Workout journaling

megannbarnes6309
megannbarnes6309 Posts: 4 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I was wondering something, that perhaps is, well, stupid, but please be polite in response. Would it help if I DONT add my calories burned during exercise so that my deficit will be more? I usually stay on target with tracking my good and calories. I dont log my strength training ( cant say I know the burn amount), but my cardio I do. I have alot of weight to lose and want to be consistent in my results.

Replies

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    Well, 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 for them 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
  • Jch4mb3rs
    Jch4mb3rs Posts: 67 Member
    Myself personally, I ignore any calories that get added because of exercise.
  • megannbarnes6309
    megannbarnes6309 Posts: 4 Member
    Thank you for the explanation on how the calorie goal is set here. Makes sense now.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,325 Member
    Backing up a little bit from how MFP is designed to work (which is correct, and I agree with what was said about it):

    If someone is targeting a quite-slow weight loss for their current size (like 0.5lb/week when they have 40 pounds or more left to lose, just making up numbers), and doing relatively small amounts of exercise in calorie terms, maybe a hundred calories or so average daily, then it's probably OK to just let the exercise increase the deficit.

    If someone is trying to lose aggressively fast (like 2 pounds a week if under 200 pounds and not *super*-short), and doing on average several hundreds of calories daily, then it wouldn't be a good idea at all to take the exercise calories as extra deficit, IMO, because it increases health risk.

    In between extremes is a judgement call: What matters is actual rate of loss, plus adequate nutrition and fueling. Losing slowly can be frustrating, but losing too fast increases health risk. Eating too little risks not getting minimally necessary amounts of protein, fats, veggies/fruits. Underfueling total calorie needs increases odds of fatigue, which in turn reduces calories spent in daily life activity (rest more, do less), so is counterproductive for weight loss.

    Faster loss isn't necessarily better loss. Sometimes it's riskier loss, less sustainable loss, unhealthy loss - not good.

    Best idea, IMO: Use the tool as designed, lose slow/sustainably, keep energy level up.

    OP, if you have a lot of weight to lose, it's tempting to try to lose fast. But even losing fast, you're going to be at this weight loss thing for many months, at least. That's a reason to maybe think about how to make it easy to stick with, rather than fast.

    P.S. If you want to get a calorie estimate for weight training, the MFP exercise database is a good estimating method for this particular thing. If regular rep/set lifting with longer rests between sets, use the "strength training" entry under cardiovascular exercise. If a set up with a faster sequence of lifts, and some short rests or cardio in between exercises, use "circuit training".

Categories