Adding back Exercise calories?

https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10503681/exercise-calories-do-i-eat-these-a-video-explanation/p1

Honestly, I don't eat mine for several reasons, the principal being that I don't weigh every single thing I eat down to the gram. I weigh most things and estimate as best I can, but I assume that I'm going to be off a little bit--especially at restaurants--and studies have shown that people routinely underestimate their intake. Also, the calorie burn is arguably not the main benefit of exercise compared to the muscular/cardiovascular improvement; you can't out-train a bad diet, period. I went for a 45 minute light jog this morning and my estimated burn was a measly 130. You can eat that much mis-measuring peanut butter, and that's assuming the count is even accurate.

Ultimately, I find it more beneficial to let exercise absorb the human error factor in my logging, and it works for me. If you're a meticulous logger, you may indeed need to eat those calories to keep your weight loss safe and reasonable. It just comes down to your routine.

sathmixx35 wrote: »

My goal is to lose 15 pounds. Mfp gave me a daily goal of 1380 cals to eat. My rate of loss is set to 0.2kg per week. I think 1380 cals is more than enough for me. I workout 5 days per week. Each day I burn around 100-150 cals from a workout.

Do I have to add back my exercise cals? Wat if I’m not hungry and I dnt wanna eat them back? Will that matter?

Also let’s say one day I burnt 100 cals from my workout and I add this so that will be 1380+100=1480 cals. Does this mean I ate 1480 cals altogether that day? Or 1380 cals?

Thank u

Exercise isn't accounted for in your activity level. The calorie target you get from MFP is a base target without exercise. You account for exercise with MFP by logging it after the fact and getting additional calories for increased activity beyond what you established as your activity level.

That said, I wouldn't personally be too fused about 100 calories either way. Where people really run into problems is when they're doing higher intensity and/or longer duration exercise/training/workouts that burns a significant amount of calories and then they don't fuel that when they're already in a fairly steep calorie deficit.

Ultimately, fitness needs to be fueled. When you start to think of fitness for the sake of fitness rather than just a weight management tool, this makes complete sense. The more you're moving, the more fuel you are using...just like if I drive my car around the block to the grocery store vs a 500 mile road trip...obviously the fuel requirements would be different. Failure to fuel your fitness ultimately hinders fitness gains and recovery from higher intensity activity. On top of that, eating in a steep deficit and then adding significantly to that deficit with exercise is rarely the smart move in the long run. But like I said...I wouldn't get too fused about 100 calories.

MFP would give me around 1900 calories to lose about 1 Lb per week. Tomorrow I have a 30 mile ride planned for the morning since I have the day off...a 30 mile ride is not an everyday thing, but it's a fairly regular thing and I will burn in the neighborhood of 1,000 calories on that ride. If I didn't eat to fuel that activity I would end up with a net calorie intake of around 900 calories...which would basically be the same thing as just eating 900 calories. Ask yourself if that sounds healthy for an adult male...