Exercise Calories-To Count or Not to Count

It depends on many factors as far as what you should be doing. The best test is to either add or add 50% of those calories or none. You'll know how your equation is working after reviewing progress or lack of it in 4 weeks or so. Adjust at that point.

Anecdotally I don't figure exercise calories. That's just one more number that may or may not be accurate. When I'm in fatloss mode I lose 1 lb a week.

MFP calculations and equations are only as accurate as the data you give it.

Accurate calorie counting and tracking
Selecting the correct food entries
Proper lifestyle category
Proper exercise entries (many can be overstated)

If any of these are inaccurate you won’t get the results you expect. I doubt anyone is spot on with all categories so it become a matter of compensation.

tomcustombuilder wrote: »

MFP calculations and equations are only as accurate as the data you give it.

All these tools use population estimates. So part of this is also how close your personal reality tracks to the population estimates. So no matter what the experiment has to be run for your own reality

Fattyohfat wrote: »

I don't record my exercise. I tried, and it was just to much research, and guessing etc. I go to the gym 3-4 times a week, and do 15 minutes of cardio and 30 minutes of weights. All I want is to elevate my heart rate. So as long as I am sweaty and tired at the end I don't worry about it. I just try and make sure I hit my macros and my calorie numbers. Two months in 40-ish lbs lost.

I realize that you may be starting from a higher weight level and that these numbers may actually be quite good in your particular n=1. In general, though, approximately 5lbs a week more than doubles the generally suggested maximum rates of loss and probably far exceeds the 0.5% to 1% of bodyweight lost per week that most people end up finding to be more "sustainable" (for lack of better word) over the longer term. Yes I realize that part of this may be initial weight loss and especially if aiming for lower levels of carbs part of it may be temporary water weight removal that is expected to come back. But if we take it at face value 40 x 3500 = 140,000 / number of days = effective deficit you've applied per day... regardless of what you may have been aiming for. That said: awesome results so far; but do remain willing to adjust with your eye towards sustainability of effort... because five years from now it would be nice to see you here talking about how long you've been maintaining your weight loss!

Like Riverside, I've always estimated my exercise calories separately (and carefully), and have eaten them all back - all through about a year of loss from obese to a healthy weight, and 7+ years maintaining a healthy weight since.

My body weight outcomes have varied predictably with calorie intake, after a period at the start when I was figuring out whether I was average (i.e., matched the calculator estimates) or not. (The answer was "not" . . . so using my own experience data to adjust was essential.) Riverside's point about being consistent for weeks at the beginning to get clean experience data - that's IMIO a really smart point.

My preferred exercises are weather dependent, and my overall routine varies seasonally. I probably exercise more than the average person, most of the time. However, I do have times when I'm unable to exercise (illness, surgical recovery, injury . . . .), occasionally for weeks at a time. For those reasons, my daily calorie expenditure can vary quite a lot, and it's most useful to me to have ways to adjust my eating intelligently alongside.

Let's say someone estimates their calorie needs without considering exercise, sets a very aggressive loss rate (2 pounds/week would be aggressive for quite a range of people), and does several hundred (accurate) calories of exercise most days. If they eat back zero exercise calories, I think they're asking for trouble. It's a health risk, and usually not sustainable in the long run. (Fast loss isn't necessarily better!)

At the opposite extreme, where someone selects a gradual loss rate, does only a relatively small amount of exercise 3x a week or something, and doesn't eat back exercise calories . . . they'll probably be fine letting the exercise increase their loss rate.

Anything in between those two extremes is a question of how much health and sustainability risk a person wants to accept. Personally, I don't like betting my health.

What really matters is keeping actual loss rate at a sensible level, no matter how one does the math, though. Sensible, IMO, means 0.5-1% of current weight lost per week, with a bias toward the lower end of that unless severely obese and under close medical supervision for deficiencies or complications.