Don't eat your exercise calories

I usually don't eat mine unless I'm hungry. If I do I try nit to eat over half but usually I don't log my exercise so I don't see those calories

To those people who claim they maintain or gain weight when they eat their exercise cals back - then you are DOING IT WRONG! The law of thermodynamics will not allow you to gain weight when you ate a deficit (and MFP already has you eating at a deficit BEFORE you exercise). You are either thinking you worked out more than you did, or logging less than you ate. If you understand this and don't exercise to create an even larger deficit (and understand the consequences this might have) then whatever, do your thing.

I was anorexic for 2 years in high school, and I ate about 500 cals a day, sometimes less. If you are eating 1200 a day and NOT eating back the 400, 500 you burn - you essentially have a restrictive eating disorder, which I can tell you, is not actually a healthy OR fast way to lose weight in the long run. You'll be flabby from muscle loss and put it all back on if you don't keep up the restriction forever.

Okay sorry... this topic really rustles my jimmies =S

Different things work for different people and obviously there are exceptions but... if you don't see something wrong with eating 500 cals a day then there's a problem.

I checked with my physician about logging exercise calories and eating them back. She suggested not logging exercise because the calories burned during exercise are bonus weight loss. So far, I've loss 54 pounds in 4 months by not logging exercise and not eating back exercise calories.

Ultimately, everyone is different and you should check with a physician before you make your decision. At least your physician knows your body (unlike me and everyone else on here).

First there are many ways to lose weight and some of the "eat them back" guys like Taso are my good friends here.
But I agree with the OP.

My feeling is, if you're going to eat back the exercise calories what the point of exercising? To eat more or burn fat? To me I see it as a wash if you eat them back. Personally, I'm lazy I would just rather eat less and not exercise.

Now if your goal is maintenance then I think it's a great idea to eat them back, but if the goal is to burn fat, then no way.

Starvation mode is not understood much at all. It's not going to kick in after one, two, or even several days. The decline is gradual and is typically a problem after weeks.

This is why I incorporate Spike Day's, if I have a day each week where I eat a calorie surplus, then my body can't go into starvation mode. How can it be starving if I store energy?

Also the energy I store is not bodyfat, it's glycogen. Since with a surplus glycogen is stored first because it's heavily depleted while I'm dieting, and short-term energy is a higher priority then long-term (bodyfat) energy storage.

some people can get by with netting a low amount. but, please, don't post on here in 2 weeks when your body is in starvation mode and you're not losing.

First there are many ways to lose weight and some of the "eat them back" guys like Taso are my good friends here.
But I agree with the OP.

My feeling is, if you're going to eat back the exercise calories what the point of exercising? To eat more or burn fat? To me I see it as a wash if you eat them back. Personally, I'm lazy I would just rather eat less and not exercise.

Now if your goal is maintenance then I think it's a great idea to eat them back, but if the goal is to burn fat, then no way.

Starvation mode is not understood much at all. It's not going to kick in after one, two, or even several days. The decline is gradual and is typically a problem after weeks.

This is why I incorporate Spike Day's, if I have a day each week where I eat a calorie surplus, then my body can't go into starvation mode. How can it be starving if I store energy?

Also the energy I store is not bodyfat, it's glycogen. Since with a surplus, glycogen is stored first! Because it's heavily depleted while I'm dieting, and short-term energy is a higher priority then long-term (bodyfat) energy storage.

I only allow half of my exercise calories to be eaten since I'm at 1,200.

Me too except that I'm at 1,640. Because we tend to overestimate the amount of calories burned & underestimate the ones we take in so its better to be safe than sorry. Bottomline here is that if you eat more than you burn, you will gain weight & if you burn more than you consume, you will lose weight regardless if you're eating back your exercise calories or no.

I read somewhere that if you don't eat your calories back that fat turns into muscle.

haha fat & muscle cells are two very different body masses & its impossible for the one to become another. Its like saying that an apple can become an orange.