Do you eat exercise calories back or not?

Yes, over time I have learned where numbers are accurate and where I should assume they are a little high so I can judge where to eat back. I'm down 29lbs in 6 months. I'm close to goal weight and under 1500 cals and don't want to drop lower, I'd starve if I worked out like I do and didn't eat to compensate.

leanjogreen18 wrote: »

I'm on 1200 calories a day and the only exercise I do is walking and body resistance.

For 6 months I did not eat my exercise calories back but I'm beginning to feel tired and just a general lack of energy. I started eating my exercise calories back on the days I work out.

I only eat about 50% of mine back.

How tall are you and how much weight do you have to lose? 1200 calories is overly aggressive for most women, the exception being those who are really short and/or old.

cmriverside wrote: »

I lost 70+ pounds. I always ate every single delicious exercise calorie. Still do, ten years later.


The only way to figure this out is to run the experiment. Keep good records. GOOD records, every day. Log all your food accurately. Pick a method (either TDEE minus 500 calories deficit OR Myfitnesspal's method of built in daily deficit that is calculated using the NEAT numbers. If using MFP, eat the exercise calories. Who wouldn't want to at least try it that way?)

Stick to one method. After a month to six weeks you will know your intake, output and weight trend. Adjust as necessary. It's your experiment to run. We are all slightly different, different jobs, different intensity of exercise, etc.

This adjustment is ongoing. It isn't a one and done thing. As you get smaller, your numbers will change as well.


For me, I actually just use MFP's numbers using the goal wizard and a flat 300 calories for each HOUR of INTENTIONAL exercise. It works great.

Keep it simple.

While I have my reservations about that "flat 300" idea (burn depends on how big the person is, intensity, etc.), the part about using experiential data is good advice.

If you're trying to lose 1.5 pounds a week (and that does not exceed 1% of your current bodyweight at most, even less if close to goal), then just use one of the methods/approaches for several weeks, and adjust eating or exercise if you're losing too fast or too slowly.

Obviously, if you're feeling fatigued, weak, moody/irritable, etc., and losing quite fast before the month is up, eat more before the time expires.

Just for the record, 1200 is a pretty aggressive goal (and can be difficult to get solid nutrition), unless you're quite petite. I was at 1200 briefly (at age 59) and it was too low for me. At 5'5", and weighing in the mid-140s, I was loosing handily on 1400 net - i.e., while eating back all my carefully-estimated exercise calories. Everyone's different, so I'm not saying this would apply directly to you, but I am encouraging caution because you have health challenges already, and are much younger than I so you may well burn more calories than someone my age. Now in the 120s and maintaining weight, I'd still lose pretty fast at 1200 net.

AnnPT77 wrote: »

cmriverside wrote: »

I lost 70+ pounds. I always ate every single delicious exercise calorie. Still do, ten years later.


The only way to figure this out is to run the experiment. Keep good records. GOOD records, every day. Log all your food accurately. Pick a method (either TDEE minus 500 calories deficit OR Myfitnesspal's method of built in daily deficit that is calculated using the NEAT numbers. If using MFP, eat the exercise calories. Who wouldn't want to at least try it that way?)

Stick to one method. After a month to six weeks you will know your intake, output and weight trend. Adjust as necessary. It's your experiment to run. We are all slightly different, different jobs, different intensity of exercise, etc.

This adjustment is ongoing. It isn't a one and done thing. As you get smaller, your numbers will change as well.


For me, I actually just use MFP's numbers using the goal wizard and a flat 300 calories for each HOUR of INTENTIONAL exercise. It works great.

Keep it simple.

While I have my reservations about that "flat 300" idea (burn depends on how big the person is, intensity, etc.), the part about using experiential data is good advice.

If you're trying to lose 1.5 pounds a week (and that does not exceed 1% of your current bodyweight at most, even less if close to goal), then just use one of the methods/approaches for several weeks, and adjust eating or exercise if you're losing too fast or too slowly.

Obviously, if you're feeling fatigued, weak, moody/irritable, etc., and losing quite fast before the month is up, eat more before the time expires.

Just for the record, 1200 is a pretty aggressive goal (and can be difficult to get solid nutrition), unless you're quite petite. I was at 1200 briefly (at age 59) and it was too low for me. At 5'5", and weighing in the mid-140s, I was loosing handily on 1400 net - i.e., while eating back all my carefully-estimated exercise calories. Everyone's different, so I'm not saying this would apply directly to you, but I am encouraging caution because you have health challenges already, and are much younger than I so you may well burn more calories than someone my age. Now in the 120s and maintaining weight, I'd still lose pretty fast at 1200 net.

Well, what I said is that the 300 works for me. I have been logging food with a food scale for ten years. It's impossible to figure out exactly how much I "burn" doing exercise so I used a variety of methods over the years including a HRM, gym machine numbers, online calculators, and my own data. Obviously everyone is different - which I stated twice, but for me this guesstimate has worked well.

I'm just saying that people get all hung up on perfection and exactitude. If I use a set calculation and I'm expending relatively similar energy in my regular exercise, it's just easy to use a set number. I don't use a fitbit or any other device so I've come to this by using my own data over many years. The perfectionism and worrying about every calorie gets to be too much after a while, and I have gone down that path. I find it isn't really necessary for me to be exact.