Eating back your gym calories, yes or no?

valitsakouel wrote: »

I am a very very big lady trying to get smaller. I started recently using MFP for the that exact reason. Every app I've used seem to overexagerate my BMR and my burnt calories (MMW seems to do that to, I mean 285 cals for a lazy groccery 30 mins run? so propably gonna delete it). I kept my gym membership till end of May and was constantly scratching down calories in and out and for some periods even had an after workout protein shake that my trainer swore would make my progress faster but my progress seemed even slower than what it was. I don't trust the treadmill counter, the bike counter, the elliptic counter, practically have not any idea what my outs are, can only make an educated guess. I understand the idea that calories burnt on a 30 min fast pace in the treadmill should be different in me and a 60 or 70 or even 100 kg person, due to the diference in the effort needed for me and that person to do the same excersise, but the numbers seem waayy off. So I've set MFP to not adjust cals on excersise days and starting next week, will see how things will go.
P.S. It seems I lost more in those 3 months I've been off the gym and not eating them back than on any 3 months period on the gym, maybe eating back really cancels your progress?

CWShultz27105 wrote: »

I think that people assume a lot. Now, not saying that in a confrontational or aggressive manner. Just what I find, in my experience.

The calories and macro break-downs that we all view when we buy our food (I look at the labels religiously) are subject to error. Who knows to what extent. 10%, 20%. Everything that I read on that topic suggests somewhere in that range (10% to 20%). So, those 200 calories that you are getting from the 1/4 cup of Sunflower Seeds. Is that really 200 calories? Maybe not! Maybe it is 240 calories. Or, somewhere in between.

Point is.....we assume all of the stuff on the label to be 100% accurate. It is not likely 100% accurate.

I tend to look at 'counting calories' and 'counting macros' on a weekly-basis. Not a daily-basis. Yes, I try to hit my numbers each and every day. I try to stay within 5% of the caloric intake. I try to stay within 10% of each macro. But, for me, looking at it from the perspective of one week just works better than looking at it from the perspective of each day. But, that is just me....

And, the machines at the gym - no matter what gym, they all use 'similar' machines - are a best estimate with respect to calories burned. At best.

So, it is very easy to think that you are eating such and such calories each day - and actually be eating more - and to think that you are burning this amount of calories when on the tread mill (or whatever 'cardio' exercise equipment you are using) when you are actually burning significantly fewer. You couple those two and you find yourself in a caloric surplus.....not the deficit that you thought.

So, is there a better solution? Maybe!

The great thing....we are all playing on the same field, right?

So, if we are 'eating some of our cardio | exercise calories back' we are essentially pouring salt on an open wound. Potentially, anyway.

• This is not an a "one size fits all" decision. If someone's planned eating deficit is high, and their exercise frequent/lengthy/heavy, not eating back any exercise calories leaves them them at greater risk of underfueling. If someone's planned eating deficit is small (slow loss rate), and their exercise quite calorically modest, the risks tip more toward the chance of slow/no loss. Would you argue that both are best served by the strategy of eating back no exercise calories?
  
  NOTE: I think either person should assess results after a month to 6 weeks - sooner if notable problems clearly arise - and adjust their strategy and goals based on results.
  
• Yes, food labels are legally permitted to be off by 20%, which is large; and exercise machines' calorie burn estimates are often crazy high. In most cases, in a practical sense, this really doesn't matter all that much.
  
  What?!? And why?
  
  First, most people tend to repeat similar foods and similar exercises. Therefore, over time, their CI and CO estimates are inaccurate, but tend to be consistent. If they sensibly review and adjust their strategy after a month or so, that consistency is enough to be the basis for success.
  
  Second, errors on the eating side from labeling inaccuracies can go in either direction, high or low. Therefore, there's some tendency for those to cancel each other out, dampening magnitude of net error - particularly if the person is managing measurement accuracy as much as possible by weighing foods, thus reducing caloric variation from portion size errors.
  
  The other factors, like forgetting to log things or picking lowball estimates from the database, are within the person's control - conscientiousness and self-honesty go a long way. I regularly see folks in the forum on "help I'm not losing" threads review open diaries and point these out, besides.
  
  On the exercise side, the standard advice is to eat back 50%, and reassess after a month or so. Only in the case of someone with something like an atypically low NEAT or very low deficit is the exercise estimate likely to be so far off at 50% that it conspires with CI errors to result in no loss, let alone gain.
  
  Can it happen? Sure. And if they get frustrated and quit, that's a horrible outcome. But if they recognize the potential for these things to happen, and adjust based on results (seeking help in the forums when needed, too), they're likely to do fine in the long term.