Eating the calories I burn

Should help to read these (hint, the answer is yes ) :

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/186814-some-mfp-basics

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/10589-for-those-confused-or-questioning-eating-your-exercise-calo

I would question though, exactly how you are getting burns that high. If it is from work, that should generally be included in your activity level, not exercise. If it is from exercise, you may be over-exercising. There is a point at which your body is no longer gaining benefit from extreme daily calorie burns, but rather just catabolizing muscle and wearing out joints, etc.

From what I remember my cousin saying.. you CAN eat the extra BUT it is not neccessary.. it just gives you the option.. kinda like a bonus.. I try really hard not to because you will see better results with weight loss.. hope this helps!

If you at back all of your calories, you probably won't lose much. You need some to fuel your workouts, but if you eat them all how will you lose?? thats the way I think about it anyways. :-)

If you eat them all you will lose what you have set into MFP - the 1 pound per week that you set in your goals (or half or 2, depending on what you set). Works for me.
MFP is set up to give you a calorie deficit even when you eat all those exercise calories, how good is that?

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

I eat most of them back most days. Not always. If you keep your body guessing it won't go into a plateau as easily. For me, I usually left about 600 calories at the end of the day, but when I hit a plateau I started leaving only 150-200 and started losing again.

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

Actually, this is kind of contradictory. MFP DOES automatically adjust calories --- to include adding calories to your goal when you log exercise. This is because MFP works differently than other counters/plans, or the way most trainers set up a plan. These other plans take your “intended exercise” and use that to create a deficit, keeping your daily cal goal static. Therefore, with other plans, you would not replace calories you burn through exercise. MFP is different and you CANNOT compare them, unless you’re prepared to do some calculations to get apples vs. apples and not apples vs. oranges.

MFP was designed with the idea that many people can't exercise regularly, or at all, due to physical limitations or time. They also recognized that most people set up an exercise plan with good intentions, but as we all know, that's not necessarily what actually happens every day. So they built the site to allow for weight loss with or without exercise, and keep the daily deficit stable by adding calories for exercise.

NO I TYPE IN CAPS ALOT :-)

Unless you're WAY under your daily goal for calorie intake, there is no need for you to replace the calories you burn while working out. MyFitnessPal should automatically adjust your daily goal so you shouldn't have to worry about it too much.

By the way, what are you doing to burn 2200 calories?

Actually, this is kind of contradictory. MFP DOES automatically adjust calories --- to include adding calories to your goal when you log exercise. This is because MFP works differently than other counters/plans, or the way most trainers set up a plan. These other plans take your “intended exercise” and use that to create a deficit, keeping your daily cal goal static. Therefore, with other plans, you would not replace calories you burn through exercise. MFP is different and you CANNOT compare them, unless you’re prepared to do some calculations to get apples vs. apples and not apples vs. oranges.

MFP was designed with the idea that many people can't exercise regularly, or at all, due to physical limitations or time. They also recognized that most people set up an exercise plan with good intentions, but as we all know, that's not necessarily what actually happens every day. So they built the site to allow for weight loss with or without exercise, and keep the daily deficit stable by adding calories for exercise.

So, basically, what you're saying is I should always be at my daily target calorie goal no matter what? Even if I'm netting 500 cal under my goal and I'm not hungry?

In general, yes. There are some variables that factor into it. Largely because you don't have a lot to lose, it is more important that you don't have too large of a deficit. Your body doesn't have a lot of fat stores to provide energy, and what you do have is in "hard to reach" places, so it will be more difficult for the body to access it quickly. Which means you need a conservative deficit. If your net cals are low, you have a higher deficit. With a higher deficit, you will likely burn a higher ratio of muscle, rather than fat.

So, as long as you are accurate in your logging (weight/measure food, use realistic burn numbers, etc) you should probably try to be within 50 or so cals over or under your Net goal for the day.

In general, yes. There are some variables that factor into it. Largely because you don't have a lot to lose, it is more important that you don't have too large of a deficit. Your body doesn't have a lot of fat stores to provide energy, and what you do have is in "hard to reach" places, so it will be more difficult for the body to access it quickly. Which means you need a conservative deficit. If your net cals are low, you have a higher deficit. With a higher deficit, you will likely burn a higher ratio of muscle, rather than fat.

So, as long as you are accurate in your logging (weight/measure food, use realistic burn numbers, etc) you should probably try to be within 50 or so cals over or under your Net goal for the day.

Well, my goal is to lose fat only. I have my goal set to lose 2lb/week which puts me at 1330 cal for the day. AT THE SAME TIME, I burn about 300 calories a day for 4 days out of the week and almost 800 for 2 days out of the week. I also just began weight lifting at the gym 6 days a week.

Sometimes, I net 600 calories from a food intake of 1400. I don't think or feel like I'm in "starvation mode" because I ALWAYS have energy and am almost never hungry.

What are your thoughts?

I would say your loss per week goal is far too aggressive. 2 lbs per week is appropriate for someone who obese or morbidly obese, not someone who is near a healthy BMI - you simply don't have enough fat stores to withstand that large of a deficit. Especially if you're doing that kind of cardio/strength, you need more fuel than that; specifically, your muscles need more fuel than that. With that high of a deficit, you'll almost certainly be catabolizing muscle. I would highly recommend changing it to 1/2 lb per week, 1 lb per week at the most.

I'll note here that while the recommended minimum intake for women is 1200, it is 1500 for the average man to receive adequate nutrition. If you are much smaller than average, you may be able to get away with slightly less than that, but it's likely not necessary, especially if you are active.

No one could say whether you're in starvation mode, but that's the problem with it -- it's not an obvious process. Even if you feel like you have lots of energy, that can simply be a reaction to inadequate intake (a process similar to fight-or-flight.) Same goes with lack of hunger. When your intake is not in line with your expenditures, and the metabolism slows, the hormones that regulate appetite will become imbalanced and your body won't send the proper hunger cues. So you really can't depend on them.

Think of it this way. (I'm just using a guess, since you didn't provide height) A 5'7" male, 23 yrs old, at about 165 lbs, would have a BMR around 1700. That means he'd burn 1700 just for basic function, as if in a coma.

For people who have a lot of fat stores, they can get away with a much higher deficit, because they have energy stores for the body to fall back on. But in your case, you don't have that much in reserve. So the body has to find that required energy somewhere. And the quickest source of energy in your body is muscle (once you burn through glycogen stores.) So, while you'll burn some fat, you'll also burn a high percentage of muscle as well. In your situation, you should be eating your BMR every day, at the very minimum. And if you want to maintain muscle mass, eat at least most of your exercise cals, to maintain a conservative deficit.

I would say your loss per week goal is far too aggressive. 2 lbs per week is appropriate for someone who obese or morbidly obese, not someone who is near a healthy BMI - you simply don't have enough fat stores to withstand that large of a deficit. Especially if you're doing that kind of cardio/strength, you need more fuel than that; specifically, your muscles need more fuel than that. With that high of a deficit, you'll almost certainly be catabolizing muscle. I would highly recommend changing it to 1/2 lb per week, 1 lb per week at the most.

I'll note here that while the recommended minimum intake for women is 1200, it is 1500 for the average man to receive adequate nutrition. If you are much smaller than average, you may be able to get away with slightly less than that, but it's likely not necessary, especially if you are active.

No one could say whether you're in starvation mode, but that's the problem with it -- it's not an obvious process. Even if you feel like you have lots of energy, that can simply be a reaction to inadequate intake (a process similar to fight-or-flight.) Same goes with lack of hunger. When your intake is not in line with your expenditures, and the metabolism slows, the hormones that regulate appetite will become imbalanced and your body won't send the proper hunger cues. So you really can't depend on them.

Think of it this way. (I'm just using a guess, since you didn't provide height) A 5'7" male, 23 yrs old, at about 165 lbs, would have a BMR around 1700. That means he'd burn 1700 just for basic function, as if in a coma.

For people who have a lot of fat stores, they can get away with a much higher deficit, because they have energy stores for the body to fall back on. But in your case, you don't have that much in reserve. So the body has to find that required energy somewhere. And the quickest source of energy in your body is muscle (once you burn through glycogen stores.) So, while you'll burn some fat, you'll also burn a high percentage of muscle as well. In your situation, you should be eating your BMR every day, at the very minimum. And if you want to maintain muscle mass, eat at least most of your exercise cals, to maintain a conservative deficit.

This has been very helpful. Thank you.