Eating your workout calories?

Options
BrittSwimsJDRF
BrittSwimsJDRF Posts: 50 Member
in Food and Nutrition
I've been doing this a while, and I see this a lot on the forums, but I have never really been able to clarify. What does this mean exactly? Does this mean that I should be eating my 1200 calories, plus whatever exercise calories I burn to net 1200? Any advice would be great!
«1

Replies

  • CoCoMa
    CoCoMa Posts: 906 Member
    Options
    Yes, that's what it means, but it's been a hot topic on the forum, with varying opinions.
  • sineadangele1
    sineadangele1 Posts: 97 Member
    Options
    it means exactly that
  • nirvana1
    nirvana1 Posts: 58
    Options
    I would really like to know this too, Jillian Michaels said I should be burning off what I eat on the plan I read earlier today!
  • brooke0206
    brooke0206 Posts: 255 Member
    Options
    Every one has a different opinion of this.... Some people dont eat back their exercise calories and some do. MFP says you should so that you dont go too low and throw your body into starvation mode.
  • PBJunkie
    PBJunkie Posts: 652
    Options
    I've been doing this a while, and I see this a lot on the forums, but I have never really been able to clarify. What does this mean exactly? Does this mean that I should be eating my 1200 calories, plus whatever exercise calories I burn to net 1200? Any advice would be great!
    Yes, that's what it means, but it's been a hot topic on the forum, with varying oppinions.
    it means exactly that

    That doesn't make any sense, why would you exercise in the first place and not only eat 1200 calories to lose weight instead of exercising and consume more calories so the net would be 1200??
  • surfinbernard
    surfinbernard Posts: 53
    Options
    Yes it seems you can 'earn' extra calories with exercise as with many diets. However we are all different and while some people will still lose happily while eating the extra calories I know that if I try to create a chunk of my deficit with exercise it doesn't work. Only eating less works for me unfortunately. I would try it to see if you can have the extra calories and still achieve a loss, if you can great. If not then stick to 1200 or just allow yourself a percentage of your workout calories rather than all of them.
  • DoncasterPhotography
    DoncasterPhotography Posts: 147 Member
    Options
    I would really like to know this too, Jillian Michaels said I should be burning off what I eat on the plan I read earlier today!

    but does J M know that you're already eating a cal deficit ?

    Read this.... Digest... Understand. :o)


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/186814-some-mfp-basics
  • Dandersonjr32
    Dandersonjr32 Posts: 73
    Options
    This must be something new, as in the last few months. It must be a new phrase for the old idea of adjusting your diet according to how intense your exercise routine is.

    I can see the merits of this in some part. You need to fuel your exercise and ensure that you're burning fat and not lean muscle. However, weight loss is a simple matter of calories in < calories out, so if you want to lose weight you eat less than you burn.

    This site is great for letting you know what your BMR is and how much (approximately) you burn during your workouts. Adjust your diet to that.
  • exacerbe
    exacerbe Posts: 447 Member
    Options
    I've been doing this a while, and I see this a lot on the forums, but I have never really been able to clarify. What does this mean exactly? Does this mean that I should be eating my 1200 calories, plus whatever exercise calories I burn to net 1200? Any advice would be great!
    Yes, that's what it means, but it's been a hot topic on the forum, with varying oppinions.
    it means exactly that

    That doesn't make any sense, why would you exercise in the first place and not only eat 1200 calories to lose weight instead of exercising and consume more calories so the net would be 1200??

    I don't understand your post. Your body uses about 1200 calories for minimal functioning (give or take). If you use more energy through exercise, you have to consume more calories... otherwise, your body would start breaking down muscle, organs, etc... just to stay alive.
  • Sepheara
    Sepheara Posts: 208 Member
    Options
    if you click "My Home" and "Goals" you'll see that MFP has already calculated you a deficit. for example your diet profile shows you how many calories your body, without exercise, burns in a day. And then it shows you how much you are eating in. So theoreticly, just by cutting calories you will lose weight. And if you exercise and don't eat your calories back (at least some of them) the deficit from exercise plus the deficit from mfp can put you into starvation mode. I usually eat back at least some of them.
  • veganbaum
    veganbaum Posts: 1,865 Member
    Options
    I would really like to know this too, Jillian Michaels said I should be burning off what I eat on the plan I read earlier today!

    but does J M know that you're already eating a cal deficit ?

    Read this.... Digest... Understand. :o)


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/186814-some-mfp-basics

    PLEASE, for those of you who who may not understand the way MFP is set up - read this link. MFP gives you a deficit BEFORE exercise based on the information you put in under your settings/goals. You ALREADY have healthy deficit to lose weight. When you exercise, you need to eat those calories in order to keep your body properly fueled nutrition-wise, otherwise you run the risk of creating a much larger deficit that can, for some people, become dangerous. Yes - it's all about the numbers - but if you don't understand what numbers MFP is using and giving you, then you won't understand the concept of eating your exercise calories. Please read the link for a detailed explanation. The go ahead and make your informed choice to eat or not to eat them.
  • PeeTeePee
    PeeTeePee Posts: 235 Member
    Options
    When you start MFP you enter your weight, sex, height, etc and also how much weight you want to lose each week. You are then given a calorie 'allowance' that would help you reach your weekly weight loss. This will be lower than a calorie intake to remain stable.

    For example, I need 2,100 calories a day, but to lose 1lb a week I'm allocated 1,600 calories a day. If I exercise I'll burn up some of my calories, let's say 250. So my calorie intake is 1,600-250 = 1,350. This means I need to eat an 'extra' 250 calories to get back to my allowance of 1,600. If I don't eat back, I'll lose weight quicker, but I also risk my body going into starvation mode, which would be worse for me.
  • 84jeepster
    84jeepster Posts: 198 Member
    Options
    if you click "My Home" and "Goals" you'll see that MFP has already calculated you a deficit. for example your diet profile shows you how many calories your body, without exercise, burns in a day. And then it shows you how much you are eating in. So theoreticly, just by cutting calories you will lose weight. And if you exercise and don't eat your calories back (at least some of them) the deficit from exercise plus the deficit from mfp can put you into starvation mode. I usually eat back at least some of them.

    This is a great explanation. When I joined MFP a few weeks ago, it took a few minutes to read through the info about eating your exercise calories. It makes sense once you understand that MFP already accounted for a deficit to lose the amount of weight/wk that you origianally selected when setting up your account. I eat some of them back some of the time, but more often then not, I eat most of them.
  • PBJunkie
    PBJunkie Posts: 652
    Options
    I've been doing this a while, and I see this a lot on the forums, but I have never really been able to clarify. What does this mean exactly? Does this mean that I should be eating my 1200 calories, plus whatever exercise calories I burn to net 1200? Any advice would be great!
    Yes, that's what it means, but it's been a hot topic on the forum, with varying oppinions.
    it means exactly that

    That doesn't make any sense, why would you exercise in the first place and not only eat 1200 calories to lose weight instead of exercising and consume more calories so the net would be 1200??

    I don't understand your post. Your body uses about 1200 calories for minimal functioning (give or take). If you use more energy through exercise, you have to consume more calories... otherwise, your body would start breaking down muscle, organs, etc... just to stay alive.

    No....the activity level that you chose already took that into account. You should not consume more calories as you have to stay in a deficit and as you eat more the smaller the deficit and the slower the rate of fat loss.
  • jumperchick
    jumperchick Posts: 79
    Options
    i try to eat them all back, sometimes im not hungry enough to though.
  • PBJunkie
    PBJunkie Posts: 652
    Options
    Do yourself a favour and do this manually...

    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121703981

    Simply read the thread and use the Katch-McArdle formula to calculate your true calorie needs.
  • Getting2KnowMe
    Getting2KnowMe Posts: 28 Member
    Options
    I would really like to know this too, Jillian Michaels said I should be burning off what I eat on the plan I read earlier today!

    but does J M know that you're already eating a cal deficit ?

    Read this.... Digest... Understand. :o)


    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/186814-some-mfp-basics

    Thank you for sharing! This is the best summary I have seen yet. I really appreciate passing on this info, I just started in August and wasn't sure how this all worked together.
  • 84jeepster
    84jeepster Posts: 198 Member
    Options
    I've been doing this a while, and I see this a lot on the forums, but I have never really been able to clarify. What does this mean exactly? Does this mean that I should be eating my 1200 calories, plus whatever exercise calories I burn to net 1200? Any advice would be great!
    Yes, that's what it means, but it's been a hot topic on the forum, with varying oppinions.
    it means exactly that

    That doesn't make any sense, why would you exercise in the first place and not only eat 1200 calories to lose weight instead of exercising and consume more calories so the net would be 1200??

    I don't understand your post. Your body uses about 1200 calories for minimal functioning (give or take). If you use more energy through exercise, you have to consume more calories... otherwise, your body would start breaking down muscle, organs, etc... just to stay alive.

    No....the activity level that you chose already took that into account. You should not consume more calories as you have to stay in a deficit and as you eat more the smaller the deficit and the slower the rate of fat loss.

    The deficit should always be the same. For example, your daily deficit is 1000 normally. If you burn 500 additionals cals by exercising and you eat 500 cals more, it zeros out and your deficit is still 1000.
  • Coltsman4ever
    Coltsman4ever Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    Do yourself a favour and do this manually...

    http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121703981

    Simply read the thread and use the Katch-McArdle formula to calculate your true calorie needs.
    I followed the link, did the calcs and it came out the same as what MFP has me at.
  • PBJunkie
    PBJunkie Posts: 652
    Options
    The deficit should always be the same. For example, your daily deficit is 1000 normally. If you burn 500 additionals cals by exercising and you eat 500 cals more, it zeros out and your deficit is still 1000.

    "additional" not your initial activity level or the amount of exercise that you have specified when setting up your goals then yes you can eat the calories back. Not otherwise.

Categories