Want to log my exercise but don't want those "eat back" calories- ugghh.

New to MFP since the beginning of the year... I didn't realize that the exercise calories were over-estimated. That said, I eat them back... every single one... and I'm still losing at the desired rate. So, do I assume that my metabolism is higher than MFP is calculating?

I never eat back the exercise caloroes and i would NEVER listen to someone who tells me to do so, there is NO one size fits all, CICO really doesn't work for everyone and setting your own exercise calories is your best answer.

The funny thing is, i need to lose less than 10 pounds, can you imagine if i ate back the exercise calories. Yet i've had peope here who REALLY NEED to lose 60, 70+ pounds giving me advice.

There are people who think they know what will work for you, if you are eating 1900 calories a day, leaving the exercise calories is a wonderful way to create a deficit.....and you'll only lose weight if somehow you create a calorie deficit.

(i always catch the weight gain before it becomes an issue)

LINIA wrote: »

I never eat back the exercise caloroes and i would NEVER listen to someone who tells me to do so, there is NO one size fits all, CICO really doesn't work for everyone and setting your own exercise calories is your best answer.

The funny thing is, i need to lose less than 10 pounds, can you imagine if i ate back the exercise calories. Yet i've had peope here who REALLY NEED to lose 60, 70+ pounds giving me advice.

There are people who think they know what will work for you, if you are eating 1900 calories a day, leaving the exercise calories is a wonderful way to create a deficit.....and you'll only lose weight if somehow you create a calorie deficit.

(i always catch the weight gain before it becomes an issue)

You're all over the place here. CICO doesn't work for everyone yet you'll only lose weight if you create a deficit?

You clearly don't understand how MFP works and if someone is eating the base level of calories needed to meet nutritional needs and not eating any exercise calories they are doing damage to their body.

And his 1900 per day goal INLCUDES a deficit already, so exercise is increasing that deficit, lowering nutrition and increasing muscle loss. None of which is a good thing.

catrowan74 wrote: »

New to MFP since the beginning of the year... I didn't realize that the exercise calories were over-estimated. That said, I eat them back... every single one... and I'm still losing at the desired rate. So, do I assume that my metabolism is higher than MFP is calculating?

Either that, or you are very accurate at logging, or you are at the high end of your stated activity level, or you log actual workouts only, or the exercise you do is not one that's over estimated.......a number of possibilities. If it ain't broke......



There is something that many people don't understand............everything is an estimate.

The reason CICO "doesn't work" for some people is they are eating more than they think, or they are burning less then they think. CICO has worked for hundreds of years, for millions of people.

Activity level is a range....not one number. When I started MFP I assumed I was at least lightly active. I got a FitBit and that told me the truth. Sedentary.....middle of the pack.

Not everyone weighs portions. Some of us use measuring cups, this isn't bad, but it's not the best either. Some people "eye-ball" this is even worse. Some people choose incorrect entries. Plenty of those to choose from.

Some of us log walking the dog as exercise, but if our actual activity is low enough, then it's already in our activity level.

When we get close to goal a 1/2 pound a week loss would be good progress (this is for those who are within 15 pounds of goal).

That's a measly 250 calorie a day deficit. That can easily be wiped out with inaccurate logging. A 1/2 pound loss is easily something that does not show up on the scale. It could be masked by water weight, waste, whathaveyou.

Eating back (a sensible portion) of exercise calories works for most MFP users.

redd_87 wrote: »

I don't eat back my exercise calories either. I log the exercise and manually change the calories burned to 1.

I do this. I manually set my MFP goal based on TDEE so I count my exercise manually at a minimum.

I can't imagine not eating back exercise calories. You will burn out so fast doing that. Either use the tdee method as others suggested or eat back half of your estimated calories. I get so hungry from exercise and if I didn't get the extra calories, it would totally not be worth the hunger. I've lost 85 lbs in the past year eating back half of my estimated calories. I don't think I could've kept it up this long without fueling my body.

LINIA wrote: »

I never eat back the exercise caloroes and i would NEVER listen to someone who tells me to do so, there is NO one size fits all, CICO really doesn't work for everyone and setting your own exercise calories is your best answer.

The funny thing is, i need to lose less than 10 pounds, can you imagine if i ate back the exercise calories. Yet i've had peope here who REALLY NEED to lose 60, 70+ pounds giving me advice.

There are people who think they know what will work for you, if you are eating 1900 calories a day, leaving the exercise calories is a wonderful way to create a deficit.....and you'll only lose weight if somehow you create a calorie deficit.

(i always catch the weight gain before it becomes an issue)

I'm super short and have been working on my last ten pounds, just entered maintenance actually. I ate back 50% of my exercise calories doing it. Sometimes more. It doesn't matter if you have 10 pounds to lose or 100... the math is the same.

VintageFeline wrote: »

LINIA wrote: »

I never eat back the exercise caloroes and i would NEVER listen to someone who tells me to do so, there is NO one size fits all, CICO really doesn't work for everyone and setting your own exercise calories is your best answer.

The funny thing is, i need to lose less than 10 pounds, can you imagine if i ate back the exercise calories. Yet i've had peope here who REALLY NEED to lose 60, 70+ pounds giving me advice.

There are people who think they know what will work for you, if you are eating 1900 calories a day, leaving the exercise calories is a wonderful way to create a deficit.....and you'll only lose weight if somehow you create a calorie deficit.

(i always catch the weight gain before it becomes an issue)

You're all over the place here. CICO doesn't work for everyone yet you'll only lose weight if you create a deficit?

You clearly don't understand how MFP works and if someone is eating the base level of calories needed to meet nutritional needs and not eating any exercise calories they are doing damage to their body.

And his 1900 per day goal INLCUDES a deficit already, so exercise is increasing that deficit, lowering nutrition and increasing muscle loss. None of which is a good thing.

Agreed. CICO works for every single person that exists, as is it a function of the human body. The reason why some people think CICO doesn't work for them is actually due to their own inaccuracies. Unless you're manually setting your own calories by using your TDEE, the way MFP is designed means that you should be eating a portion of your exercise calories back, as you'd be netting too little otherwise.

Unfortunately some people take exercise calories to the extreme, it becomes unrealistic, and that's why people fail. I've seen people log sex sessions as exercise, 5 minutes of jumping jacks, 2 hours of "cooking", and a slew of other things that are really not sufficient exercise. If you're looking to list any activity as exercise just so you could eat more food, then yes, you will fail because you're eating back overinflated burns. Furthermore, so many people log their food terribly. They choose incorrect entries, they log half days, negate their deficit by a cheat day or, if they have less weight to lose, screw themselves over by not weighing their food.

Personally I don't deal with MFP's burns because I use a Fitbit. I set myself as sedentary so that I'm given a lower amount of calories to eat and I earn more as the day goes on. After doing this since July, I've learned I can eat back all my exercise calories and then some. I'm 5'3" and I was 139 pounds in July and by mid-February I was 109 pounds. I am currently in the process of bulking, so I'm sitting at 113 at the moment. If I didn't eat back my exercise calories when I was losing, I'd be netting a crazy low amount of calories and I wouldn't have retained all the muscle I have. I'm still having issues with it because I'm trying to bulk and finding I can actually eat more calories than Fitbit says I can. If I don't do so, I still lose weight. I weigh everything I eat to the gram and I try to be as accurate as possible. If I can't be, then I leave a bit of padding, but I would never eat none of my exercise calories back. It's just not feasible for someone as active as I am. For people who are sedentary and don't do anything aside from light cardio a few times per week, I could see where it could end up being an issue. Your mileage may vary, but observing your own trends for a few weeks and reassessing always works.

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

You're better off not eating back burned calories ... Will only speed the weigh loss process up and you will achieve your goals a lot faster .. Also fitness trackers treadmill machines are not very accurate with how much u burn.

No. Going beyond a healthy rate of loss is not better for you at all. Stop spreading misinformation. The general rule is that people should not exceed a rate of loss that goes beyond 1% of their bodyweight per week. If so, they risk losing muscle in addition to fat, especially if they're not doing any resistance training in an attempt to preserve it. This is part of what causes the whole "skinny fat" look. Also, your hair falls out, your skin turns to crap, as well as a slew of other health problems. The whole "faster is better" mentality is exactly why people crash diet, lose a bunch of weight, then gain it all back.

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

synacious wrote: »

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

You're better off not eating back burned calories ... Will only speed the weigh loss process up and you will achieve your goals a lot faster .. Also fitness trackers treadmill machines are not very accurate with how much u burn.

No. Going beyond a healthy rate of loss is not better for you at all. Stop spreading misinformation. The general rule is that people should not exceed a rate of loss that goes beyond 1% of their bodyweight per week. If so, they risk losing muscle in addition to fat, especially if they're not doing any resistance training in an attempt to preserve it. This is part of what causes the whole "skinny fat" look. Also, your hair falls out, your skin turns to crap, as well as a slew of other health problems. The whole "faster is better" mentality is exactly why people crash diet, lose a bunch of weight, then gain it all back.

synacious wrote: »

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

You're better off not eating back burned calories ... Will only speed the weigh loss process up and you will achieve your goals a lot faster .. Also fitness trackers treadmill machines are not very accurate with how much u burn.

No. Going beyond a healthy rate of loss is not better for you at all. Stop spreading misinformation. The general rule is that people should not exceed a rate of loss that goes beyond 1% of their bodyweight per week. If so, they risk losing muscle in addition to fat, especially if they're not doing any resistance training in an attempt to preserve it. This is part of what causes the whole "skinny fat" look. Also, your hair falls out, your skin turns to crap, as well as a slew of other health problems. The whole "faster is better" mentality is exactly why people crash diet, lose a bunch of weight, then gain it all back.

I just don't see the point in eating back calories you've worked hard to burn unless it's a special occasion. Also I'm a true believer in lifting heavy if you are doing cardio to preserve muscle

You eat to fuel your exercise, and to learn how to eat in maintenance. If you're trying to lose weight you're already in a caloric deficit, and stored fat isn't a great source of energy for intense exercise.

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

synacious wrote: »

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

You're better off not eating back burned calories ... Will only speed the weigh loss process up and you will achieve your goals a lot faster .. Also fitness trackers treadmill machines are not very accurate with how much u burn.

No. Going beyond a healthy rate of loss is not better for you at all. Stop spreading misinformation. The general rule is that people should not exceed a rate of loss that goes beyond 1% of their bodyweight per week. If so, they risk losing muscle in addition to fat, especially if they're not doing any resistance training in an attempt to preserve it. This is part of what causes the whole "skinny fat" look. Also, your hair falls out, your skin turns to crap, as well as a slew of other health problems. The whole "faster is better" mentality is exactly why people crash diet, lose a bunch of weight, then gain it all back.

synacious wrote: »

joseserpas1788 wrote: »

You're better off not eating back burned calories ... Will only speed the weigh loss process up and you will achieve your goals a lot faster .. Also fitness trackers treadmill machines are not very accurate with how much u burn.

No. Going beyond a healthy rate of loss is not better for you at all. Stop spreading misinformation. The general rule is that people should not exceed a rate of loss that goes beyond 1% of their bodyweight per week. If so, they risk losing muscle in addition to fat, especially if they're not doing any resistance training in an attempt to preserve it. This is part of what causes the whole "skinny fat" look. Also, your hair falls out, your skin turns to crap, as well as a slew of other health problems. The whole "faster is better" mentality is exactly why people crash diet, lose a bunch of weight, then gain it all back.

I just don't see the point in eating back calories you've worked hard to burn unless it's a special occasion. Also I'm a true believer in lifting heavy if you are doing cardio to preserve muscle

Yeah, but that's what you're not understanding. Unless you're customizing your calorie allowance via the TDEE method, MFP's calorie allowance has a deficit built in. The goal is not to create an even bigger deficit to the point where you net 0 calories. It's not beneficial for the body. A lot of people here have a negative relationship with food, so I can understand why eating is seen as a negative thing, however, food is exactly what your body needs to function.

If you consume 1200 calories, but burn off 600 of them by doing a two-hour long cardio session at the gym, you're only netting 600 calories. While the average person would think "Yay, an even bigger deficit! Faster weight loss! Great!", people with more experience know what will come within the next month. "Why am I hungry all the time no matter how much I eat? Why is my hair falling out? Why am I under the weather all the time?" Simple; your body is not getting the fuel it needs to function. Even if you lift heavy, if you're not eating a sufficient amount of calories to fuel your body, you're not going to preserve muscle. Period.

I'm not saying someone has to eat ALL of their calories back. I do, but I'm experienced with doing this and I have more muscle than most women my height/weight, so I can eat more than they can. However, if someone is only eating 1200 calories and has themselves set as sedentary and they truly are working out hard, they should eat a portion back. Obviously this changes if the person has themselves set as anything higher than lightly active, which is why the general rule is 50 to 75%. I'd actually say 25 to 50% until someone can accurately assess their rate of loss. The bottom line is that if you're an 150 pound person pulling in a rate of loss of 3 to 4 pounds per week, you're screwing over your body big time and you're going to learn that the hard way.

Not too long ago, there was a poster here only eating 700 calories per day to get rid of her "fat"; she was 105 pounds. She posted photos of herself and to be honest, she looked like she was around 120 or more. She had no muscle tone whatsoever and her entire body just looked loose. She did that to herself because of the whole "eat less, lose more" philosophy and now it's gonna take her at least a year or more of body recomposition to fix the damage.

I've been eating most of my exercise calories - and have been losing slightly faster than mfp would predict. I don't log incidental 'exercise' such as going for a walk to get lunch as I figure that's built in to my activity level. Working well for me, seeing as though I really, really like to eat :-)

I wait until I have eaten all my allotted calories, or until I have logged them for the day then I sync my Fitbit so the exercise calories are not added until I have logged my food for the day. It's kinda odd because I pretty much workout the same amount every day, so I know about how many calories will be added. I like to see the added calories, but I rarely eat any back

I enter my exercise, let MFP do its thing, and just aim for the net number at the end of the day to be about half to equal of what MFP says I burned, instead of aiming for 0.