Eating back burned calories
Options
summersmama2
Posts: 7 Member
Hey everyone!
I’m having some confusion on the idea of eating back calories burned. Can someone explain why this is necessary? It seems so counter productive to me!
I have 80lbs to lose and have my goal set at a loss of 2lbs a week. I’ve recently started working out (cardio) pretty heavily (who knew how much I’d love working out!). So today, my calorie goal was 1200 but my exercise calories burned were over 1000. Seems crazy to eat 1000 calories back after I worked so hard to burn them.
Someone help me make sense of it all!
I’m having some confusion on the idea of eating back calories burned. Can someone explain why this is necessary? It seems so counter productive to me!
I have 80lbs to lose and have my goal set at a loss of 2lbs a week. I’ve recently started working out (cardio) pretty heavily (who knew how much I’d love working out!). So today, my calorie goal was 1200 but my exercise calories burned were over 1000. Seems crazy to eat 1000 calories back after I worked so hard to burn them.
Someone help me make sense of it all!
0
Replies
-
Because your calorie deficit to lose your 2 lbs is already figured into the calories you are supposed to eat. If you then somehow burn 1000 calories (questionable, unless you worked out for several hours), and only eat 1200 you would be netting only 200 calories for intake for the day, which your body can't live on.
People usually suggest eating back only about 50% of your exercise calories, since they are usually way over inflated. It is really hard to burn an extra 1000 calories through exercise unless you are a professional athlete.8 -
musicfan68 wrote: »Because your calorie deficit to lose your 2 lbs is already figured into the calories you are supposed to eat. If you then somehow burn 1000 calories (questionable, unless you worked out for several hours), and only eat 1200 you would be netting only 200 calories for intake for the day, which your body can't live on.
People usually suggest eating back only about 50% of your exercise calories, since they are usually way over inflated. It is really hard to burn an extra 1000 calories through exercise unless you are a professional athlete.
An hour and a half of cardio: 60 mins elliptical (716 calories burned) and 30 mins cycling (313 calories burned). Calories burned calculated by my Apple Watch and heart rate.1 -
Personally.... I ignore exercise calories as the science of calculating them is highly inaccurate.21
-
You will also need energy to work out. The food fuels your body so you can exercise more effectively. With a huge deficit you will (most likely) feel lethargic over time. It will suffice in the short term, but it will be difficult to maintain in the long run.
I suggest eating back at least a portion of those bonus calories.5 -
Here's a fantastic video explanation: https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p16
-
As @musicfan68 indicated you need the extra calories to fuel you body.
Your deficit is already taken into account when MFP gave you 1200 cals.
(And 1200 may be too low unless you are sedentary and have over 75lbs to lose)
If you would share your height, weight, and goal weight with us, we may be able to say if the 1029cals for your 90 min work out is appropriate. All machines, devices, and web based (inc MFP) estimates of calorie burns are just that, estimates.
Cheers, h.
6 -
Well, it’s math.
MFP gives you a calorie goal so you will lose at your selected rate of loss WITHOUT exercise.
This means that if you burn 300 through exercise, you have increased your total calorie burn for the day by 300 and as such you either eat them or increase your deficit for the day by 300.
I’ll use my numbers as an example.
MFP settings: Sedentary/0.5lb per week loss
MFP estimated Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (aka NEAT): 1700
1700 - 250 = 1450
Exercise/activity adjustment: 331
1700 (NEAT) + 331 (exercise) = 2031
2031 -250 (0.5 lb per week)= 1781
My deficit isn’t very big. However the most I want to aim for a week is 1% bodyweight loss since I want fat loss. In my case that’s only about 1.3 lbs or a daily deficit of 650 calories. That however is hard for me to sustain so I am going the safer route of 0.5lb per week.
Moving on. If your deficit becomes too large your body will use fat as well as lean mass for fuel. It can also cause headaches, dizziness, hair loss, and lead to a binge.
It is often suggested to start with eating 50% back and adjust how much you eat back based on actual results.3 -
middlehaitch wrote: »As @musicfan68 indicated you need the extra calories to fuel you body.
Your deficit is already taken into account when MFP gave you 1200 cals.
(And 1200 may be too low unless you are sedentary and have over 75lbs to lose)
If you would share your height, weight, and goal weight with us, we may be able to say if the 1029cals for your 90 min work out is appropriate. All machines, devices, and web based (inc MFP) estimates of calorie burns are just that, estimates.
Cheers, h.
My calories burned were calculated with my Apple Watch, using my heart rate.
I’m 5’6” and 220lbs.
Issue wasn’t with how much I actually burned today but rather eating back calories is necessary.2 -
summersmama2 wrote: »middlehaitch wrote: »As @musicfan68 indicated you need the extra calories to fuel you body.
Your deficit is already taken into account when MFP gave you 1200 cals.
(And 1200 may be too low unless you are sedentary and have over 75lbs to lose)
If you would share your height, weight, and goal weight with us, we may be able to say if the 1029cals for your 90 min work out is appropriate. All machines, devices, and web based (inc MFP) estimates of calorie burns are just that, estimates.
Cheers, h.
My calories burned were calculated with my Apple Watch, using my heart rate.
I’m 5’6” and 220lbs.
Issue wasn’t with how much I actually burned today but rather eating back calories is necessary.
As heart rate has no correlation to calorie burns, I would not take that number at face value. Heart rate monitors use heart rate to estimate oxygen uptake during cardio and then give you a calorie burn. It's all just an estimate. Eating exercise calories is a very good thing to do for fueling your workouts and for keeping from having too large a deficit. Start with a portion back and see how you are doing after 4-6 weeks and tweak it as needed.
With the calorie deficit already built into your numbers, you are really doing exercise for fitness sake, not weight loss.
ETA: I should probably add, that I lost 25 lbs this way 5 years ago and and since maintained and ran a couple bulk/cut cycles using this method with no issues.6 -
summersmama2 wrote: »
My calories burned were calculated with my Apple Watch, using my heart rate.
I’m 5’6” and 220lbs.
Issue wasn’t with how much I actually burned today but rather eating back calories is necessary.
When you do a lot of exercise, eating back those calories is necessary if you don't want to pass out. If you burned 1000 calories and ate 1200, then you have only given your body 200 calories of energy today. You would be dramatically undereating, to an extent that it would be dangerous if you continued that behavior for any length of time. Blacking out on the elliptical will not be fun.
The purpose of exercise is not to create a larger deficit. Stop thinking of it as working for an hour and a half in order to lose weight faster. Exercise has various physical fitness benefits, depending on what activities you do, and it also allows you to eat more. You worked for an hour and a half so you can have better aerobic fitness and a bigger dinner.11 -
summersmama2 wrote: »musicfan68 wrote: »Because your calorie deficit to lose your 2 lbs is already figured into the calories you are supposed to eat. If you then somehow burn 1000 calories (questionable, unless you worked out for several hours), and only eat 1200 you would be netting only 200 calories for intake for the day, which your body can't live on.
People usually suggest eating back only about 50% of your exercise calories, since they are usually way over inflated. It is really hard to burn an extra 1000 calories through exercise unless you are a professional athlete.
An hour and a half of cardio: 60 mins elliptical (716 calories burned) and 30 mins cycling (313 calories burned). Calories burned calculated by my Apple Watch and heart rate.
As a cyclist, I can guarantee that a person who's trying to lose weight and only just began exercising isn't burning 10 kcal per minute. Humans can put out a lot of energy through exercise, but we're limited in how fast we can deliver it. It's entirely possible to burn that many calories that fast but it takes more fitness than the average cyclist has. (And the bike is bearing your weight, so that's not a major factor.)
This is the challenge. MFP worked out a calorie goal for you that already has a deficit, as other people have explained. It's not healthy to go too low on food calories, and when you're exercising for 90 minutes, you have to eat more. And it's difficult to know how much more.
This is a tortise and the hare thing, you have time to work it out. Start with your best estimate, like you're doing. Track everything including your weight. Revisit the issue a month from now, to see how your weight loss compares to what the numbers predict. Adjust from there.6 -
Here's what I do: I eat until I'm satisfied. Mostly healthy foods, some not-so-healthy foods. Some days, I end up eating more calories than I burn, but most days, I burn more calories than I eat. I keep track of some nutrients (sugars, fiber, and protein), but I don't worry about hitting my macros exactly every, single day of my life. If I'm dragging, I'll look at my eating and try to figure out what my body is lacking. I'm not losing as quickly as I could be, I'm sure, but I'm in no hurry to get to a number on the scale. The whole point of MFP, to me, is just about getting healthy and swapping ideas for getting and staying healthy with other people.
If you don't want to eat your calories back, you don't have to. In fact, since you're in a place where you probably want to cut your weight a little faster than I do (I'm very close to "goal"), you probably shouldn't. Just don't trust, if your Apple Watch says you burned 1,000 calories, that you actually did. (Check out this article: "Though six of the seven devices tested produced accurate heart rate readings (within 5 percent), even the most accurate tracker was off by an average of 27 percent when it came to measuring energy expenditure. The worst was off by 93 percent!")
But, by the same token, make sure that you're getting enough to eat and adequate nutrition from what you do eat. I am the queen of forgetting to eat and then wondering why I feel like a nap in the late afternoon or wondering why I can't satisfy that crazy hunger that hits me around 10:00 pm after a day of not eating enough, so I've got plenty of knowledge about what happens when you aren't eating enough. I seriously don't recommend it.3 -
Personally.... I ignore exercise calories as the science of calculating them is highly inaccurate.
There’s an awful lot of middle ground between “highly inaccurate” and “ignore them all”.
If only there were a way to try to assess how accurate those calorie burn projections are for an individual...15 -
Personally.... I ignore exercise calories as the science of calculating them is highly inaccurate.
Yeah, it's an estimate and sometimes people do have to adjust to get in the right range. But by choosing "0" as the amount to eat back, you've chosen the only number that has no chance of being right. You know you're burning *something* through exercise, so pretending you aren't has never made sense to me.10 -
Whatever my watch says I burned I subtract 50cal off (i rather underestimate than over. I also eat back half my exercise calories. I did loose 99lbs and STOPPED LOGGING !! and gained 36lbs so take it at face value when people tell you to take your calories. I am now fully committed to tracking calories again.2
-
Well.
I started on this site in 2007. I have always eaten every calorie earned by exercise. In the beginning I just used the numbers generated by this site and by my Polar HRM - and at 200+ pounds, I got high calorie estimates and I used them. It worked fine. I had a lot of weight to lose. I still ate all the calories earned.
In several months, as I got close to my goal weight, I looked back on my data (food and exercise data) and decided to just use a flat number going forward. I based this decision on my past data of weight loss. The number I came up with was 300 calories per hour of moderate exercise - based on my weight of 155 at the time. I have used that number for over ten years and together with logging my food and using the Goals set by this site, it's close enough. I've been maintaining my weight at 140 for many years.
Just pick a number or a device or use an average.
It's a big ole science experiment. If you're crashing due to lack of energy, fatigue, depression, anxiety or irritability or if your hair, skin and nails are appearing unhealthy - then you aren't eating enough. When you have a lot of weight to lose the body is much more forgiving because it's carrying around its own energy source in the form of body fat. As you get slimmer, it's more of an issue. By that time you'll have good data collected and will be able to use your results as your guide.8 -
I ran for 80 minutes yesterday. I have a number of tracker devices/apps all connected to me and all measuring my HR. Calorie burn estimates from those devices/apps for that run ranged from 562 to 844.
I will eat about 650. I will eat them because I plan to run again today and I want to have the energy to do so.
8 -
summersmama2 wrote: »musicfan68 wrote: »Because your calorie deficit to lose your 2 lbs is already figured into the calories you are supposed to eat. If you then somehow burn 1000 calories (questionable, unless you worked out for several hours), and only eat 1200 you would be netting only 200 calories for intake for the day, which your body can't live on.
People usually suggest eating back only about 50% of your exercise calories, since they are usually way over inflated. It is really hard to burn an extra 1000 calories through exercise unless you are a professional athlete.
An hour and a half of cardio: 60 mins elliptical (716 calories burned) and 30 mins cycling (313 calories burned). Calories burned calculated by my Apple Watch and heart rate.
i do that daily and dont burn ANYWHERE near that amount. the most i would eat back would be around the 400mark.
you are not burning 1000 calories in an hour and a half. well, maybe if youre 300 pounds.5 -
callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »summersmama2 wrote: »musicfan68 wrote: »Because your calorie deficit to lose your 2 lbs is already figured into the calories you are supposed to eat. If you then somehow burn 1000 calories (questionable, unless you worked out for several hours), and only eat 1200 you would be netting only 200 calories for intake for the day, which your body can't live on.
People usually suggest eating back only about 50% of your exercise calories, since they are usually way over inflated. It is really hard to burn an extra 1000 calories through exercise unless you are a professional athlete.
An hour and a half of cardio: 60 mins elliptical (716 calories burned) and 30 mins cycling (313 calories burned). Calories burned calculated by my Apple Watch and heart rate.
i do that daily and dont burn ANYWHERE near that amount. the most i would eat back would be around the 400mark.
you are not burning 1000 calories in an hour and a half. well, maybe if youre 300 pounds.
Which is the issue I have eating back anything. Who the hell actually knows what’s burned?? MFP had it at way higher than 1000, I adjusted to what the Apple Watch said.
I added in a healthy snack today to replace some of today’s calories (Apple Watch said 700 burned today, but again, who really knows).
0 -
summersmama2 wrote: »Hey everyone!
I’m having some confusion on the idea of eating back calories burned. Can someone explain why this is necessary? It seems so counter productive to me!
I have 80lbs to lose and have my goal set at a loss of 2lbs a week. I’ve recently started working out (cardio) pretty heavily (who knew how much I’d love working out!). So today, my calorie goal was 1200 but my exercise calories burned were over 1000. Seems crazy to eat 1000 calories back after I worked so hard to burn them.
Someone help me make sense of it all!
Eating 1200 calories and burning 1000 of them off is the same thing as only eating 200 calories...does that sound remotely healthy? I would question a 1000 calorie burn on a regular basis though...I need to cycle around 35 miles to do that...I do that, but not everyday.
You need to understand that your burning calories 24/7. Your body requires a substantial amount of calories just being alive and nothing else. On average, a woman's BMR is 1300-1400 calories...those are the calories you burn just being alive...then you burn more with your day to day and then exercise. A 1200 calorie diet plan is an aggressive calorie target and assumes one is sedentary....if you're exercising 1.5 hours per day, you aren't sedentary and you need to account for that activity. Undereating and overexercising are no bueno and bad things result down the line.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p16
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions