New to calorie counting & a little confused

I agree, make sure you eat net 1200, meaning you should eat back at least the majority of your exercise calories.

I started out at 165 and I have been eating back almost all of my exercise calories. Actually my main motivation for exercising in the beginning was just the fact that I wanted to eat more. I did not enjoy exercising at all in the beginning so the only reason I even exercised was b/c I was hungry. LOL Now I'm to the point that I actually do enjoy my workouts and the results they get me, but I still eat my exercise calories b/c they are still just as delicious. LOL There is a huge debate on this site over eating exercise calories, there are different ways to look at it and everyone has an opinion. One thing to keep in mind is HOW you are getting your exercise calorie numbers. If you are using estimates given by gym machines or by plugging in numbers on MFP, they might be very inaccurate. If you are getting your exercise calorie numbers from a heartrate monitor, they are likely more accurate as they are taking your actual effort into account.

Eat 1200 NET calories while eating back your exercise calories. MFP already created a calorie deficit for you to lose x pounds a week. Netting less than 1200 could be counter productive.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/10589-for-those-confused-or-questioning-eating-your-exercise-calo

I agree!

Me too!

MFP will also give you more calories but still with a deficit if you reduce the # of lbs you want to lose per week in your goals. Some people have more success when they actually eat more...esp with a lower weight like you have.

I only eat back my excercise calories if I am Hungry. MFP has my goal at 1.7lbs a week but on a good week I can loose 2-2.8lbs.

Ooh, that's not something I'd thought of. I guess it really does differ and depend on everyone's bodies, huh? Hopefully I can figure out what works best for mine.

it doesn't differ that much. It's all based on basal metabolic rates (BMR aka your metabolism) and the amount of energy you expend throughout the day or your total daily energy expended (TDEE). The more energy you expend, the more you need to eat or your body will cannibalize your muscle. And since your metabolism is a function of muscle mass, the less muscle you have, the slower your metabolism is. This is why slower weight loss is much more beneficial in the long run than quick weight loss. This is one affect of programs like HCG where you only eat 500 calories; 50% of the weight loss is muscle which really kills the metabolism. What most people dont' realize, when losing the weight quick, it's not fat they are burning, it's fat and muscle. If you concentrate more on recomposition (turning fat into muscle or reducing fat without loss of muscle) you end up maintain a strong metabolism and will decrease your waistline quick. Also, as you continue with very low calories, your body adjust and learns how to function on less. This leads to plateaus, which can take weeks or months to fix. And lastly, when you eat very low calories for so long, what do you think happens when you stop eating that low?

Something to think about.

Also, if you want a true picture of your BMR, i would advise getting your body fat read (with body calipers) and it will provide a better estimate than the BMR calculator on the boards. To let you know, the BMR calc online under estimated mine by 250 calories.