Do people account their exercise?
amz9028
Posts: 2 Member
Hi everybody,
Really appreciate guidance on this.
Am I right in logging my 400 calories from a workout and eating my 1200 goal plus the extra 400 I gained? I feel like I'm cheating the app!
Weight not moving but maybe I need to give it more time. 2 weeks in. Days I don't workout I stick to 1200 cal but I workout 6 days a week.
Really appreciate guidance on this.
Am I right in logging my 400 calories from a workout and eating my 1200 goal plus the extra 400 I gained? I feel like I'm cheating the app!
Weight not moving but maybe I need to give it more time. 2 weeks in. Days I don't workout I stick to 1200 cal but I workout 6 days a week.
1
Replies
-
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/p16 -
Thanks so much for getting back to me. I'll definitely check the thread you shared. Might need to aim for the 50% if I don't see progress.
Amy0 -
The app gave you 1200 because you selected a weight loss goal, with no consideration of exercise being done.
That already causes weight loss if you log accurately.
Faster is not better, and a more extreme diet usually ends up making workouts suck, in which case why workout to improve the body if not able to do them well?
What was the workout for how long that said 400 cal burn?4 -
Do give it at least a month. If the exercise is new, you might retain water, which will hide fat loss on the scale. Personally, I GAINED 7 pounds of water weight when I started lifting weights again. (This took a week or two to come off and keep going down.)
Also, if you are a woman with a menstrual cycle, you may also retain water when you ovulate or premenstrually.
So if the scale doesn't start going down right away do be patient
5 -
All mainstream methods of estimating your calorie needs take your exercise expenditure into account, they just do it differently. It's not cheating to use a tool as it's designed to be used.
Would you use a TDEE calculator but select the option no exercise instead of the 6 times a week you actually do?
(Cheating.)
Would you use an all day tracker tracker but take it off for your exercise?
(Cheating.)
Getting a daily goal from MyFitnessPal that is only for a day with no exercise and adding a reasonable estimate for your exercise - NOT cheating!
As you are exercising 6 times a week you could really be messing with your calorie balance estimates by ignoring it.
If you tell people about yourself and your exercise you might get some guidance on how to make your estimate reasonable. Do try to generate a longer term view than two weeks, that really doesn't tell you anything reliable.2 -
MFP and most other calorie estimates are inflated, sometimes wildly so. 400 cals is a lot of cals for one workout. For most people (i.e. depending on weight) that would represent well over an hour of vigorous, continuous cardio.* Many here eat back half of the reported exercise calories, for that reason. It'd be reasonable to try eating 200 of the 400 back on work-out days for a while to see what happens.
Meanwhile, two weeks is not a long time. If you've been at it two weeks and haven't seen any weight loss, it's understandable that you'd be a bit frustrated, and so, also understandable that you'd do some fine-tuning such as only eating back half of your exercise cals. That said, it takes many people 5-6 weeks to get a handle on whether they're losing weight at the pace they want to. A bit of patience is called for while you're fine tuning things.
* I have an exercise bike that's telling me I burn 600 calories per hour at an average 75 watts of effort. Which is completely absurd. The actual calorie expenditure using the watts-based formula that pretty much all of science agrees is the accurate formula is 3.6 x 1 hr x 75 watts = 270. So wrap your mind around that, 270 calories burned and a machine telling me it's 600. That's how far off and ridiculous these calorie estimates can be. You can usually start by just dividing the reported calorie number in half - which is why many eat back half their supposed calories.3 -
MFP and most other calorie estimates are inflated, sometimes wildly so. 400 cals is a lot of cals for one workout. For most people (i.e. depending on weight) that would represent well over an hour of vigorous, continuous cardio.* Many here eat back half of the reported exercise calories, for that reason. It'd be reasonable to try eating 200 of the 400 back on work-out days for a while to see what happens.
Meanwhile, two weeks is not a long time. If you've been at it two weeks and haven't seen any weight loss, it's understandable that you'd be a bit frustrated, and so, also understandable that you'd do some fine-tuning such as only eating back half of your exercise cals. That said, it takes many people 5-6 weeks to get a handle on whether they're losing weight at the pace they want to. A bit of patience is called for while you're fine tuning things.
* I have an exercise bike that's telling me I burn 600 calories per hour at an average 75 watts of effort. Which is completely absurd. The actual calorie expenditure using the watts-based formula that pretty much all of science agrees is the accurate formula is 3.6 x 1 hr x 75 watts = 270. So wrap your mind around that, 270 calories burned and a machine telling me it's 600. That's how far off and ridiculous these calorie estimates can be. You can usually start by just dividing the reported calorie number in half - which is why many eat back half their supposed calories.
I'm not going to opine on OP's exercise calorie estimate, because she hasn't said what she's doing, at what intensity, for how long, nor what her fitness level is. (I agree that just playing the odds, 400 is more likely to be high than low.)
In giving specific numbers or number-bounds for others, I think you're overgeneralizing from your own experience, fitness and size.
I don't disagree with your statement that many machines will overestimate calories, or with what you say about your own workouts.
As far as I can see, OP didn't indicate how long her workouts were on those 6 days. And it's not freakishly unusual to reach 400 calories per hour for certain types of activity, even for smaller people. (I wouldn't say it would necessarily have to be "vigorous", either, but we'd probable differ about what that word even means in context. 70% heart rate is a commonly used boundary.) It's probable that someone who has weight to lose is relatively less fit, but it's far from guaranteed.
Further, dividing by 2 is completely arbitrary. I understand the notion of cutting exercise calories eaten if the scale responds sluggishly over a reasonable test period, but even if that's a reasonable quantitative adjustment (gotta make one somewhere), it isn't necessarily the exercise calorie estimate that was the source of the discrepancy in the first place.
IMO, to give her any kind of decent feedback about her exercise calorie estimate, we need to know at least what activity she was doing for how long, and ideally something about the intensity (preferably an objective measure like speed/distance/pace if available, but those don't apply to all exercises, of course). Depending on the exercise, knowing her size and fitness level might be helpful as well.9 -
To illustrate the point made by @AnnPT77
I have a friend who is 50, petite, very slender and a very good club rider.
Her indoor training ride yesterday burned an accurate 406 net calories in 41 minutes.
She has also struggled with undereating in the past by not eating enough to fuel her exercise through feelings of guilt - similar to thinking it's cheating perhaps OP?3 -
In addition to what Ann and sijomial have said, I'd ask amz9028 how she is logging food? Using a food scale? Double checking your food entries to be certain you are using accurate data? How is your sleep and stress level?
Here's the "How To" log food thread. If you would also open your Food diary for us to view, we may be able to spot some frequent errors.
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1234699/logging-accurately-step-by-step-guide/p1
...also...
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10012907/logging-accuracy-consistency-and-youre-probably-eating-more-than-you-think/p13 -
I haven't logged exercise. I use MFP for logging my calories in, but depend on my Fitbit for measuring calories out. I didn't like the idea of 'eating back' my calories. It was just slightly too close to a 'reward system' for me (I know that might not be how others use it, but I think my mind would see it that way).
So I just stick to a fairly fixed maximum calorie allowance of 1750, and rely on the fitbit to burn at least 2750.
Though I do have questions about the fitbit's calorie accuracy too - I've been burning about 3300 the last three days with mostly sedantary days with long (c90 minutes) and moderate intensity walks. These walks have added 600-1000 calories burned, presumably based on my heart rate while walking. But that feels quite high for a walk, so I'm taking it with a little pinch of salt.2 -
as others have said, 2 weeks is too soon to get a true idea of whats happening. It takes me 2-4 weeks to start to see consistent movement on a scale after 'restarting' a calorie cut and exercise program.
also as others have said, exercise calorie estimators (whether the machine or a fitbit or similar device) can grossly overestimate. While 400/cals per hour doesn't seem stupidly high (for me), depending on what your stats and activity are, it could be. eating back about half that is generally recommended until you get an idea of how your body actually responds to it. Losing too fast, eat back a few more calories. too slow or not at all, reduce calories.
That also assumes you are weighing and logging your food accurately, which can be a whole other can of worms and where many people come into issues.
For MYSELF (who is an old hand at this), I purposely don't eat back many exercise calories. If I am hungry, or trying to fit in something I otherwise wouldn't, I will, but (again, for ME), it gives me a margin of error for any logging inaccuracies (and in general I am pretty good at it) or days where I don't workout. It is what I have found works for me. But I also don't have my calories set super low. They are set at 1500/day. This makes for a slower rate of loss, but makes it so I am not miserable.
This big thing to keep in mind with all of this, is that weight loss is not linear. You can do everything PERFECT (and no one does 100% of the time) and still see a gain on the scale. Our bodies retain water, stress and sleep can affect it, weight ebbs and flows for a variety of reasons, and that's normal.0 -
SouthWestLondon wrote: »I haven't logged exercise. I use MFP for logging my calories in, but depend on my Fitbit for measuring calories out. I didn't like the idea of 'eating back' my calories. It was just slightly too close to a 'reward system' for me (I know that might not be how others use it, but I think my mind would see it that way).
So I just stick to a fairly fixed maximum calorie allowance of 1750, and rely on the fitbit to burn at least 2750.
Though I do have questions about the fitbit's calorie accuracy too - I've been burning about 3300 the last three days with mostly sedantary days with long (c90 minutes) and moderate intensity walks. These walks have added 600-1000 calories burned, presumably based on my heart rate while walking. But that feels quite high for a walk, so I'm taking it with a little pinch of salt.
Yes, the Fitbit slipping into HR-calculated calorie burn on the low end of the aerobic range will be inflated calorie burn. Manually log the walk on Fitbit afterwards using the known distance and time - the calculated calorie burn will be correct now and replace whatever Fitbit came up with.
And no you don't have to log exercise on MFP when you have a tracker synced - different discussion, and your exercise is included in your method if you think about it.
Burning more does count as it should.
Just as burning less better count too, and eating less. That's usually what has people here losing weight, failure on both directions.2 -
With apologies, I see that I dived into the exercise estimating side of this, should've answered the core question, too.
I've striven to estimate my exercise calories as accurately as possible - it's imperfect, but there are reasonable and improbable methods, and the closest-to-best ones vary by exercise type. I've eaten back pretty much every exercise calorie since starting MFP/counting back in 2015. My weight has behaved as expected for 5+ years since of logging . . . *after* that initial period where first we figure out how to log food semi-accurately (it's a skill, takes learning/practice), then spend a month or so figuring out whether MFP (or any other calculator/tracker) accurately estimate our calorie needs. They're close for most people, perhaps a bit high or low for some, but can be meaningfully far off for a relatively rare few.
Because I was old (59 at the time) and sedentary outside of intentional exercise, MFP estimated 1200+exercise for me, to lose at what was then a reasonable loss rate for my size (5'5", started at 183, joined MFP in mid-150s). Its estimate was definitely too low, as I'm one of the weird outliers. I felt great, not hungry, until I hit a wall. I was suddenly weak and fatigued, and it took several weeks to recover fully, despite correcting quickly.
I do urge caution for those just starting out, because the consequences of estimating intake too low (health risks increase!) are more concerning than the consequences of estimating intake too high (slow/no loss for a month or so).
OP, if you used MFP as per directions, and set your activity level based on activity level in your daily life before exercise, you should be eating back a reasonable estimate of your exercise calories. Don't risk your health and energy level. It's counterproductive (fatigue => less movement in daily life, lower exercise intensity => even lower calorie burn).
I think someone already mentioned that too big a deficit (trying to lose fast) can increase stress-related water retention, and make the scale look like loss is happening slowly, or not at all. Please be cautious.
4 -
SouthWestLondon wrote: »I haven't logged exercise. I use MFP for logging my calories in, but depend on my Fitbit for measuring calories out. I didn't like the idea of 'eating back' my calories. It was just slightly too close to a 'reward system' for me (I know that might not be how others use it, but I think my mind would see it that way).
So I just stick to a fairly fixed maximum calorie allowance of 1750, and rely on the fitbit to burn at least 2750.
Though I do have questions about the fitbit's calorie accuracy too - I've been burning about 3300 the last three days with mostly sedantary days with long (c90 minutes) and moderate intensity walks. These walks have added 600-1000 calories burned, presumably based on my heart rate while walking. But that feels quite high for a walk, so I'm taking it with a little pinch of salt.
I see nothing wrong with using exercise as a reward system. I didn't log for about 2 months and I noticed I was exercising less.4 -
Why wouldn't you account for exercise...exercise calories aren't some kind of different calorie than your BMR or your daily activity...people account for those, so I really don't see the dilemma in accounting for exercise.
I do not use MFP's method for accounting for exercise...I use the TDEE method for which exercise is rolled up into my total activity level and what my average daily calories would need to be to maintain weight, and then I cut from that TDEE number. It's really 6 of 1, half dozen of the other though. When I did use the MFP method of logging exercise and earning additional calories to account for that activity, I was eating roughly the same total calories as I do with TDEE.4 -
kshama2001 wrote: »SouthWestLondon wrote: »I haven't logged exercise. I use MFP for logging my calories in, but depend on my Fitbit for measuring calories out. I didn't like the idea of 'eating back' my calories. It was just slightly too close to a 'reward system' for me (I know that might not be how others use it, but I think my mind would see it that way).
So I just stick to a fairly fixed maximum calorie allowance of 1750, and rely on the fitbit to burn at least 2750.
Though I do have questions about the fitbit's calorie accuracy too - I've been burning about 3300 the last three days with mostly sedantary days with long (c90 minutes) and moderate intensity walks. These walks have added 600-1000 calories burned, presumably based on my heart rate while walking. But that feels quite high for a walk, so I'm taking it with a little pinch of salt.
I see nothing wrong with using exercise as a reward system. I didn't log for about 2 months and I noticed I was exercising less.
I'll go even further. Using exercise as a reward was the key for me to lose weight and get fit.7 -
I used to eat back some exercise calories but have just switched up to eating 1700 cal per day regardless of a heavy exercise day or a day off. Seems to be working for me.0
-
I add the net calories from my Apple watch for my exercise. I do the "indoor walk" for the treadmill and the "strength training" for crunches/weight lifting. Since weight exercises in MFP don't add calories I enter the number of minutes in the 3mph walking entry that totals the combined net. I'm losing weight every week (outside of the two week holiday period) so this seems to work OK. Some days I eat nearly all of the exercise calories back and other days only partially. I'm finding that as I get smaller I get full faster and can't always finish my meal.0
-
LazyBlondeChef wrote: »I add the net calories from my Apple watch for my exercise. I do the "indoor walk" for the treadmill and the "strength training" for crunches/weight lifting. Since weight exercises in MFP don't add calories I enter the number of minutes in the 3mph walking entry that totals the combined net. I'm losing weight every week (outside of the two week holiday period) so this seems to work OK. Some days I eat nearly all of the exercise calories back and other days only partially. I'm finding that as I get smaller I get full faster and can't always finish my meal.
@LazyBlondeChef
It's not that strength exercises don't have calorie allotments it's that the strength part of the diary is just a journal with no calorie functionality.
Search for the "strength training" entry in the cardiovascular part of the exercise diary. (Or cicuit training for fast-paced weights workouts.)
2 -
I used to eat back some exercise calories but have just switched up to eating 1700 cal per day regardless of a heavy exercise day or a day off. Seems to be working for me.
That's a good solution for people who want to have the same calorie allowance every day, but for anyone who doesn't have enough valid personal experiential logging data to calculate a personalized TDEE estimate, they'd be better off using a TDEE calculator to get a goal that averages in their exercise activity more explicitly. (The activity multipliers MFP uses have one set of assumptions, the TDEE calculators have another, loosely speaking.)
And as previously stated, this isn't a relevant issue for folks who sync a tracker to MFP for calorie adjustments (. . . though there can be *other* issues with that 😆).
On the TDEE estimation front, I like Sailrabbit among the public web TDEE estimators (more activity levels than some others, clearer descriptions of them, lets the user compare multiple research-based formulas in one spot - at https://www.sailrabbit.com/bmr/). Even better, that nice Mr. heybales' "Just TDEE Please" spreadsheet.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G7FgNzPq3v5WMjDtH0n93LXSMRY_hjmzNTMJb3aZSxM/edit?usp=sharing2 -
I used to eat back some exercise calories but have just switched up to eating 1700 cal per day regardless of a heavy exercise day or a day off. Seems to be working for me.
I think you are in danger of confusing the issue here with your terminology, if you are setting a same every day (TDEE) goal you are eating exercise calories. Just averaged out instead of variable.
Your repeated struggles to eat enough to fuel your extensive exercise routine could be a warning to others not to feel any guilt about taking into account what is a perfectly normal calorie need for your body.6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions