancine88 wrote: »I have a question related to this... I don't eat back my exercise calories BUT I have MFP set to lose 1 pound a week. I don't exercise everyday. Since you can safety lose 2 pounds a week, isn't it OK to not eat them back? Because if I had set it to 2 pounds a week, it would have me eating less net calories anyway.
I think this is a decent way to do it, unless you are at a place where you get 1200 even aiming for one lb (which you are not). Like you said, it's similar to going for 2 lb/week and then exercising and eating back exercise calories.
I almost feel like eating back exercise calories will trigger me to exercise JUST so I can eat more junk. I know that's what I did when I was on weight watchers. I know it may not "hurt" things but my goal is to lose weight, not figure out how to eat more. So I purposely set myself at only 1 lbs a week just as a safegaurd to prevent undereating.
Am I wrong, but I seem to remember from 2/3 years ago, MFP did not adjust specific macros for your food diary when you added your exercise? I seem to remember seeing the exercise calories shown at the top, subtracted from your goal/calories consumed showing how many calories you could still eat, but this did not filter down into your diary specific macros as it does now?0 -
I know this is your experience thus far, but posting it here is indirectly offering bad advice to other users.
Lets be clear. I am not offering advice, only sharing my own experience; a big difference. You on the other hand are offering advice, which of course I and others appreciate.
That's why I said indirectly offering advice.Am I wrong, but I seem to remember from 2/3 years ago, MFP did not adjust specific macros for your food diary when you added your exercise? I seem to remember seeing the exercise calories shown at the top, subtracted from your goal/calories consumed showing how many calories you could still eat, but this did not filter down into your diary specific macros as it does now?
I could be wrong too, but I don't recall them doing that either when I first joined. Heck, I don't even remember the whole exercise calories to eat back thing when this site first launched.
0 -
I know this is your experience thus far, but posting it here is indirectly offering bad advice to other users.
Lets be clear. I am not offering advice, only sharing my own experience; a big difference. You on the other hand are offering advice, which of course I and others appreciate.
That's why I said indirectly offering advice.
Same thing, just put more politely.Am I wrong, but I seem to remember from 2/3 years ago, MFP did not adjust specific macros for your food diary when you added your exercise? I seem to remember seeing the exercise calories shown at the top, subtracted from your goal/calories consumed showing how many calories you could still eat, but this did not filter down into your diary specific macros as it does now?
I could be wrong too, but I don't recall them doing that either when I first joined. Heck, I don't even remember the whole exercise calories to eat back thing when this site first launched.
This 'new adjustment' is one reason why I change my exercise calories to 1. It encourages you to eat more than really need, especially if you miscalculated the calories you burned.0 -
This 'new adjustment' is one reason why I change my exercise calories to 1. It encourages you to eat more than really need, especially if you miscalculated the calories you burned.
I was like you when I first started. I was afraid to eat my exercise calories back thinking that I wouldn't lose weight. MFP overestimates burns so it can be difficult to figure out how much you should truly eat back. What personally helped me was buying a Fitbit Charge HR. It really helped me see how much I burn when I workout. At first I only ate 25-50% of the calories back before my Charge HR; I was losing 2.2 lbs per week, sometimes 3. After my Charge HR I still only ate 25-50% of the calories back. I was on top of the world for around two months or so, then one day I just felt incredibly hungry and tired. I never averaged more than five hours of sleep per night.
I'm 5'3.5" and I started at 139 pounds at the end of June and by the end of August I was 123 pounds. I scaled my weight loss back to half a pound per week after that and started eating back my exercise calories. I usually have 50 to 100 left at the end of my day. I'm still losing weight. I'm 117 pounds now. Last week I lost 2 pounds anyway and it wasn't even my intention. My deficit wasn't close to 7,000 calories, so it just happened somehow. The body is strange. In any case, it feels good to know I get to eat more food now. My skin cleared up and my hair stopped shedding as much when I upped my calorie intake. I also started getting seven hours of uninterrupted sleep by having more food in my system. Looking back, I'm lucky I retained as much LBM as I did because it was only over the course of approximately two months. Listening to your body is the most important factor when it comes to diet and exercise.
0 -
I look at this way.
If I increase my deficit by a couple hundred calories a day it's no big deal, regardless of whether exercise or less eating caused it. Spread out over a week that's only 1400 calories more deficit, less than a 1/2 pound in theory.
But if I go exercise hard with longer cardio sessions and burn 800-1500 calories in a day, I have to eat at least some of it back to promote proper recovery and keep me from being hungry the following days. Since I don't have a lot of exercise time often I go exercise longer.
Personally for me I'm more comfortable keeping my weight loss goals lower. I'd rather take the extra time with less risk of doing anything unhealthy.
0 -
Lost
And i eat back what i can, when i can, when ever i can!0 -
If I don't eat back all of what I burn then I have trouble lifting and that's just something I'm willing to undermine. Eating them never hindered losing and has been no issue in maintaining. It's just at little trial and error to find actual calorie burns. After I did that, I felt so much better, wasn't hungry, and improved my weights greatly. I like the way the site is set up as it keep all the 1200 calorie a day folks from netting 800 calories or at least it's designed to.0
-
if you’re trying to lose weight, chances are you’ll be on the hungry side even without exercising since MyFitnessPal’s weight loss calorie goals are calculated independent of exercise. The upside to this is that those exercise calories become a “bonus”–so if your workout leaves you feeling a bit hungry afterwards, by all means you should enjoy the bump in calories and eat something.
Rather than running for the kitchen cabinet the moment you get home from your workout, trust your tummy to tell you if you need a post-workout snack.
Remember, the calories you eat and exercise off are estimations, and we’re more likely to overestimate calories burned from exercise. If hunger hits between meals, start slow–particularly if you’re trying to lose or maintain your weight. Begin by eat back a percentage of your exercise calories (say, 50%) rather than all of them, and see how you feel in 20-30 minutes.0 -
I assume he has his setting on MFP set to active or something so that he can do the TDEE method on MFP. I do that too. I eat 1600 instead of 1400 all the time but then don't count exercise. I never do more than 200 cals of exercise at a time anyway. And not even everyday!0
-
maplehouse200 wrote: »We're similar.
For the last 7 wks I've been ingesting an average about 1400 cals per day and a fair bit of that has been beer and wine. (Not Greene King tho'). I'm very active, especially at the weekends so probably have a deficit of 1000+. I'm down 16 pounds and contrary to what I'm reading on MFP, I'm not weak, tired, malnourished, hungry, grumpy etc etc.
I maybe losing some muscle mass but I can still chop firewood for a 5hr stint and I'll pop back to the gym when I lose some more weight; probably another stone.
I don't advocate the way I lose weight to anybody else, just putting it out there as what works for me and what seems to work for you. We are all different.
Do whatever works for you.
Having said that, I appreciate that I do not have too much to lose, and cannot say that this could be sustainable for someone with a lot to lose.
BTW. 55 6'3'' 13st/10lb.
116/68
RHR 54.
(Fuller's London Pride).
Extra calories are easily consumed when a bottle of wine contains 450/500 calories. Add to this the junk I would normally eat with the wine- peanuts, crisps, chocolate, all items I do not need because I am not necessarily hungry. In fact, they are the reason I gained weight in the first place!
Cutting 1000 calories of junk and making good choices for 'necessary' calories shouldn't leave you starved, feeling weak or unwell. The opposite, feeling healthier and having more energy is more likely. To me, the exercise has always been there, it is the diet that needed fixing.
0 -
Certainly when I have reached my goal and am at maintenance, I'll eat back my exercise calories. And, if I were working out vigorously several days a week, I'm sure I'd need to do so even now to keep up the pace. However, I'm not. Zumba Gold twice a week is great for me. Nice cardio workout. I'm moderately active the other 3 days a week on the job. So there's no need to eat back exercise calories to keep up a strenuous pace here.
I have 9 lbs to go to my goal. It's not a long-term weight loss plan, nor does it need to be. If I were having to lose for a lengthy time period, I would probably do what people suggest here, eat back some exercise calories regularly.
What's silly is that some posters seem to push the notion that you MUST or ELSE! The point is to maintain energy levels so that you feel pretty good while losing weight and not set up a situation where you boomerang and say, "I quit!" But there's certainly no reason to eat back the calories if you feel fine, are losing at a rate recommended by your doctor or reputable sources, which is 1 to 2 lbs a week, and you are staying motivated to stick to your plan.
Commonsense rules.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
MarcyKirkton wrote: »are losing at a rate recommended by your doctor or reputable sources
This is a key.
Usually when people are told they should eat back exercise calories they are at a max safe deficit already (2 lbs, not morbidly obese or under a doctor's care) and also exercising vigorously. If you are doing light exercise and not losing beyond the recommended amount, it's not you who is meant. Many use exercise calories to make up for inaccurate logging or cover it with a lower deficit (as discussed above) or a higher activity level, and that's sensible.
Taking a 1000 deficit (or 1200 calories) and then running 6 miles a day on top of that isn't the same thing, and for that person to be told that eating back exercise is counterproductive (or to not understand that she's greatly exceeding the recommended deficit) is a problem, and likely is causing unnecessary loss of LBM, as well as other risks. (And that's more of a danger if close to goal.)
Lots of people seem to think it's weak to not be able to do this, either, so telling them it's not important to fuel the exercise so long as they feel like they don't need to (regardless of how much they are losing) seems irresponsible to me. Better to encourage people to be sensible and acknowledge what's healthier.0 -
A bottle of red wine is 625 calories on the average
0 -
I gained weight by eating back my calories!0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »MarcyKirkton wrote: »are losing at a rate recommended by your doctor or reputable sources
Lots of people seem to think it's weak to not be able to do this, either, so telling them it's not important to fuel the exercise so long as they feel like they don't need to (regardless of how much they are losing) seems irresponsible to me. Better to encourage people to be sensible and acknowledge what's healthier.
I just look at the rate of loss. I've never lost more than 2 lbs in a week. It comes down by ounces, literally. So as long as the rate of loss is steady and within normal recommended guidelines, then the person probably is eating plenty. No?
0 -
LightersUp wrote: »I gained weight by eating back my calories!
Did you have a fitness tracker or were you using MFP's database to determine your calorie burn from exercise? The answer to this question makes all the difference.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions