Is it really OK to eat back your workout calories?
Xkmaf2018X
Posts: 97 Member
I always feel ever so bad when I do eat them. MFP sets me a 1280 daily calorie goal and I put that I was sedentary, today (according to my fitbit charge 2) I’ve walked 11,000 steps, done two gym classes (Step and Pump) and gained 821 workout calories to which I have eaten 414 of them but now I’m sat here feeling really bad!
Do others eat back they’re workout calories and still lose or should I try not to eat them back?
My daily steps are around 10k -11k everyday and I do two gym classes back to back 4x days a week, my classes are fatburn, pump, circuits, tone and step.
Do others eat back they’re workout calories and still lose or should I try not to eat them back?
My daily steps are around 10k -11k everyday and I do two gym classes back to back 4x days a week, my classes are fatburn, pump, circuits, tone and step.
4
Replies
-
When MFP gives you a goal of 1,280, they're *counting* on you eating back your exercise calories. You don't need to feel bad for using the system as designed.6
-
Xkmaf2018X wrote: »I always feel ever so bad when I do eat them. MFP sets me a 1280 daily calorie goal and I put that I was sedentary, today (according to my fitbit charge 2) I’ve walked 11,000 steps, done two gym classes (Step and Pump) and gained 821 workout calories to which I have eaten 414 of them but now I’m sat here feeling really bad!
Do others eat back they’re workout calories and still lose or should I try not to eat them back?
My daily steps are around 10k -11k everyday and I do two gym classes back to back 4x days a week, my classes are fatburn, pump, circuits, tone and step.
Well, look at it this way...with all of that other activity that isn't accounted for in your activity level, you're not sedentary and when you move more, you need more fuel.
A car that commutes 60 miles each way daily is going to go through a lot more fuel than a car that just goes around the block to the grocery store.
Calories aren't bad...your body needs them. You burn a *kitten* ton of calories merely existing and you need calories (energy) for basic functions.
If you ate 1280 calories and actually worked off 821, that's the exact same thing as only eating 459 calories...that's what you should feel bad about because you'd basically be starving your body.17 -
Why if you steps are so high did you choose sedentary when you clearly aren't?
You are just going to get a huge adjustment (assuming you have linked your Fitbit).
As your daily calorie goal excludes exercise then eating them back just keeps the rate of weight loss you selected.
The method worked perfectly well for me both for weight loss and long term maintenance. My cycling alone last year at a very rough estimate was 303 hours X a conservative 500 cals/hr or 151,500 cals - and I must say they were absolutely delicious!
Think ahead to maintenance at goal weight, how will you account for your activity and exercise then?
Will you still feel guilty about fuelling your body properly?
Do you also feel guilty about the calories you burn by just existing? (BMR)10 -
I came to MFP ~because~ they add workout calories and the other tracker I was using didn't. I never felt bad for using them because this was the method I chose. There are other ways to setup your goals that will include your exercise calories up front instead of adding them in after. It's just a matter of knowing which you prefer and why so that you can adjust as you go.2
-
I find this mind boggeling too and always feel id do better in my weight loss journey if I did not eat my exercise cals back...but I always do. im hungry.
4 -
I find this mind boggeling too and always feel id do better in my weight loss journey if I did not eat my exercise cals back...but I always do. im hungry.
I don't understand how people find this mind boggling. It's just math.
If I don't exercise and my maintenance calories are 2400, I will lose 1 Lb per week eating 1900 calories. If I start exercising, my maintenance calories are going to go up and I can lose the same 1 Lb per week eating more.9 -
It doesn't work for me, keep in mind fitbit and other tracker overestimate a lot and I'm trying lose 10lbs. Just an idea you may change your setting to active just to see the difference. Setting your number to active probably will give another 500 to 800 calories per day and you can compare to your current daily activities. So its easier make a judgement call. Are you trying to lose or maintain?9
-
mutantspicy wrote: »It doesn't work for me, keep in mind fitbit and other tracker overestimate a lot and I'm trying lose 10lbs. Just an idea you may change your setting to active just to see the difference. Setting your number to active probably will give another 500 to 800 calories per day and you can compare to your current daily activities. So its easier make a judgement call. Are you trying to lose or maintain?
Eating calories doesn't "work" for anyone if they're using overestimates for their calorie burn and fail to reach a deficit as a result. This doesn't mean that this method doesn't work, it means that one should use reasonable estimates for calories out, pay attention to the results, and make adjustments as needed.9 -
mutantspicy wrote: »It doesn't work for me, keep in mind fitbit and other tracker overestimate a lot and I'm trying lose 10lbs. Just an idea you may change your setting to active just to see the difference. Setting your number to active probably will give another 500 to 800 calories per day and you can compare to your current daily activities. So its easier make a judgement call. Are you trying to lose or maintain?
My FitBit is pretty close to what my own data indicates...I find it to be fairly accurate.5 -
I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.9
-
roadglider48 wrote: »I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.
If you don't lose weight when eating all the calories you estimated you burned and you do lose weight eating about half of what you estimated you burned, I think that's a good indication that your initial estimate was too high and your burn is closer to half of what you think you're burning. The other possibility is that your estimation of calories in is off and you're eating more than you think you are and the exercise calories are serving as a kind of "buffer" for this inaccuracy.
Either way, your method (pay attention to results and adjust estimate of what to eat back if you don't see desired results) is the exact strategy that is being advocated for by the people in this thread who are arguing that OP should eat back exercise calories. People may need to do a bit of observation and adjustment to find the number that works because we're all starting with estimates.
Eating more fat won't result in failure to lose weight (assuming one is still in a deficit). In fact, people can lose weight on really high fat diets (like keto) assuming a calorie deficit is in place.8 -
I have a hard time eating all those back as well. So, instead, I find a happy medium and eat back about half of those calories to give not only my anxiety about over eating to rest, but also to help curb any extra hunger I might feel. It might not work for you, but it has for me! Good Luck!2
-
janejellyroll wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »It doesn't work for me, keep in mind fitbit and other tracker overestimate a lot and I'm trying lose 10lbs. Just an idea you may change your setting to active just to see the difference. Setting your number to active probably will give another 500 to 800 calories per day and you can compare to your current daily activities. So its easier make a judgement call. Are you trying to lose or maintain?
Eating calories doesn't "work" for anyone if they're using overestimates for their calorie burn and fail to reach a deficit as a result. This doesn't mean that this method doesn't work, it means that one should use reasonable estimates for calories out, pay attention to the results, and make adjustments as needed.
Well unfortunately most fitness trackers notoriously do just that. I think the info from myfitnesspal is pretty spot on. I'm set at lightly active and eating my food cals which is 1910cals and I'm losing a pound or two a week. If I were to eat all of my workout cals, it would be over 3000 cals most days. And I know for a fact over 2500cals I start gaining. As you say, this is information is very helpful, but you have pay attention to the results and make adjustments.0 -
roadglider48 wrote: »I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.
It's nothing to do with the proportion of fat in your diet - it's calorie balance that matters.
Biggest suspects are inaccurate food and exercise logging.
There's an amazing correlation between people with non-public diaries and reporting the numbers and methods don't work.
I'm not saying that you are hiding something of course but it does mean you don't get feedback from others when you make errors.
That can be using poor tools (cups, spoons...) or simply picking bad entries from the database or exaggerated exercise estimates.
It's once in a blue moon that someone who opens their diary doesn't get useful pointers on how to tighten up or improve accuracy. Genuine outliers are a rare breed.7 -
mutantspicy wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »It doesn't work for me, keep in mind fitbit and other tracker overestimate a lot and I'm trying lose 10lbs. Just an idea you may change your setting to active just to see the difference. Setting your number to active probably will give another 500 to 800 calories per day and you can compare to your current daily activities. So its easier make a judgement call. Are you trying to lose or maintain?
Eating calories doesn't "work" for anyone if they're using overestimates for their calorie burn and fail to reach a deficit as a result. This doesn't mean that this method doesn't work, it means that one should use reasonable estimates for calories out, pay attention to the results, and make adjustments as needed.
Well unfortunately most fitness trackers notoriously do just that. I think the info from myfitnesspal is pretty spot on. I'm set at lightly active and eating my food cals which is 1910cals. If I were to eat all of my workout cals, it would be over 3000 cals most days. And I know for a fact over 2500cals I start gaining. As you say, this is information is very helpful, but you have pay attention to the results and make adjustments.
Some people do have this problem (although I've found my Fitbit to be very accurate). No matter what method we're choosing to estimate calorie burn, it's important to understand that they're all estimates.2 -
Every person loses weight differently. I decided to be "clever" and not increase my daily calories level with 3 to 4 hours gym work outs 5 to 6 days a week. Result: the mother of all plateaus for a long time - and 3 years later I am back where I have started. I have learned my lesson...1
-
roadglider48 wrote: »I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.
Same for me. I wonder if it has to do with fitness level. Like if you're heart, lungs, muscle are used to working out for years and years. Maybe the calorie burn is a lot less, than for someone who is out of shape. I know they're supposed to take that into account, but I just feel like the numbers for me are highly inflated. On average I burn over 1200 cals a day from steps and workouts, If ate that back I'd get fat quick.9 -
Think of it like this. Let's just say at 1280 net calories your deficit is 500 per day resulting in 1lb per week loss (your's may be different but go with me here). You told MFP your goal is 1lb per week (500 deficit per day). MFP took you at your word and is holding you to that goal. No more of a deficit than that, no less of a deficit than that.
If you eat 1280 calories and exercise during the day you are eating at a deficit greater than 500 calories or greater than your goal. That's not what you told MFP your goal was. You eat your exercise back to keep your deficit right at 500 calories and right at your goal of 1lb per week. MFP is defaulted to losing weight slow and steady (healthy weight loss) vs. a lot in a short time frame (unhealthy).
Now having said that. The scale will tell you how you are doing. If you are only eating 50% back and still hitting your goal every week, then stick with that, no guilt necessary.
6 -
mutantspicy wrote: »roadglider48 wrote: »I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.
Same for me. I wonder if it has to do with fitness level. Like if you're heart, lungs, muscle are used to working out for years and years. Maybe the calorie burn is a lot less, than for someone who is out of shape. I know they're supposed to take that into account, but I just feel like the numbers for me are highly inflated. On average I burn over 1200 cals a day from steps and workouts, If ate that back I'd get fat quick.
Actually, the more fit you are, the more calories you're going to burn because you'll actually go further and go harder.
It also depends on what your exercise is...determining exercise expenditure from things like boot camps or classes or lifting, etc is difficult...figuring out calories for running and walking is very straight forward. I always used my Garmin bike computer calorie burns minus my basal calories when i was doing the MFP method and I ate around 2300 - 2500 calories per day to lose about 1 Lb per week on average. A power meter on a bike is very accurate.
There are ways of more accurately determining energy expenditure. But really, the problem in most cases is that people are really bad at estimating both calories coming in and out which is why they have issues.9 -
Super good topic. Loved reading everyone’s post!0
-
Also, I'll leave this here...
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p1
I'll also never understand why people think MFP would add them in if you weren't supposed to eat them...that one always baffles me...like MFP is trying to trick you.10 -
I don't believe that I am overestimating calorie burn or underestimating calorie intake. ALL of my calorie burn data comes from my Fitbit Charge 2. ALL of my calorie intake comes from religiously weighing/measuring all food and liquids using label data or the MFP database. Not sure what else I could do. I think there are just a lot of inaccuracies in Fitbits, label data and MFP's database. So I would continue to recommend to anybody that over the long haul, don't assume you can eat all of your exercise calories if you want to lose weight. These days there is a strong incentive for food makers to fudge their numbers and little real regulation.9
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »roadglider48 wrote: »I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.
Same for me. I wonder if it has to do with fitness level. Like if you're heart, lungs, muscle are used to working out for years and years. Maybe the calorie burn is a lot less, than for someone who is out of shape. I know they're supposed to take that into account, but I just feel like the numbers for me are highly inflated. On average I burn over 1200 cals a day from steps and workouts, If ate that back I'd get fat quick.
Actually, the more fit you are, the more calories you're going to burn because you'll actually go further and go harder.
It also depends on what your exercise is...determining exercise expenditure from things like boot camps or classes or lifting, etc is difficult...figuring out calories for running and walking is very straight forward. I always used my Garmin bike computer calorie burns minus my basal calories when i was doing the MFP method and I ate around 2300 - 2500 calories per day to lose about 1 Lb per week on average. A power meter on a bike is very accurate.
There are ways of more accurately determining energy expenditure. But really, the problem in most cases is that people are really bad at estimating both calories coming in and out which is why they have issues.
I agree with you for the most part, I probably wasn't clear. I was referring the way fitness trackers guestimate our expenditure not our actual expenditure. People with more muscle and endurance and more strength do more. No doubt. Just wondering if fitness trackers have a tendency to over estimate for people are in better condition, because even though they use heart rate, there is still a lot mathematical algorithms behind it all.
For instance my average step count is about 17000 to 25000, and I'll get up to 900 calories for that. That just seems crazy to me. Based on my experience I need 1900 cal a day to lose weight. Not 2800 to 3000, I'm not an NFL player. If I actually put mapmyfitness on it will tell something 450 cal for 4 mile walk. And then give me about the same for 40 mins of intense weight lifting. The weight lifting seems more accurate than the walking to me. But really I think they're both pretty high. And my food diary is on point, btw. Its easy to make errant selection, I constantly audit it, import online recipes I use audit them tweak them. I don't pick stuff thats close enough. MFP is solid. Its the trackers that are off.2 -
Think of it like this. Let's just say at 1280 net calories your deficit is 500 per day resulting in 1lb per week loss (your's may be different but go with me here). You told MFP your goal is 1lb per week (500 deficit per day). MFP took you at your word and is holding you to that goal. No more of a deficit than that, no less of a deficit than that.
If you eat 1280 calories and exercise during the day you are eating at a deficit greater than 500 calories or greater than your goal. That's not what you told MFP your goal was. You eat your exercise back to keep your deficit right at 500 calories and right at your goal of 1lb per week. MFP is defaulted to losing weight slow and steady (healthy weight loss) vs. a lot in a short time frame (unhealthy).
Now having said that. The scale will tell you how you are doing. If you are only eating 50% back and still hitting your goal every week, then stick with that, no guilt necessary.
This right here. If you are currently losing weight at the rate you want using your current calorie intake stick with it. Otherwise make adjustments, those may not be setting new goals but instead making sure your food diary is actually accurate.0 -
I never trust my Apple Watch, phone or machines for how many calories are burnt.
Short answer: yes it’s fine to eat back your calories. Your recommended calories already take into account deficit for losing weight.
But
As it’s not always correct I usually steer away from using them all, usually try and eat back half0 -
I always do! If you're nervous about MFP overestimating calories from exercise you log, a lot of folks eat back 50%-75% of them.0
-
mutantspicy wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »mutantspicy wrote: »roadglider48 wrote: »I have always found that if I eat all of my exercise calories, I won't lose weight despite my best efforts to accurately determine calories consumed. Past discussions of this issue here indicated that a lot of others found the same results as I have. If I keep it to eating half or less of the exercise calories I will lose weight. The mathematics just don't seem to fit with the biology. I think some of the reasons for this is that in eating more of the exercise calories a person is likely to have consumed more fat calories and/or more sodium resulting in water weight gain. I'm not a dietitian and maybe we could hear from someone who is that might have a better explanation.
Same for me. I wonder if it has to do with fitness level. Like if you're heart, lungs, muscle are used to working out for years and years. Maybe the calorie burn is a lot less, than for someone who is out of shape. I know they're supposed to take that into account, but I just feel like the numbers for me are highly inflated. On average I burn over 1200 cals a day from steps and workouts, If ate that back I'd get fat quick.
Actually, the more fit you are, the more calories you're going to burn because you'll actually go further and go harder.
It also depends on what your exercise is...determining exercise expenditure from things like boot camps or classes or lifting, etc is difficult...figuring out calories for running and walking is very straight forward. I always used my Garmin bike computer calorie burns minus my basal calories when i was doing the MFP method and I ate around 2300 - 2500 calories per day to lose about 1 Lb per week on average. A power meter on a bike is very accurate.
There are ways of more accurately determining energy expenditure. But really, the problem in most cases is that people are really bad at estimating both calories coming in and out which is why they have issues.
I agree with you for the most part, I probably wasn't clear. I was referring the way fitness trackers guestimate our expenditure not our actual expenditure. People with more muscle and endurance and more strength do more. No doubt. Just wondering if fitness trackers have a tendency to over estimate for people are in better condition, because even though they use heart rate, there is still a lot mathematical algorithms behind it all.
Any of the devices are estimating. Work, in pretty much the physics sense of the term, determines calorie burn. The devices use algorithms based on formulas from research, plus various proxy measures (heart rate, distance, speed, body weight, etc.) to estimate work and therefore calories.
IMO, a heart-rate-based device is more likely to underestimate calories for an above-average fit person, and overestimate calories for a very unfit person. Why? Because I suspect the algorithms are pitched to average fitness, and a very fit person will perform work X with a lower than average heart rate (look like they're doing less work), while a very unfit person will spike their heart rate doing the same X work (look like they're doing more work).For instance my average step count is about 17000 to 25000, and I'll get up to 900 calories for that. That just seems crazy to me. Based on my experience I need 1900 cal a day to lose weight. Not 2800 to 3000, I'm not an NFL player. If I actually put mapmyfitness on it will tell something 450 cal for 4 mile walk. And then give me about the same for 40 mins of intense weight lifting. The weight lifting seems more accurate than the walking to me. But really I think they're both pretty high. And my food diary is on point, btw. Its easy to make errant selection, I constantly audit it, import online recipes I use audit them tweak them. I don't pick stuff thats close enough. MFP is solid. Its the trackers that are off.6 -
While losing weight, and for 2+ years of maintaining my weight since, I estimated exercise calories thoughtfully/conservatively, then ate pretty much all of them back. I had no problem losing weight (50+ pounds in just less than a year) doing this, and have maintained a healthy weight since.
Nonetheless, because others report varied experiences, I suggest eating back 50% of exercise calories to start, then adjusting once you have 4-6 weeks of actual weight loss experience, to keep your actual weight loss rate at a satisfying yet sensible level. People vary.
Unless you do only a tiny amount of exercise, or are targeting a very slow weight loss rate before considering exercise calories, you risk your health by not eating back any exercise calories, assuming you're using MFP as designed. In particular, doing high amounts of exercise, while targeting a very fast loss rate, is a recipe for problems: Crash and burn, in one form or another.
Be conservative and value your health and energy level: Eat back at least part of the exercise calories, until you see the results.4 -
not ok..13
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions