Is it safe to eat back calories burned from walking?
Options
Replies
-
nutmegoreo wrote: »Have you started eating more than 1000 calories per day yet?
Ya...I was going to say with the OPs history of under eating I'd say it isn't just safe but highly encouraged.5 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »Have you started eating more than 1000 calories per day yet?
I have been on days where I burn off a lot of calories by walking
1 -
It would only be a problem for expected rate of loss if you do a lot of it, and plan on eating back the full estimated calorie burn.
The calorie burn estimate is probably close enough, the problem is MFP already is accounting for you burning so many calories per min & hour & day.
So if it already accounted for you burning say 2400 daily / 24 hrs = 100 cal/hr, and your walking 3.5 mph for 2 hrs burns say 600, you only burned 400 above and beyond what was already accounted for.
So if you had a reasonable daily deficit of 500, and lost 200 to that type of effect eating back the 600 - almost 50% is rather major loss of deficit.
Walk slower and/or longer - even worse effect if done daily.
This I believe is the origination of the complaint the exercise database is way off (it's really not that bad) and recommendation to only eat 50% of what it says (which could be bad overkill for many).
1 -
adamlai2000 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Have you started eating more than 1000 calories per day yet?
I have been on days where I burn off a lot of calories by walking
The minimum in MFP is 1,500 net calories a day for men. So, you should be eating more than 1,000 on the days you are not walking and even more on the days you exercise. MFP is designed for you to eat back your exercise calories.1 -
tzimmer10211 wrote: »Sure it's safe. If you want to stay in a calorie deficit for weight loss, don't do it.
If you use MFP to set your calorie goal, exercise, but don't eat back any exercise calories, you are not using MFP the way it was designed.
Unlike other sites which use TDEE calculators, MFP uses the NEAT method (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis), and as such this system is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns given by MFP to be inflated and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back. Others, however, are able to lose weight while eating 100% of their exercise calories.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p14 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.5
-
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
You certainly could do that instead. For some of us due to our size and/or gender, our calorie usage without exercise is fairly low, and eating 1300 cals just doesn't cut it. I'd rather get in a workout and have an extra 200 cals to eat. (Plus, I personally don't find light to moderate exercise makes me any more hungry than the calories it buys me, though I'm sure that's an individual thing) Then there are all the additional health benefits of exercise, including stress relief, which can be important while dealing with weight issues. It also seems that people who exercise (and specifically strength train) are happier with how they look when they reach goal weight than those who don't, in general.
There are lots of folks here who lost substantial weight with little to no exercise. I personally exercised throughout my weight loss (and still do) for fitness and health, and so I have the calories for dessert or a beer
4 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
Well, there are reasons aside from the health benefits. Exercising and being able to eat back those calories means you can have larger more varied meals and treats... it generally increased the volume you are allowed to eat. This is important for some and especially the shorter/smaller people who don't get a lot of calories to begin with. Exercise - primarily strength training - also allows you to keep most of your current muscle. Just losing weight by calorie deficit with no training to retain that lean mass usually just results in a smaller version of what you started with and is contrary to most peoples aesthetic goals.
Personally, I don't do much cardio - I just lift. I don't typically "eat back" my exercise calories as the calorie burn from lifting is pretty insignificant and just account those calories into my limits for either a cut or a bulk as my program is pretty static and consistent. I'm also not a small guy so even in an aggressive cut I get to eat quite a bit of food.
4 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
If I didn't exercise, my daily calories would be about 1,460 and that's to maintain my current weight. I like eating more than that (and I love the way I feel when I'm regularly exercising too).5 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
Using MFP's numbers, a deficit is created through calorie intake only. The deficit is already included.
I exercise for fitness and body composition and those calories burned makes my deficit even larger which is something I don't want. Eating them still has me losing at the rate I want while still fueling me for my workouts.
In maintenance, same thing. If I want to maintain, then I need to account for exercise calories or I will keep losing.
Bulking, if I don't account for exercise then I won't add as much mass as I would like.
Some people do find their appetite increased exponentially and it's hard to find the balance. With adjusting macros and using a weekly calorie goal, I don't have this issue.2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »tzimmer10211 wrote: »Sure it's safe. If you want to stay in a calorie deficit for weight loss, don't do it.
If you use MFP to set your calorie goal, exercise, but don't eat back any exercise calories, you are not using MFP the way it was designed.
Unlike other sites which use TDEE calculators, MFP uses the NEAT method (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis), and as such this system is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns given by MFP to be inflated and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back. Others, however, are able to lose weight while eating 100% of their exercise calories.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1
Depends on how the goals were setup.
If you set your activity level to slightly active because you walk every day and then eat back the calories from those walks you are double dipping.
At most I only eat back 1/2 my exercise calories because:
1) I realize it's challenging to to be perfectly exact in entering intake calories and I also assume I'm overstating.
2) I also assume MFP is overstating calories burned.
3) I know I'll be over my daily goals on the weekend ( pizza & beer ) so I want to be under my goals during the week.
There is no requirement to eat back your exercise calories... you will just be at a higher deficit.
2 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
You could indeed just eat less - that's exactly the point in either scenario.
And in either scenario a reasonable rate of loss will have positive effects, rather than negative adaptations making it unreasonable.
The problem with saying don't eat them back is creating that too big a deficit.
And then the negatives impact the ability of the exercise to transform the body.
If someone is doing the exercise purely for the calorie burn, then likely they'll be on this weight loss roller coaster ride again and at some point in the future will realize exercise for the heart/body and keeping it up, eating less than you burn for the fat loss, is really the way to go.
Now - someone could be doing no deficit to average non-exercise daily burn - and let exercise create the deficit (could still get unreasonable there, though harder probably) - but usually that is mentioned if it's the case.3 -
kshama2001 wrote: »tzimmer10211 wrote: »Sure it's safe. If you want to stay in a calorie deficit for weight loss, don't do it.
If you use MFP to set your calorie goal, exercise, but don't eat back any exercise calories, you are not using MFP the way it was designed.
Unlike other sites which use TDEE calculators, MFP uses the NEAT method (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis), and as such this system is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns given by MFP to be inflated and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back. Others, however, are able to lose weight while eating 100% of their exercise calories.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1
Depends on how the goals were setup.
If you set your activity level to slightly active because you walk every day and then eat back the calories from those walks you are double dipping.
At most I only eat back 1/2 my exercise calories because:
1) I realize it's challenging to to be perfectly exact in entering intake calories and I also assume I'm overstating.
2) I also assume MFP is overstating calories burned.
3) I know I'll be over my daily goals on the weekend ( pizza & beer ) so I want to be under my goals during the week.
There is no requirement to eat back your exercise calories... you will just be at a higher deficit.
Your reasoning makes sense, as you said, based on how your goals are set up. The problem being a higher deficit isn't necessarily better. If someone has already chosen an aggressive rate of loss, a higher deficit through uneaten exercise calories can be disastrous.
OP does have a backstory from other threads of eating far less calories than he should be, looking for drastic results. Increasing his exercise and not eating those calories back is a bad idea, for him at least.3 -
adamlai2000 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Have you started eating more than 1000 calories per day yet?
I have been on days where I burn off a lot of calories by walking
So you are continuing to seriously under eat despite all the support and suggestions to change that. The answer to your OP, is to eat your exercise calories. All of them.5 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
I don't use exercise to create a deficit. That's WHY I eat back all my exercise cals.3 -
ok thxnutmegoreo wrote: »adamlai2000 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »Have you started eating more than 1000 calories per day yet?
I have been on days where I burn off a lot of calories by walking
So you are continuing to seriously under eat despite all the support and suggestions to change that. The answer to your OP, is to eat your exercise calories. All of them.
2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »tzimmer10211 wrote: »Sure it's safe. If you want to stay in a calorie deficit for weight loss, don't do it.
If you use MFP to set your calorie goal, exercise, but don't eat back any exercise calories, you are not using MFP the way it was designed.
Unlike other sites which use TDEE calculators, MFP uses the NEAT method (Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis), and as such this system is designed for exercise calories to be eaten back. However, many consider the burns given by MFP to be inflated and only eat a percentage, such as 50%, back. Others, however, are able to lose weight while eating 100% of their exercise calories.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p1
Depends on how the goals were setup.
If you set your activity level to slightly active because you walk every day and then eat back the calories from those walks you are double dipping.
At most I only eat back 1/2 my exercise calories because:
1) I realize it's challenging to to be perfectly exact in entering intake calories and I also assume I'm overstating.
2) I also assume MFP is overstating calories burned.
3) I know I'll be over my daily goals on the weekend ( pizza & beer ) so I want to be under my goals during the week.
There is no requirement to eat back your exercise calories... you will just be at a higher deficit.
I suppose it is important to point out that one should not double dip.
However, activity level is supposed to be based on one's job.
1 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
In addition to its many additional health benefits, exercise is the healthiest way for me to manage stress. While vigorous exercise like swimming for an hour or snowshoeing does increase my appetite, the moderate exercise I normally do does not.
Also, when I'm 80 I want to be like my mom - hiking in the White Mountains for her 80th and 81st birthdays.3 -
Serious question I always have to people who advise to eat back their calories (specifically indicating the reason for exercise is weight loss) from exercise. Why not instead of exercise you just eat less to create the same deficit? I understand there are benefits to exercise, but creating a caloric deficit for weight loss it's not necessary and more times than not works against building a caloric deficit as exercise generally increases hunger and cortisol levels, both to which inhibit weight loss.
Because exercise relaxes me so I stress eat less, I find I'm less hungry, and my mood improves so there goes the emotional component of my eating. Plus at 5'3" and 10lbs away from a healthy BMI, without exercise I'm on 1360 calories to lose 1/2lb per week. I'd be miserable if I didn't get some extra calories to play with.1 -
TavistockToad wrote: »adamlai2000 wrote: »I’ve gotten into the habit of going on walks (10km+) fairly regularly and I burn off enough calories to fit in a large snack/small meal. Would using these burned off calories on food jeopardize my weight loss in any way?
Safe?
Safe, as in "won't risk accomplishing the goal."
Happy to be of service.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 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
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 937 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions