Another calorie intake question.

No.

When people starve, they are on starvation diets. These are defined as 50% of your calorie needs or less. No one who is eating 2000 calorie a day is starving. Well, Michael Phelps maybe.

The idea that people have to eat more to lose weight is a big misunderstanding of the science of dieting anyway. Anyone who reduces their calories will experience a slow down in their metabolism even if they are just operating at a small deficit. But it's not enough to stop weight loss. Weight loss stops when your calories in is the same (or greater) than your calories out.

OTOH, there is a point of diminishing returns. IOW, it's not a more is better kind of deal. For example, if you need 2000 calories a day to maintain and you eat 1500, you will lose about a pound a week. If you lower it to 1000 calories, you may lose 2 lb. a week, but you may only lose 1.75. But if you lower it to 500 calories, you risk malnutrition and you probably will only lose 2.25 lb. a week. So it really isn't worth it. It's a lot of suffering to lose an extra .25 lb. a week.

This assumes that you don't subconsciously (or even consciously) lower your energy expenditure as you lower your calories, of course.

Maybe drinking some Odwalla or Acai Berry Juice? They are good for your health, and if you have a few calories left to consum, it's worth to have all your vitamins and antioxidants!

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


contrary to the previous post, so-called "starvation mode" aka "depressed metabolism" IS real, and will slow your progress if you eat too little.

your body is just like an engine, if it has no fuel, it will not run properly.
when your intake is too low, it becomes harder to lose weight because your body feels it must ration the remaining stored energy (fat) it has left.

EAT your exercise calories. if your burn off 400 in exercise, and your daily is set at 1200, you eat 1600 that day.

It should be noted that eating back exercise calories is not putting "junk back in your body" unless of course, you eat junk food.

BUT, once you start eating at a maintenance level, your body will convert everything you eat to fat because you've been in starvation mode and you will gain all that weight back again - and more. That's what creates the yo-yo dieting effect people see all the time. You eat too few cals, yes, you lose weight, temporarily... and you will gain it all back even on maintenance calories. Once in a while is not going to hurt you (to go under 1200 or whatever the number is for your body).

Also, if you have lots of weight to lose, you can get away with doing that much easier than people with not much to lose. Example, I can get away with a much lower cal diet because I have a lot to lose, like the PP who has 98 pounds to lose. But if you have 30 to lose instead, you will not be as successful.

There are some people on here who have been successful with eating back your exercise cals, and some claim you don't need to. Just be aware of the potential problems if you aren't putting the fuel into your body that it needs.

And to answer the PP question as to why eat what you've worked off - there are two things. FIrst, MFP creates a calorie deficit for you, it does not include working out. So by working off a bunch of cals you then have created a double deficit and you do need to fuel your body. You can change MFP to be maintenance instead for your calorie intake and then work off the cals you don't want to eat, staying above 1200.

You also need to be aware that your body will take the quickest, easiest fuel - and that's muscle. So you need to also build your muscles so that your body will take stored body fat for energy rather than muscle (another reason a starvation diet isn't going to do you any good, you'll lose muscle first over fat).

BUT, once you start eating at a maintenance level, your body will convert everything you eat to fat because you've been in starvation mode and you will gain all that weight back again - and more. That's what creates the yo-yo dieting effect people see all the time.

There is no clinical evidence to support this. Not only that, it completely defies the laws of physics! If you eat as many calories as you consume, you will not gain weight. Excess calories are converted to fat. If you have no excess calories, they can't be converted to fat.

The reason people gain the weight back is because our bodies were designed for famine times and every time we go on a diet, our bodies think there is a famine. Once the famine (diet) is over, they decide it's important to gain that weight back -- plus a cushion -- in case there is another famine (diet) again. So they increase our production of ghrelin (among other things). The ghrelin in particular gives people a voracious appetite.

In studies of ghrelin, it was shown that the morbidly obese had 3x as much ghrelin as normal people, btw. They also fed it to rats and the humans after they had eaten to satiety. Even though the people reported being full, once they got the ghrelin given to them, they went nuts trying to eat everything in sight. It's a very powerful hormone!

But I digress.... the important thing is... if you only eat as much as you use, you won't gain weight. Also, this effect -- of putting the weight back on -- happens with *every* diet, not just with starvation diets.

Oh, and in the Minnesota study, when the study was over, the men mostly went back to their normal weight. This has been shown time and time again, btw. There are many studies where they had people lose or gain weight (or both!) and the normal weighted people mostly all go back to their original weights when it was over while the overweight people put their overweight back on, plus a cushion. It seems that some people's bodies are entirely too efficient at processing calories and entirely too sensitive to "famine."

But again, not eating your exercise calories does not put most people into starvation mode so it's all moot. The men in the study didn't go into "starvation mode" until their body fat had dropped dramatically. Even those who believe in starvation mode, like Tom Venuto, say that it's not easy to get into and you don't drop into it just from not eating enough calories for a meal or even a few days.

It's really convenient to think that the key to losing weight is to eat more. But it's magic thinking. Most people who plateau do so because they are eating too much and/or exercising too little or because of temporary water weight gains as glycogen is remove and then put back into the muscles in response to diet and exercise.

BUT, once you start eating at a maintenance level, your body will convert everything you eat to fat because you've been in starvation mode and you will gain all that weight back again - and more. That's what creates the yo-yo dieting effect people see all the time.

There is no clinical evidence to support this. Not only that, it completely defies the laws of physics! If you eat as many calories as you consume, you will not gain weight. Excess calories are converted to fat. If you have no excess calories, they can't be converted to fat.

The reason people gain the weight back is because our bodies were designed for famine times and every time we go on a diet, our bodies think there is a famine. Once the famine (diet) is over, they decide it's important to gain that weight back -- plus a cushion -- in case there is another famine (diet) again. So they increase our production of ghrelin (among other things). The ghrelin in particular gives people a voracious appetite.

In studies of ghrelin, it was shown that the morbidly obese had 3x as much ghrelin as normal people, btw. They also fed it to rats and the humans after they had eaten to satiety. Even though the people reported being full, once they got the ghrelin given to them, they went nuts trying to eat everything in sight. It's a very powerful hormone!

But I digress.... the important thing is... if you only eat as much as you use, you won't gain weight. Also, this effect -- of putting the weight back on -- happens with *every* diet, not just with starvation diets.

Oh, and in the Minnesota study, when the study was over, the men mostly went back to their normal weight. This has been shown time and time again, btw. There are many studies where they had people lose or gain weight (or both!) and the normal weighted people mostly all go back to their original weights when it was over while the overweight people put their overweight back on, plus a cushion. It seems that some people's bodies are entirely too efficient at processing calories and entirely too sensitive to "famine."

But again, not eating your exercise calories does not put most people into starvation mode so it's all moot. The men in the study didn't go into "starvation mode" until their body fat had dropped dramatically. Even those who believe in starvation mode, like Tom Venuto, say that it's not easy to get into and you don't drop into it just from not eating enough calories for a meal or even a few days.

It's really convenient to think that the key to losing weight is to eat more. But it's magic thinking. Most people who plateau do so because they are eating too much and/or exercising too little or because of temporary water weight gains as glycogen is remove and then put back into the muscles in response to diet and exercise.

Please post the links to these studies. Thanks!!!

Mac Madame,
Thank you for taking the time to enter all the information on the use of calories. I was so confused by the extra calories I had at the end of the day when I entered my exercise and food for the day.
I was trying to eat the recommended 1200 calories for the day then after entering my food and exercise for the day it would tell my I had around 600 calories remaining at the end of the day. It just didn't make sense. I think I should stick to my allotted 1200 calorie a day regimine and ignore the extra calories I earn by working out. I mean really if we are allowed 1200 per day shouldn't that be offset by all the activities we do during the day including exercising?

I am not a large person I just want to burn the fat and build the muscle for a better physique.

Hey Lucky,

I just did and then I BUMPED the post because I think everone needs to read it!!!!!
We have all learned that we have to burn off more than we consume. However, we do not realized how much the body needs to just function normally on a day to day basis. Then when we add extreme exercise programs on top of that.... now I see why they add calories to the intake after exercising.

I will happily eat my extra calories throughout the day as well as spread them out into more even proportions by utilizing my snacks as mini meals.

Thanks for the recommeded reading Lucky!!!

But he also says that some of that fat stored is harder to get to when you do not have a lot of extra fat on your body, it gets harder and harder for the body to convert that fat as "quickly" and therefore it will burn the muscle before taking the time to convert the fat into a burnable substance and therefore it will take whatever is most easily accessible which is muscle unless you consume some complex carbs for it to feed on.

I did find the list of links for newbies on the general weight lost catagory right after I read your previous post. However, if the there was an area specific for "newbies", like me, to be directed to these posts which contain this specific information at the very beginning I would have felt a much better sense of direction at the beginning. Luckily I am very curious and tend to research many areas of the message boards "as time allows" I am slowly finding these posts by supportive members like yourself who points me in the right direction. Some may not have the time to search or post and for them I think it would be great to have a collaboration of these beneficial posts right in front of the newbies face upon joining the site. That's all...Thanks for your help

Please post the links to these studies. Thanks!!!

Here you go:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/11/60II/main543614.shtml

(not a study but talks about the mouse study)

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/satter17.htm

(talks about studies)

http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/endocrine/gi/ghrelin.html

(all about ghrelin)

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/346/21/1623

(study of ghrelin in dieters vs. those who had gastric bypass)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18376181?ordinalpos=12&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
(compares ghrelin in bypass vs. vertical sleeve gastrectomy where that part of the stomach is actually removed)

interesting posts from a person who lost weight through drastic, invasive surgery.

Nice ad hominem attack.

contrary to the previous post, so-called "starvation mode" aka "depressed metabolism" IS real, and will slow your progress if you eat too little.

That's not what clinical data shows. It shows that, even when on a starvation diet, people continue to lose weight. Yes, their metabolism slows down. In the famous Minnesota study on starvation done in the 40s, by the time the guys were on their starvation diet for months and had 5% body fat, their metabolism had slowed down 40%!

BUT they were still losing weight. If you maintain a calorie deficit, you will lose weight because you are expending more energy than you are taking in. There is a point of diminishing returns and there are other risks to starving yourself, but not losing weight is not one of them.

Btw, a starvation diet is defined as eating 50% of your energy expenditure or less. It's not defined as not eating your exercise calories.

You're confusing a starvation diet with starvation mode or the technical term of "famine response" they are two different things.

You are correct in your statement of a starvation diet being defined as 50% of your maintenance calories, But the famine response can start at far higher then that. When the body perceives there to be few calories coming in then it needs to sustain healthy metabolic activity, the body starts the systemic slow down of enzyme production, hormone release (except for a couple of fat storage hormones like cortisol), and organ function. This lowers the amount of fuel we need, and it also increases the storage of fat. The body will normally start seeing this type of deficiency at around 75% of maintenance calories (which, ironically, is around where your BMR is).

You are also correct in the statement that there's no point where the body will STOP losing weight when we are at caloric deficit, even in famine mode. The problem is, when we are in a high deficit mode, our body looks for ways to trim off excess calorie burn, the first thing to go in this situation is muscle and lean tissue, as they are both active calorie users (as opposed to fat, which really doesn't burn any calories, like 1 per day per lb). Losing weight by extreme malnutrition just makes us lose muscle, which gives us a higher body fat %, which makes it harder to lose weight, which lowers our metabolic rate, which adds more fat...etc. vicious cycle.

Side note (added after), you MUST realize that this is true for people who ARE NOT in the obese and morbidly obese category, its a whole different set of calorie rules for them. People who have lots and lots of fat stores, don't have the same body responses to extreme calorie deficits as others. Which is why someone who has a BMI of say ...35 can eat 1100 calories a day NET (after exercise) and still lose 2 to 4 lbs a week without significant muscle loss. But eventually, once they drop enough fat, these rules WILL start to apply for them. You need to be concious of this, and know that as you approach the "overweight" range, you need to decrease your deficit and start adding in muscle building activity to your cardio workouts (best to have them in there from the start as it will make the transition less dramatic for the body).

so i get that i should eat my exercise calories, but what if i reach a point where i am full & its 8pm. i really try to not eat after 7pm but often times, i find that i have 700+ calories left over from exercise....


i like to leave a deficit since i guesstimate most of my food serving sizes (due to lack of time), but often workout 2x/day for an hour each time.....

should i eat those extra calories late in the evening or just add more to the next day????

so if you have a 700 calorie difference from what you have eaten and what you're suppose to eat (assuming you are following the MFP guidelines) then you need to do some more planning and better map out the food you will eat for the day. If you think you might be exercising, account for that in the food you plan for. For instance, when I'm going to work out I plan for 3300 calories a day, where normally I have a 2850 calorie allowance (I'm a big guy, and at maintenance so...)

interesting posts from a person who lost weight through drastic, invasive surgery.

Nice ad hominem attack.

just the facts, no attack.

but it does come off a little "do as I say, not as I do"