Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
exercise calories on or off?
lizzielynnn
Posts: 3 Member
On or off?
Why or why not?
More likely to lose more weight if it's off or no? Or does having it on make you workout so you can eat more? Is that good or bad?
Just trying to get a discussion going to see different opinions
Why or why not?
More likely to lose more weight if it's off or no? Or does having it on make you workout so you can eat more? Is that good or bad?
Just trying to get a discussion going to see different opinions
2
Replies
-
MFP gave you a calorie deficit with ZERO exercise factored in. The program is designed for you to eat them back. But these numbers are estimates. Start by eating back 50% and tweaking this number up or down as weight loss progresses.
Workouts take fuel. Food is fuel.
Eating back calories is very important for some. Closer to goal we are more at risk for lean muscle loss. I strength train to help preserve existing lean muscle mass.....not fueling the workouts can defeat this.
Eating back calories is very important when you already have an aggressive weekly weight loss goal (1200 calories and not petite or elderly).....or you exercise a lot.6 -
It's not really a debate...it's the way this particular tool is designed, and fueling your fitness is very important.
Other tools and calculators include exercise in your activity level and thus account for the calories you need to perform that in your overall targets...MFP does not...you account for exercise after the fact by logging it and getting those calories to "eat back".
You just have to understand what tool you're using.
Here's the simple math...if I wanted to lose 1 Lb per week MFP would give me a target of 1900 calories meaning my estimated maintenance calories WITHOUT any exercise would be 2400. Now lets say I go on my morning ride and burn 600 calories...I can now eat 1900+600=2,500 calories and still lose that same 1 Lb per week...because my maintenance number would also move from 2400 calories to 2400+600=3000 calories and 3000-2500=500 calorie deficit still.7 -
lizzielynnn wrote: »More likely to lose more weight if it's off or no?
Yes for some people, no for others. I say no.
Exercise burns calories. This is legitimate and real. It's like how driving your car burns gas, and after you drive you have to put more gas in your car. That's just how physics works.
When you sign up for MFP it asks you what your current and goal weights are, and how quickly you want to get to your goal. Based on what you said, it tells you how many calories to eat BEFORE factoring your exercise in. If you use MFP correctly you're eating exercise calories back. But that's a digression, let's get back to the point. If you want to lose 1 pound per week, that gives you a 500 kCal/day deficit. If you go and burn another 500 kCal by running a 5K, your deficit is much higher, you're losing weight much faster than you wanted to, and that may have health risks and will almost certainly affect your ability to perform in the exercise you like, and to recover from it.
It also makes you hungrier, because hunger is your body's way of telling you you need more calories. What happens when people are too hungry for too long? They binge eat, and go over their calories. Consistency over the long term is more likely to succeed, and is healthier.
This is a pretty common misconception and I don't understand why (except that lots of apps including this one tend to over-estimate how much people burn by exercising). Would you never eat your dinner calories to lose weight faster?1 -
MFP uses the NEAT method, and as such exercise calories are supposed to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns to be inflated and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back.
See also:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/search?adv=&search=exercise+calories&title=&author=&cat=all&tags=&discussion_d=1&comment_c=1&group_group=1&within=1+day&date=
2 -
I only eat exercise calories back if I'm hungry. I don't burn that much during exercise anyway so just class it as a larger deficit.4
-
On - I eat all my exercise calories back whatever my weight goal is at the time.
Why - because I understand how both MFP and TDEE methods work. Because exercise is a normal and legitimate energy need, just like all the other energy needs of your body. Not accounting for exercise makes no more sense than not accounting for your RMR or your lifestyle.
More likely to lose more weight if it's off or no? - Yes I would lose more weight than I want to lose or lose at a more rapid rate than is sensible or healthy.
Or does having it on make you workout so you can eat more? - I workout because I enjoy it and because it's good for me. Losing weight at a sensible rate is certainly easier with a higher calorie goal. Feels far less restrictive.
Is that good or bad? - What proportion of people would you estimate should do less exercise?
3 -
I like seeing my exercise calories even if I don't eat them. It's like having a reward at the end of the night knowing that I COULD eat more calories and stay within goal but I'm not.7
-
Mine is on for cardio but I don't add for weight training. I do this because MFP uses the NEAT method so it's part of the design and for whatever reason the numbers seem to work pretty well for me even if I cheat some (which means of course that my TDEE is in excess of what the NEAT and calorie burn estimates for me and that could possibly due to the fact that I don't add a calorie burn for weight training). I want to lose weight at the rate I choose, not faster, in order to preserve as much muscle mass and strength as I can. And, I like the mental break of cheating a little at times.1
-
I ate mine while losing and eat them while maintaining.
If I didn't I would probably be a skinny-fat, shrivelled up, teeny-tiny old woman with weak bones, no muscle, and only have the energy to sit on the couch watching TV all day.
To me that is not a life, it is an existence.
I need my calories from exercise so my exercise does not take energy from my day to day activities.
I find MFP's NEAT works well when my exercise is sporadic, off site TDEE when I am following a set routine.
I am small, and old enough that 1200 cals plus my exercise calories, about 150-200 per hr, meant that the last few pounds were lost at 1lbs every 6 weeks. Slow, heck yes, but I reached my goal strong, fit, healthy, and with a lifestyle I could sustain.
Cheers, h.
10 -
I've read that it is an 80/20 ratio. 80% what you eat and 20% exercise.0
-
IF using TDEE, exercise off. If following MFP's NEAT, its on!
A person can certainly choose not to eat back exercise calories using MFP. To create the best outcome for energy balance, eating some of them is a wise choice. If you train then this becomes more important other than just weight loss.1 -
lizzielynnn wrote: »On or off?
Why or why not?
On. I want to be strong and healthy, not just skinny. I do NEAT method (my activities depend on weather, and weather is unpredictable).
If it's off, when you're doing NEAT, and you exercise hard, it's going to be tougher to stay strong and feel great . . . maybe impossible.
At my age, 60, and female, it's bleepin' hard to regain lost muscle, so I didn't want to lose more than the absolute minimum of muscle, while losing weight. So I need to work out, fuel my workouts, and keep my deficit reasonable.More likely to lose more weight if it's off or no?
Varies.
Some people, if they get to a quite-high deficit, may also have trouble staying the long-term course (i.e., they quit) or may binge and wipe out that deficit.
Also, a higher deficit may create a higher risk of undesirable adaptive thermogenesis in the long run, making it harder to lose weight or keep weight off.
If one doesn't drop into those pitfalls, turning exercise calories off could result in faster weight loss (not 'more' weight loss, though - it's not like there's a time limit for weight loss to occur).Or does having it on make you workout so you can eat more? Is that good or bad?
I was working out long before I started losing weight - a decade or so. I was the pretty-fit fat person some people find so unimaginable.
What 'makes' me work out is that I enjoy what I do; it builds strength and energy that enhances my daily life; it improves my mood; it keeps me healthier; and, as a li'l ol' lady, it improves my odds of staying out of assisted living for as long as possible.
That said, it's a nice fringe benefit that working out lets me eat more, or that I can readily work out a little extra to keep my weight more stable while doing some special-occasion eating. Food is tasty and enjoyable!6 -
IMO, people who refuse to account for their exercise calories and under eat, are usually the same people who complain about not losing any weight or not losing it fast enough. They also don't likely understand how MFP actually works and should inquire.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
For me, I have decided to stop logging exercise and it makes me feel better about the time I spend logging calories. It makes me feel more balanced and therefor easier to stick with it. I think there are multiple right ways and it is all about finding what works for you1
-
I totally think that having exercise calories off is the way to go. I used to have mine on and eat back some of what i birned but that just made me gain so i turned it off and now im only five or six pounds from my goal weight1
-
MichelleLaree13 wrote: »For me, I have decided to stop logging exercise and it makes me feel better about the time I spend logging calories. It makes me feel more balanced and therefor easier to stick with it. I think there are multiple right ways and it is all about finding what works for you
How is paying attention to food and ignoring exercise more balanced?6 -
I don't really understand *how* people are able to disregard exercise calories.
If I went on one of my 40 mile bike rides without eating at least a few hundred extra calories -- I would have to be peeled off the road somewhere around the 20 mile mark.7 -
I don't really understand *how* people are able to disregard exercise calories.
If I went on one of my 40 mile bike rides without eating at least a few hundred extra calories -- I would have to be peeled off the road somewhere around the 20 mile mark.
I'd say a lot of them suffer with hanger and less than optimal energy.5 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I don't really understand *how* people are able to disregard exercise calories.
If I went on one of my 40 mile bike rides without eating at least a few hundred extra calories -- I would have to be peeled off the road somewhere around the 20 mile mark.
I'd say a lot of them suffer with hanger and less than optimal energy.
I'd say a few of them are doing 15 minutes on the elliptical or treadmill while watching the TV, not @zamphir66's 40-mile bike ride.
Don't get me wrong, 15 minutes on the treadmill is a Good Thing . . . but not eating those calories is probably not going to have massive bad consequences, unless they're already at a pretty steep deficit. Lotta folks in these parts are new to exercise, too, and working their way in gradually.
(I'd still argue they should eat back the calories.
). 6 -
Christine_72 wrote: »I don't really understand *how* people are able to disregard exercise calories.
If I went on one of my 40 mile bike rides without eating at least a few hundred extra calories -- I would have to be peeled off the road somewhere around the 20 mile mark.
I'd say a lot of them suffer with hanger and less than optimal energy.
I'd say a few of them are doing 15 minutes on the elliptical or treadmill while watching the TV, not @zamphir66's 40-mile bike ride.
Don't get me wrong, 15 minutes on the treadmill is a Good Thing . . . but not eating those calories is probably not going to have massive bad consequences, unless they're already at a pretty steep deficit. Lotta folks in these parts are new to exercise, too, and working their way in gradually.
(I'd still argue they should eat back the calories. ).
True true. Good point, as usual
1 -
I do not eat back my exercise calories. However, if I am hungry and at my calorie limit, I will absolutely eat some raw fruits and veggies guilt free.1
-
This is a really interesting article around the whole exercise calorie debate - I found it when I was looking for the answer as to whether I should eat my calories back or not:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/eating-back-calories-burned/
Still don't know whether I should or not but I am struggling to hit my calorie goal any rate even without trying to eat them back.....
0 -
Sapphire_Elf wrote: »This is a really interesting article around the whole exercise calorie debate - I found it when I was looking for the answer as to whether I should eat my calories back or not:
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/eating-back-calories-burned/
Still don't know whether I should or not but I am struggling to hit my calorie goal any rate even without trying to eat them back.....
You probably realize this, but many people seem not to: If you've let MFP set your calorie level, and you told it you want to lose weight (whether 2 pounds a week or half a pound a week), then your deficit is already built in to your calorie goal.
The article you linked is a good & sensible one, and helpfully recognizes that the deficit can be created by eating less, exercising more, or a combination. Sometimes things from outside MFP say "never eat your exercise calories" and people here believe it, not understanding that MFP is designed to work differently from some other similar tools.
If you're at a conservative weight loss rate (half a pound a week or something), and exercising only a hundred or two calories, not eating them back is probably not a huge error . . . but exercising a lot on top of a fast weight loss rate is really not a good, healthy idea at all, unless a person is very significantly obese. (By "a lot" of exercise, I mean several hundred calories routinely, if those calories are estimated reasonably accurately.)
If you're having trouble eating enough, consider adding a bit of some very nutritious and calorie-dense food, like (say) nuts or avocado. I hope we all want to strong & healthy while losing weight!4 -
I did know that about mfp, mostly because I've seen a few threads where ninerbuff mentions it - it's the tools based on TDEE where exercise is already accounted for, yes?
I'm currently walking a couple of miles a day plus which I am doing beachbody Chalean Extreme and T25. Having thought about it I'm going to set my calorie goal to 1600 a day. So this is my 1200 that mfp gives me for weight loss plus an additional 400 for exercise. i hope that 400 should cover a 25 minute HIIT workout and a 35-40 minute weight session (t25 is 6x a week, Chalean is 3x). So I won't now log it separately unles I do anything over and above, like the 2 hours horse riding I will be doing tomorrow
on my rest days I will eat less than the 1600.
Is my thinking about right or total nonsense???0 -
Sapphire_Elf wrote: »I did know that about mfp, mostly because I've seen a few threads where ninerbuff mentions it - it's the tools based on TDEE where exercise is already accounted for, yes?
I'm currently walking a couple of miles a day plus which I am doing beachbody Chalean Extreme and T25. Having thought about it I'm going to set my calorie goal to 1600 a day. So this is my 1200 that mfp gives me for weight loss plus an additional 400 for exercise. i hope that 400 should cover a 25 minute HIIT workout and a 35-40 minute weight session (t25 is 6x a week, Chalean is 3x). So I won't now log it separately unles I do anything over and above, like the 2 hours horse riding I will be doing tomorrow on my rest days I will eat less than the 1600.
Is my thinking about right or total nonsense???
Conceptually, it sounds sensible enough, but I'm not the right woman to ask. I used MFP as designed: I set my basic activity based on my daily routine non-exercise life (adjusted as needed so that my actual loss matched my targeted loss rate), then separately added intentional exercise (estimated conservatively) and ate it all back. In maintenance, that's still my basic approach.
Also, I'm not at all familiar with those forms of exercise, and I don't know how big you are, so I don't have any way to know whether 400 is a good exercise estimate, or not. You could try it for a month, and see how the results come out (obviously, adjust sooner if it becomes evident it isn't working). Sorry - wish I could be helpful!0 -
@Sapphire_Elf.
You could just enter your exercises into MFP and using their NEAT method the eat 59-75% of them back. MFP tends to over estimate the calorie burn for some exercises so adjust as needed.
Use an online TDEE calculator IIFYM, scoobysworkshop, fitness frog, sailor rabbit. And include all your exercise. This will spread your burn over the week so you don't go up and down on your cals. This works best for a stable routine.
Or from the data you have in MFP extrapolate what you actually burn then you can use that information to account for your calorie burn by either TDEE or NEAT.
The nice thing about working out you own calories is that it takes into account any logging foibles you may have.
I think just adding 400, unless you have a good reason to know that it is a good approximation, will lead to a lot of calorie adjustments over time.
Cheers, h.0 -
Thanks both, very helpful. I will have a think on best way for info, Ann, I'm 43, female, current weight 156 lbs, want to lose about 30 lbs. Chalean Extreme is weights based, lift heavy as you can go for 12 reps etc. T25 = jumping about like a total idiot for 25 minutes, no breaks. 2
-
i don't log my exercise calories burned.. otherwise i would eat them ALL back.0
-
I lost 60lb at a 1lb a week goal on MFP and ate back my excercise calories, I would have been too hungry all the time and would not have succeeded otherwise. HOWEVER, I verified the calories MFP said I burned with other calculators on line. Some of the figures (particularly the elliptical numbers) are really inflated- that one is almost 50% higher than what both the machine, and other exercise calorie calculators said. I went with the lower figures. Walking calories on MFP are accurate.3
-
Personally I don't like adding the exercise calories because it causes me to eat more even when I'm full0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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