Question.

Options
mamafrahm
mamafrahm Posts: 132 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I'm kind of new here, so I don't really understand this... today I consumed 1135 calories, but I worked off 752, which means I netted 383 ... it says I still have 1147 calories remaining..... is it bad that I have that many calories left?? Am I supposed to eat back the calories that I burn through exercise? Please help!!!!

Replies

  • blockhead922
    blockhead922 Posts: 23
    Options
    If you're not hungry to eat, then don't, but when you exercise so much and eat so little, your body could go into starvation mode and basically start cannibalizing it's own muscle for energy.... which isn't good. But like I said, you're body KNOWS when you should be eating so if you feel full, don't stuff yourself even if you have a lot of calories to spare.
    And I'm just curious.... how did you burn that many calories?!?!
  • mamafrahm
    mamafrahm Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    Yea, I don't really feel hungry. I've been eating a lot of foods with protein in them. First thing this morning I did the 30 day shred, and I just got done with a 30 minute brisk walk/jog on the treadmill!
  • LeonaB17
    LeonaB17 Posts: 304
    Options
    For me - I am usually hungrier when I exercise, so I eat some of mine back but I dont always eat all of them. It is generally advisable to net 1200 calories a day in order to give your body the basic nutrition it needs to survive. If you regularly net below that you can trigger starvation mode. But one day here or there below that number shouldn't kill you.
  • Soulierl
    Soulierl Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    I was put on 1200 calories by my weight loss doc, and I was doing zumba 3 days a week burning roughly 600 calories.. I would eat my 1200 calories, and burn off 600 calories == I have only eaten 600 calories for the day (because I just burned off 600). I put the 600 cals burned into my calorie counter and it said I have 600 MORE calories to eat... But I said to my doctor, I just burned off calories, why do I want to put them back on??? My doctor explained the same as the post above, you need 1200 calories to sustain life - if you eat 1200 and burn 600, then you have only eaten 600 - so you have to eat the 600 you just burned to keep your body out of starvation mode...
  • Soulierl
    Soulierl Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    Ok, how'd y'all get your progress to show at the bottom of your posts?? :happy:
  • HMonsterX
    HMonsterX Posts: 3,000 Member
    Options
    This equation still puzzles me. Person A eats 1200, burns off 600, then has to eat another 600 to get to 1200....

    So that workout has done nothing for your calorie deficit...so....why bother doing the sweat?


    Another example is on The Biggest Loser. Sometimes they work out for 6-7 hours a days, and lose 14lbs in that week. This means a calorie deficit of 7000 calories a day. So they arent eating all their burnt calories....

    It seems that there IS an equation here somewhere. I cant believe you should eat all the calories you burn, else what would be the point in burning any calories. But, we all know you need X amount to stop starvation mode. So if you burn off 1000 calories, how many more should you eat? Obviously not the full 1000....
  • Soulierl
    Soulierl Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    I understand completely, didn't make sense to me either... Cause you do have to have a calorie deficit to lose weight...

    I went from eating about 3,000 - 4,000 calories a DAY (eek!!!) DOWN to 1,200 calories a day... So that's a huge deficit...

    While my hubby was in Iraq from 2010 to 2011, I went from 218 pounds down to 153 pounds in about 10 months using the 1200 calorie a day method.

    I haven't exercised since October, but have stuck to 1200 calories a day... And have still lost weight/inches.... .???? Who knows, maybe I am just starving! I'm worried I AM losing muscle since I'm not exercising....
  • mamafrahm
    mamafrahm Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    Thanks everyone!! It does make sense to eat back some of the calories so I don't go into starvation mode, but then its like whats the point of working out? I guess I'll try a little harder to eat a bit more, but stick to healthier stuff like veggies, fruits and whole grains.
  • mamafrahm
    mamafrahm Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    Ok, how'd y'all get your progress to show at the bottom of your posts?? :happy:


    You put it as your signature. When you click to start a post or reply there is a link above the text box that says signature, thats where you put it! :)
  • Soulierl
    Soulierl Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    Cool!! Thanks!! :smile:
  • nicothepotato
    nicothepotato Posts: 306 Member
    Options
    This equation still puzzles me. Person A eats 1200, burns off 600, then has to eat another 600 to get to 1200....

    So that workout has done nothing for your calorie deficit...so....why bother doing the sweat?
    Working out has a lot more benefit than just burning calories. I strengthens you as a whole: mind, muscles, bones, organs. Just eating a calorie deficit without a workout will cause you to lose muscle and possibly bone density.
  • lexiwho
    lexiwho Posts: 178 Member
    Options
    MFP already calculates a healthy weight loss deficit for you when you set up your goals. Whenever you work out, you're making that deficit larger and that isn't healthy.

    I'll use my stats as an example:

    MFP has my calories I burn just by existing at 2,410 because I'm set to sedentary. I selected a 2 pound loss (because I have over 100 pounds to lose, this is a reasonable goal) so MFP gives me 1,420 calories a day before exercise.

    Take my base metabolism and multiply it by 7, then multiply my calories a day by 7...subtract my calories a day from the base metabolism. (2,410x7)-(1,420x7) = 6,930. A general number per pound of weight is 3,500 so divide 6,930 by 3,500 and you get 1.98 pounds per week.

    I usually average 350 calories a day in exercise so if I were to not eat those back, I'd be getting an extra 2,450 calorie deficit weekly. This sounds good to those who think "restrict restrict restrict" but it's not. I would only be getting 1,070 calories worth of fuel for my body since I've burned off 350 from exercise.

    So, MFP gives you the amount of net calories per day that you need to lose the goal you set. Whenever you exercise, you take too much from the goal and you could run into complications with your weight loss.

    Hope this all makes sense for those of you who had questions.
  • TranquilityBreeze
    TranquilityBreeze Posts: 36 Member
    Options
    Perfect sense Lexiwho. I was also confused when I started. I am to eat 1200 with no exercise to lose 1 pound a week. When I did Weight Watchers years ago my points were equivalent to 1500 calories and to exercise 4-5 times a week. Every site I go to tells me to consume 1500 a day and exercise. This is what helped me to understand. If I don't exercise, I stick to 1200 a day as I burn apx 1400 to sustain life. Hence, I am down 200 calories a day. Eating also speeds up the metabolism which is what we want.

    I weighed myself on Monday after a week on MFP and only lost .2 pounds. I looked over my diary and I noticed I was 300 under on calories each day and worked out 5 days. My body must have been confused and in shock. This week I'm making sure I eat 1200. If I'm still hungry I will eat my exercise calories.

Categories