We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
1200 calories a day- eat back exercise cals?
empressjasmin
Posts: 170 Member
This may be a silly question to some but I just want to know does it matter to eat exercise calories back if eating 1200 cals in a day? I ask because I know eating too few can stall weight loss too and I usually get a few hundred calories back from exercise. Wondering should I just consume my 1200 calories or focus more on net, which would technically mean eating more than 1200 calories? Thanks!
2
Replies
-
Assuming your exercise calories are calculated accurately, you should eat them back.9
-
yes MFP is developped in a way that requires you to eat back exercise calories. the amount it gives yo uto eat is the amount to eat TO LOSE THE REQUESTED RATE, assuming no purposeful exercise. if you don't eat back the exercise calories you will be undereating which is bad.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p1
note that few people actually need to eat as low as 1200 to lose weight. what are your stats? (height, current weight, goal weight)?4 -
yes MFP is developped in a way that requires you to eat back exercise calories. the amount it gives yo uto eat is the amount to eat TO LOSE THE REQUESTED RATE, assuming no purposeful exercise. if you don't eat back the exercise calories you will be undereating which is bad.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p1
note that few people actually need to eat as low as 1200 to lose weight. what are your stats? (height, current weight, goal weight)?
Thank you. I have quite a bit to lose. I’m 245 pounds, 5’4, and I would like to get to 190 as my first goal.
0 -
1200 sounds very low given those stats. is that what MFP gave you for 2lb/week loss?10
-
-
eat 1310 then. and exercise calories.don't make this harder than it needs to be. weight loss is a long game.
there is zero benefit (and lots of negative outcomes) to under eating.24 -
Thank you!3
-
Eating less won't make you stall. But it will likely sabotage your efforts. Also, make sure you set your weight loss rate to a practical amount. No need to be overly aggressive and blow it by binging and yo-yoing. Set a reasonable loss, for you it might be 1-1.5 lbs per week at first (double check that), and reevaluate every 10 lbs or so.
Use a food scale, trust me. You will save yourself an immense amount of grief if you learn what a serving is from the beginning. And I don't mean measuring cups, spoons, and labels. An actual food scale for everything, until you are firm and self reliant.10 -
empressjasmin wrote: »
MFP gave you 1310 + exercise calories as your goal.
With a lot to lose your biggest hurdle is going to make the long process sustainable, don't make it more miserable than you have to.13 -
1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.22 -
ShaeDetermined wrote: »1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.
@ShaeDetermined
You do realise that with a TDEE calculator like the one you suggest you are also eating back your exercise calories?
It's just as a daily average based on a vague guess in advance as opposed to estimating them afterwards and eating a variable daily goal.
The TDEE method is perfectly valid but it's different rather than better.15 -
Hi! Don't try to lose faster than the suggested rate, you can lose muscle and even lose your hair! Eat the 1310 plus exercise calories. However you can take the calculated exercise calories with a grain of salt until you see how fast you are losing - sometimes they are inflated.5
-
ShaeDetermined wrote: »1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.
@ShaeDetermined
You do realise that with a TDEE calculator like the one you suggest you are also eating back your exercise calories?
It's just as a daily average based on a vague guess in advance as opposed to estimating them afterwards and eating a variable daily goal.
The TDEE method is perfectly valid but it's different rather than better.
Correct. I realize exactly that.
It's building a profile based on your overall activity/ exercise.
I've seen many people struggling to "eat back" their exercise calories when they're not hungry, and I think that creates additional problems.
Learning to listen to our bodies is an important component to a healthy and mindful way of life.
15 -
ShaeDetermined wrote: »ShaeDetermined wrote: »1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.
@ShaeDetermined
You do realise that with a TDEE calculator like the one you suggest you are also eating back your exercise calories?
It's just as a daily average based on a vague guess in advance as opposed to estimating them afterwards and eating a variable daily goal.
The TDEE method is perfectly valid but it's different rather than better.
Correct. I realize exactly that.
It's building a profile based on your overall activity/ exercise.
I've seen many people struggling to "eat back" their exercise calories when they're not hungry, and I think that creates additional problems.
Learning to listen to our bodies is an important component to a healthy and mindful way of life.
Today I got a nice chunk of exercise calories from shoveling and snow shoeing, and if I don't want them all today, I will want them tomorrow.
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.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/818082/exercise-calories-again-wtf/p111 -
msalicia07 wrote: »Eating less won't make you stall. But it will likely sabotage your efforts. Also, make sure you set your weight loss rate to a practical amount. No need to be overly aggressive and blow it by binging and yo-yoing. Set a reasonable loss, for you it might be 1-1.5 lbs per week at first (double check that), and reevaluate every 10 lbs or so.
Use a food scale, trust me. You will save yourself an immense amount of grief if you learn what a serving is from the beginning. And I don't mean measuring cups, spoons, and labels. An actual food scale for everything, until you are firm and self reliant.
Thank you! I keep a food scale at home and work but I have gotta put it to proper use! Thanks!2 -
ShaeDetermined wrote: »ShaeDetermined wrote: »1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.
@ShaeDetermined
You do realise that with a TDEE calculator like the one you suggest you are also eating back your exercise calories?
It's just as a daily average based on a vague guess in advance as opposed to estimating them afterwards and eating a variable daily goal.
The TDEE method is perfectly valid but it's different rather than better.
Correct. I realize exactly that.
It's building a profile based on your overall activity/ exercise.
I've seen many people struggling to "eat back" their exercise calories when they're not hungry, and I think that creates additional problems.
Learning to listen to our bodies is an important component to a healthy and mindful way of life.
OK but I'm not seeing why eating more on a day when you burn more is "ridiculous".
I can totally understand why some people prefer the TDEE method, it's more simple and can make planning easier.
With TDEE you are under-eating on days you exercise and over-eating or days when you are not. Sounds like the opposite of listening to your body's needs to me. Do more and eat more, do less and eat less seems far closer to being intuitive than a fixed daily goal.16 -
Thanks everyone! Helpful information!3
-
ShaeDetermined wrote: »ShaeDetermined wrote: »1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.
@ShaeDetermined
You do realise that with a TDEE calculator like the one you suggest you are also eating back your exercise calories?
It's just as a daily average based on a vague guess in advance as opposed to estimating them afterwards and eating a variable daily goal.
The TDEE method is perfectly valid but it's different rather than better.
Correct. I realize exactly that.
It's building a profile based on your overall activity/ exercise.
I've seen many people struggling to "eat back" their exercise calories when they're not hungry, and I think that creates additional problems.
Learning to listen to our bodies is an important component to a healthy and mindful way of life.
OK but I'm not seeing why eating more on a day when you burn more is "ridiculous".
I can totally understand why some people prefer it, it's more simple and can make planning easier.
With TDEE you are under-eating on days you exercise and over-eating or days when you are not. Sounds like the opposite of listening to your body's needs to me. Do more and eat more, do less and eat less seems far closer to being intuitive than a fixed daily goal.
By "ridiculous", and I agree that was a poor choice of word, I meant the concept of logging a calorie burn (which is often inflated and inaccurate) and forcing the calories.
And although I prefer the TDEE method, I do agree with the second part of your comment.0 -
ShaeDetermined wrote: »ShaeDetermined wrote: »ShaeDetermined wrote: »1200 calories is really low, and not optimal for weight loss.
I would use an online calculator (such as ruled.me) to determine your calorie consumption - based on your stats and activity level. Then, manually set your mfp calories.
"Eating back" exercise calories is a ridiculous notion, in my opinion.
@ShaeDetermined
You do realise that with a TDEE calculator like the one you suggest you are also eating back your exercise calories?
It's just as a daily average based on a vague guess in advance as opposed to estimating them afterwards and eating a variable daily goal.
The TDEE method is perfectly valid but it's different rather than better.
Correct. I realize exactly that.
It's building a profile based on your overall activity/ exercise.
I've seen many people struggling to "eat back" their exercise calories when they're not hungry, and I think that creates additional problems.
Learning to listen to our bodies is an important component to a healthy and mindful way of life.
OK but I'm not seeing why eating more on a day when you burn more is "ridiculous".
I can totally understand why some people prefer it, it's more simple and can make planning easier.
With TDEE you are under-eating on days you exercise and over-eating or days when you are not. Sounds like the opposite of listening to your body's needs to me. Do more and eat more, do less and eat less seems far closer to being intuitive than a fixed daily goal.
By "ridiculous", and I agree that was a poor choice of word, I meant the concept of logging a calorie burn (which is often inflated and inaccurate) and forcing the calories.
And although I prefer the TDEE method, I do agree with the second part of your comment.
Using one’s TDEE estemated from an on line calculator can be equally inflated and inaccurate.
Depending on my exercise consistency I can move between mfp’s NEAT and eat back my exercise cals, varied exercise, or TDEE (exercise included), consistent exercise, and get similar results.
Using one’s own data, collected over time, is the most reliable as it takes into account one’s personal idiosyncrasies and can be used in a NEAT or TDEE format.
Cheers, h.14 -
Just wanted to let you know that you didn't ask a silly question. I was wondering the same thing myself. Thanks for asking and thanks everyone for responding.
5 -
The MFP calorie goal =NEAT.
In a perfect world, NEAT + Exercise cals = TDEE.
Yes, exercise cals can be a tough number to pin down, but eating some of them and tweaking based on your results is far more accurate than just ignoring them entirely.
I would think if someone is having to stuff down food in order to eat their exercise cals, they are either giving themselves credit for a ton more exercise than they've actually done or their food logging is way off.
OP, eat all your calories and some of your exercise cals. Keep working on getting your logging more and more accurate. Tweak as you go if you need to based on your results. Make it as easy as possible to keep moving forward and shrug off bad days. Good luck :drinker:6 -
I am one of the small percentage of the population that was given net calories of 1200 to lose 1/2 pound a week. The joys of being under 5". There is no way I could live with 1200 calories a day so gradually increased my exercise to enable me to eat for variety and add treats into my day.
I can not understand why someone would eat so little when they don't need to. Undereating and being hungry all the time will most likely resort in the person giving up because losing weight is just too hard. Better to lose slowly and have long term success than to lose quickly, give up, and regain the weight with some extra friends coming along on that journey.
Eat back those exercise calories and enjoy every mouthful.8 -
While 1200 has become some sort of generally accepted "safe minimum" for women and dieting, the reality is there's nothing special about that number and it shouldn't be used as some sort generally accepted rule for all women. It's not as if 1199 calories is too low, but 1201 is safe. Your calorie need depends on your height, weight, age, and activity level. 1200 is usually inadequate for most women, with the exception of those who are short and sedentary.
It's important if you are using MFPs calculations to follow its recommendations, which include eating back your exercise calories. If you don't like the "idea" of eating exercise calories back, you can try TDEE, which incorporates your exercise into your daily calorie goal. So you will have a higher calorie goal than MFP gives you. I don't necessarily think one way is better then another, but either way, you need to make sure you account for your exercise somehow. If MFP is telling you 1310 plus your exercise calories, then you need to be eating that. Don't think you can just fall back on 1200 because you heard its the safe number. That's really not true for your needs.6 -
Thank you everyone!! I have lots of great information now!
1 -
As a wise rabbit used to say, “the winner is the one who eats the most and still loses the weight”.
If you look at many of the successful long termers on this site, the ones who achieved their weight loss goal and have been successfully maintaining the loss for a period of time - one of the common themes is that they didn’t focus on how to lose the weight the fastest or how to not eat back exercise calories in order to get the weight off quickest. They approached it as a long term, sustainable plan, where weight loss is a dress rehearsal for how you want to live the rest of your life. Many people increase their activity for a lot of reasons, but one is that they may want to have a higher overall calorie target. And that’s not just an excuse to get to eat junk food as a reward for exercising, as some people often suggest. It’s about understanding that by eating at a modest deficit, with moderate activity and a focus on slow and steady weight loss - you can often have a positive overall effect on your TDEE for the long term.
I’m a petite female that has a desk job but my maintenance calories when lightly active are around 2000, which is higher than my stats and Sedentary job would suggest. Part of that is that I’ve made a conscious effort since joining MFP to lose weight slow and steady with a modest deficit (I lost weight eating 1600-1800 total cals) and steadily increasing activity to now know that I can comfortably lose and maintain at levels that many people never think possible. I was initially set at 1200 because of my stats but quickly realized that wouldn’t be sustainable for me. I read on these forums about how most people don’t need to go that low in order to lose and the wise rabbits advice really resonated with me. If I had stuck there and not eaten back exercise calories I probably wouldn’t have had the energy or desire to keep increasing my activity level and it would have been a self fulfilling prophecy- one that likely would have ended with me giving up and just staying overweight and Sedentary and thinking weight loss is just too hard and painful so why bother.
So yeah - go with 1310 plus exercise. Or even higher, with your stats you can likely lose at 1400-1500 easily.
Good luck!10
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 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
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions