Eating back calories after exercising
Options
shepslisa
Posts: 17 Member
Hi just started mfp this wk what do yous do when exercising with calories
0
Replies
-
As a general rule, most people only eat a portion back. Since all calorie burns are estimates it's hard to really tell if they're 100% accurate. Personally I go with 50-75% depending on how I feel. Some days, I don't eat back any if I'm truly not hungry. Other days, I will have a snack after my workout, usually something protein based since I rarely get enough throughout the day.0
-
I think in an ideal world, you don't "eat up" the calories you burn when exercising. But we don't live in an ideal world. I went to the gym this morning because I knew today I was seeing an old friend and we were going to drink some mimosas... I wanted to get some calories freed up for the champagne & OJ. This isn't a typical situation for me of course, but it makes me feel better about wasting calories on "empty" drinks that don't contribute to my health, but DO contribute to my mental well being, lol. It was nice to have a few drinks and not feel guilty about the calories ingested since I had in theory already burned them off.2
-
As a general rule, most people only eat a portion back. Since all calorie burns are estimates it's hard to really tell if they're 100% accurate. Personally I go with 50-75% depending on how I feel. Some days, I don't eat back any if I'm truly not hungry. Other days, I will have a snack after my workout, usually something protein based since I rarely get enough throughout the day.
0 -
Thank you0
-
-
Just a thought: unless you're exercising like a demon, what you're burning isn't *really* that much, anyway. I burn about 275 calories running three miles. That's a bowl of oatmeal. I usually don't even bother tracking/eating exercise calories.2
-
Ah thank you I would run 8/9 mile in a tue and thur and do a boxercise class on a mon wed & thur0
-
Just a thought: unless you're exercising like a demon, what you're burning isn't *really* that much, anyway. I burn about 275 calories running three miles. That's a bowl of oatmeal. I usually don't even bother tracking/eating exercise calories.
depends what your deficit is to start with though, and how much you have to lose0 -
Just a thought: unless you're exercising like a demon, what you're burning isn't *really* that much, anyway. I burn about 275 calories running three miles. That's a bowl of oatmeal. I usually don't even bother tracking/eating exercise calories.
So you would log 275 calories of food but not 275 calories of exercise?
Seems a little odd when you are trying to find the correct calorie balance.
When you get to maintenance will you need to take that exercise into account so why not now?1 -
Just a thought: unless you're exercising like a demon, what you're burning isn't *really* that much, anyway. I burn about 275 calories running three miles. That's a bowl of oatmeal. I usually don't even bother tracking/eating exercise calories.
So you would log 275 calories of food but not 275 calories of exercise?
Seems a little odd when you are trying to find the correct calorie balance.
When you get to maintenance will you need to take that exercise into account so why not now?
Actually, I just started maintenance, and I don't. I'm finding that I'm creeping up with the maintenance calorie goals, so I'm still trying to see what works. I think we're both saying the same thing, that you have to find what works.0 -
Do not eat back your reported exercise calories. The most we can burn, on average, is 200 calories per day. A study recently came out that studied a variety of different populations across the globe with different diets and activity levels. What they found is it doesn't matter how active you are, your body will compensate in different ways, even limiting metabolic activities, to keep you from burning more than about 200 calories per day. So as far as calories burned, it doesn't matter if you do a 60 minute high intensity spin class, a 1000 mile bike ride, or just walk your dog.
Researchers are still trying to understand this phenomenon as it goes totally against what should be logically true, but the takeaway is that human metabolisms are incredibly complex systems and you have to experiment to find your sweet spot.
cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)01577-8
0 -
Just a thought: unless you're exercising like a demon, what you're burning isn't *really* that much, anyway. I burn about 275 calories running three miles. That's a bowl of oatmeal. I usually don't even bother tracking/eating exercise calories.
If you're trying to lose weight on a 500 kCal per day deficit (which seems to be the most common around here?) then an extra 275 kCal is HUGE!0 -
Do not eat back your reported exercise calories. The most we can burn, on average, is 200 calories per day. A study recently came out that studied a variety of different populations across the globe with different diets and activity levels. What they found is it doesn't matter how active you are, your body will compensate in different ways, even limiting metabolic activities, to keep you from burning more than about 200 calories per day. So as far as calories burned, it doesn't matter if you do a 60 minute high intensity spin class, a 1000 mile bike ride, or just walk your dog.
Researchers are still trying to understand this phenomenon as it goes totally against what should be logically true, but the takeaway is that human metabolisms are incredibly complex systems and you have to experiment to find your sweet spot.
cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)01577-8
Not true.
This is one study that flies in the face of a lot of what we know about diet, energy, and physics. Either a lot of what humans know about reality is wrong, or this one study is. Since incorrect things are occasionally published, it's more likely that this study is wrong and it does in fact take more energy to ride your bike 1,000 miles than to walk your dog 1 block, than to think magic exists in the world.
Now if you told us that people can't burn more than 200 kCal in a day because they just fall asleep, we'd be talking about why nobody has noticed a rash of narcolepsy, but we wouldn't have to deal with magic. But you aren't saying that. You're saying people need energy to get through the first 7 miles of that bike ride, but the next 993 miles do not require any energy at all. Magic. Caveat emptor, you need a healthy dose of skepticism.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Do not eat back your reported exercise calories. The most we can burn, on average, is 200 calories per day. A study recently came out that studied a variety of different populations across the globe with different diets and activity levels. What they found is it doesn't matter how active you are, your body will compensate in different ways, even limiting metabolic activities, to keep you from burning more than about 200 calories per day. So as far as calories burned, it doesn't matter if you do a 60 minute high intensity spin class, a 1000 mile bike ride, or just walk your dog.
Researchers are still trying to understand this phenomenon as it goes totally against what should be logically true, but the takeaway is that human metabolisms are incredibly complex systems and you have to experiment to find your sweet spot.
cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)01577-8
Not true.
This is one study that flies in the face of a lot of what we know about diet, energy, and physics. Either a lot of what humans know about reality is wrong, or this one study is. Since incorrect things are occasionally published, it's more likely that this study is wrong and it does in fact take more energy to ride your bike 1,000 miles than to walk your dog 1 block, than to think magic exists in the world.
Now if you told us that people can't burn more than 200 kCal in a day because they just fall asleep, we'd be talking about why nobody has noticed a rash of narcolepsy, but we wouldn't have to deal with magic. But you aren't saying that. You're saying people need energy to get through the first 7 miles of that bike ride, but the next 993 miles do not require any energy at all. Magic. Caveat emptor, you need a healthy dose of skepticism.
Also, I think we have an abundance of evidence that people who train hard (either for a living or for a hobby) maintain their weight on many more calories than people who don't train as hard. There is a difference between walking the dog and riding 1,000 miles on your bike.1 -
Do not eat back your reported exercise calories. The most we can burn, on average, is 200 calories per day. A study recently came out that studied a variety of different populations across the globe with different diets and activity levels. What they found is it doesn't matter how active you are, your body will compensate in different ways, even limiting metabolic activities, to keep you from burning more than about 200 calories per day. So as far as calories burned, it doesn't matter if you do a 60 minute high intensity spin class, a 1000 mile bike ride, or just walk your dog.
Researchers are still trying to understand this phenomenon as it goes totally against what should be logically true, but the takeaway is that human metabolisms are incredibly complex systems and you have to experiment to find your sweet spot.
cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)01577-8
So people why are eating ALL of their exercise calories back and losing weight are doing it wrong?0 -
As a general rule, most people only eat a portion back. Since all calorie burns are estimates it's hard to really tell if they're 100% accurate. Personally I go with 50-75% depending on how I feel. Some days, I don't eat back any if I'm truly not hungry. Other days, I will have a snack after my workout, usually something protein based since I rarely get enough throughout the day.
Me too0 -
And clearly all those athletes eating 3-4000 calories a day are super fat we just can't see it.... *roll of eyes*
I think there's far too much evidence that contradicts this theory. I know from my own experience that when I burn 500-1500 calories a day training for triathlon that if I didn't eat them back I would lose weight rapidly. Not to mention get headaches, feel dizzy, lethargic, get injured more, take longer to recover and lack the energy to train hard again the next day.2 -
I actually do eat at least 75% of my calories back because I don't log my strength training. Any variation in accuracy of my cardio burn is neutralized by my uncounted calories from strength training. It works for me.0
-
Do not eat back your reported exercise calories. The most we can burn, on average, is 200 calories per day. A study recently came out that studied a variety of different populations across the globe with different diets and activity levels. What they found is it doesn't matter how active you are, your body will compensate in different ways, even limiting metabolic activities, to keep you from burning more than about 200 calories per day. So as far as calories burned, it doesn't matter if you do a 60 minute high intensity spin class, a 1000 mile bike ride, or just walk your dog.
Researchers are still trying to understand this phenomenon as it goes totally against what should be logically true, but the takeaway is that human metabolisms are incredibly complex systems and you have to experiment to find your sweet spot.
cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)01577-8
Don't listen to this, its an outlier study of everything else known about exercise and fitness.
1 -
The "common knowledge" of physics applied to the human body is about as substantiated as the "common knowledge" that eating cholesterol literally raises your cholesterol. The truth is, it's more complicated than that and research showing anything different is oversimplifying and likely incomplete.
This is a great article with pictures.
vox.com/2016/4/28/11518804/weight-loss-exercise-myth-burn-calories
When we exercise, our body makes metabolic adjustments in response to an increase in calorie burning, slowing down metabolic activity so we use energy more efficiently. If you do an activity frequently enough, your body gets *really* efficient at it. I'm not talking about BMR and the impact of increased muscle mass on your base calorie intake, I'm talking specifically about how many calories your body actually burns when you exercise. I swim laps, and I definitely agree, after swimming 60 minutes of front crawl I definitely need to eat something. That doesn't mean I burned all those calories though.
Don't determine your daily target by eating back your "exercise calories". Figure out your sedentary TDEE based on BMR via your measured lean body mass and set a realistic daily target that way. That's what I'm saying and I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K 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
- 394 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 944 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions