What difference is there between eating 1200 daily calories or eating 1500 and burning 300?
Wegowego
Posts: 16 Member
As the title reads and just out of curiosity. Does it make any difference whatsoever? If I boil it down to the simplest terms it should be the same thing but I'd love to hear any expert thoughts on the topic.
Thanks!
Thanks!
0
Replies
-
The difference is how accurate that 300 calorie burn is, and how it's measured. Same for the intake, honestly.7
-
It would be the same. It's just math. The difficult part can be making sure you accurately measure calories burned.
Now if we're talking about how the scale reflects it could be different. If you burn 300 cals by doing something that your body isn't used to you could retain some water.
Not an expert.2 -
One will lose weight
the other will lose the same weight. but keep you fitter.
11 -
Assuming the math is accurate (which is probably a pretty big assumption), none, as far as weight loss goes.
But the scenario in which you are exercising results in better health than the scenario in which you are not, so that's the difference, I guess.
My thoughts are hardly "expert" though.
5 -
Maths wise they are the same.
Practically speaking, the second one, in my experience, will lead to less hunger and be easier to maintain.
Of course you need to be careful not to overestimate that burn.6 -
There isn't any difference...
With MFP if you were to eat 1200 and then burn 300 with exercise your calories would be upped to 1500...
Either way, you're netting 12000 -
I don't know that it is the same. 300 calories burned from exercise does not necessarily mean that the vitamins, micronutrients and other benefits you got from injesting that "extra" 300 calories are entirely or evenly expended.
It is possible that by eating that 300 calories more and accounting for the actual calories by burning them through exercise you are still getting extra nutritional benefit from having consumed additional micronutrients.
I don't know this is fact but it seems to me that if you ate 300 calories more of say beef and derived a lot more iron from that that you would somehow negate or lose that iron from burning 300 calories via exercise....you still get the benefit from the iron.
In otherwords in terms of weight loss and CICO its the same, but in terms of nutrition I don't know its hard to say. I would imagine it would be easier to get all the nutrition you need eating 1500 and burning 300 through activity than just simply eating 1200. It is really hard to know for sure though because its quite possible that the vitamins and micronutrients you need you actually need them to support metabolism and if you metabolise more calories then you use up more vitamins and it balances out. Not sure.10 -
Looking strictly at the numbers, it is the same. However, the way one achieves the deficit can affect TDEE, which can actually lead to a slightly greater deficit.
I don't have the exact study, but Stuart Phillips, a canadian researcher reported a study several months ago that suggested that a deficit achieved via exercise + diet had a greater effect that the same deficit achieved by diet alone. Basically, there were dynamics involved with consuming what they called a "surfeit of energy" that led to a higher TDEE and thus greater weight loss (while on paper the deficits were "the same", increased TDEE meant they in fact were not. So no CICOs were harmed in this study).
Again, the effect was not large, but IMO, it did argue in favor of the benefit of creating a deficit via diet and exercise vs diet along.3 -
Could the greater TDEE have to do with a slightly higher BMR and perhaps increased TEF?1
-
I think most would agree that if you had the time and the will to do either approach that you would be better off in terms of your health and fitness to choose to eat 1500 and exercise burn 300 than just eat 1200 with no exercise.5
-
From a weight loss standpoint it would be the same, however you will be fitter and healthier eating 1500 calories (and happier most likely) as you're exercising and taking in more micronutrients. 1200 calories is really not a lot of food at all and is only really appropriate for sedentary smaller older/females.4
-
I love this question. Thanks for asking it. I often struggle with this issue because I want to lose weight. When I exercise for my deficit -- I tend to get really (overly) hungry and eat more than what the exercise burned. So I struggle between the choice of the two (exercise and eat more & don't exercise and eat less) often. Hence, doing a little of both--- And not losing--- because my hunger keeps me in maintenance.1
-
One will help you lose weight.
The other will help you lose weight, get fitter, boost your mood, and give you increased energy.
It's your pick!
4 -
@Aaron_K123 I think you are right, you've got more wiggle room for nutrition when you eat more, even if you have the same net calories. Looked at purely from a calorie intake point of view, they are the same, but there are quite a few benefits to moving more and eating more, the more I think about it.
I know being incapacitated makes it much harder to stick to weight loss, as you're forced into being sedentary and eating a very low number of total calories to achieve your usual net goal. It's not ideal.0 -
shredcamps wrote: »One will lose weight
the other will lose the same weight. but keep you fitter.
Not only fitter because you're getting exercise, but fitter from doing a better job of meeting your nutritional needs, assuming that you don't change the foods you're eating for the first 1200 calories and you don't manage to consume all 300 additional calories as purely "empty" calories (energy without any other nutrients you need, like protein, fat, vitamins, minerals, or fiber, to the extent that you haven't already met 100% of the amount your body needs of all those things with the first 1500 calories).
Edited because I posted accidentally before I finished writing.2 -
MissusMoon wrote: »The difference is how accurate that 300 calorie burn is, and how it's measured. Same for the intake, honestly.
This is the difference right here. Depends on calorie burn.0 -
As the title reads and just out of curiosity. Does it make any difference whatsoever? If I boil it down to the simplest terms it should be the same thing but I'd love to hear any expert thoughts on the topic.
Thanks!
300 more calories for additional nutrients (e.g., vitamins and minerals) and you get to eat/drink more.2 -
shredcamps wrote: »One will lose weight
the other will lose the same weight. but keep you fitter.
Nice answer!
0 -
runningforthetrain wrote: »I love this question. Thanks for asking it. I often struggle with this issue because I want to lose weight. When I exercise for my deficit -- I tend to get really (overly) hungry and eat more than what the exercise burned. So I struggle between the choice of the two (exercise and eat more & don't exercise and eat less) often. Hence, doing a little of both--- And not losing--- because my hunger keeps me in maintenance.
I say definitely throw in exercise and eat more trying your best not to overdo it (stick to filling protein after like--assuming you're a meat-eater: grilled chicken, omelets, turkey on whole grain, avocados, blended protein and banana shakes, whole-grain brown rice and veggies...
working out is SO WORTH IT for all its positive benefits, especially on mood...it even makes you appreciate music more1 -
300 calories more of nutrients, plus lowering risks of disease/cholesterol/joint inflammation/etc from the exercise. #2 Sounds like a winner to me. Depending on the exercise, if you're building muscle that could reasonably also compound the fat loss 1
-
Two cookies.
The difference is two cookies. It is SO WORTH IT for two cookies.
Just sayin'.3 -
Thanks everyone for your answers. I've always worked out and am very close to my 8% body fat before bulking, however, having a scientific mind leads me to want to know as much as possible. I too believe the extra nutrients must make a difference, plus, dieting without working out would probably make me feel angry, tired and deflated.
Ants again, you guys rock!
2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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