....and tell me why I would want to eat back the calories?

2

Replies

  • Nopedotjpeg
    Nopedotjpeg Posts: 1,805 Member
    Does anybody have a link to an actual scientific study reinforcing this?

    Yes, popular belief is that you need to eat back the calories, that you shouldn't go under 1200 per day, etc., but everything I've been able to find that is an actual scientific study does NOT reinforce this theory.

    Just because a lot of people believe something, doesn't make it true.

    You can lose weight on a VLCD. I've found the starvation mode people sling around to be unfounded. However, the long term success of a VLCD is what's in question for me. I have no scientific studies to back anything about VLCD being more likely to gain back weight, however the large majority of people who lose weight, gain it back eventually. Restricting one's self to an extreme tends to trigger reactance that eventually explodes into no longer being able to eat so little, and overdoing it big time.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,416 Member
    Does anybody have a link to an actual scientific study reinforcing this?

    Yes, popular belief is that you need to eat back the calories, that you shouldn't go under 1200 per day, etc., but everything I've been able to find that is an actual scientific study does NOT reinforce this theory.

    Just because a lot of people believe something, doesn't make it true.

    Do what works for you.

    The people who believe it, have found it works for them.

    I ate my exercise calories all through my 52 pound loss. It worked for me. I've kept it off for four years - (give or take ten here and there.) When I reached my goal, I was already eating exactly where I needed to be to avoid gaining after the "diet".

    Experiment. Learn how this site works. Other sites don't give you an automatic deficit off the top of your food, and then ask you to input your exercise. This site gives you the option to exercise or not on any given day.


    .
  • sullyboo
    sullyboo Posts: 256 Member
    I eat mine back most of the time, I'm maintaining now so some days I eat more some days I eat less!! Balances out in the end (I've been doing MFP for tha last year). On the eating back exercise calories argument that is a constant battle on the forum pages my view is quite simply energy in energy out ..... Simple really !! :wink:
  • twinmama1987
    twinmama1987 Posts: 566 Member
    I just worry for those people who are eating those few calories, & losing weight.. ... its not fat you are burning.. its mostly muscle, which you need lean muscle to keep your metabolsim high, if you dont have enough lean muscle, the weight will just creep back on or itll be harder to keep it off.
  • sullyboo
    sullyboo Posts: 256 Member
    I just worry for those people who are eating those few calories, & losing weight.. ... its not fat you are burning.. its mostly muscle, which you need lean muscle to keep your metabolsim high, if you dont have enough lean muscle, the weight will just creep back on or itll be harder to keep it off.



    You are so right !! But I think everyone does it at the start don't they ... Restricts calorie intact thinking they will lose weight quicke.
  • irjeffb
    irjeffb Posts: 275 Member
    I just worry for those people who are eating those few calories, & losing weight.. ... its not fat you are burning.. its mostly muscle, which you need lean muscle to keep your metabolsim high, if you dont have enough lean muscle, the weight will just creep back on or itll be harder to keep it off.
    Most of the exercise calories I burn are walking or on the elliptical at the gym. I can feel and visibly see the difference in my leg muscles. I find it very hard to believe that I'm burning an unhealthy amount of muscle as opposed to building it.
  • twinmama1987
    twinmama1987 Posts: 566 Member
    Yeah you'll always lose some.. But i mean if you drop 50 lbs in 3 mos... chances are good that is a lot of muscle.. atleast in the beginning when that does happen you rebuild it with resistance workouts..
  • mamagooskie
    mamagooskie Posts: 2,964 Member
    you would possibly eat them because your workout was intense and made you hungry.
  • twinmama1987
    twinmama1987 Posts: 566 Member
    I just worry for those people who are eating those few calories, & losing weight.. ... its not fat you are burning.. its mostly muscle, which you need lean muscle to keep your metabolsim high, if you dont have enough lean muscle, the weight will just creep back on or itll be harder to keep it off.
    Most of the exercise calories I burn are walking or on the elliptical at the gym. I can feel and visibly see the difference in my leg muscles. I find it very hard to believe that I'm burning an unhealthy amount of muscle as opposed to building it.

    You cant really build a whole lot of muscle walking and whatnot... most of that is already there, naturally.. but whether you want to believe it or not, muscle will be burned away.
  • sickpetmom
    sickpetmom Posts: 5
    That info was really helpful and I can now understand how that works!!! Thanks
  • mkwongh
    mkwongh Posts: 279 Member
    You know your body best... If your hungry, Eat. If your not , Don't. I think people stress to much over it, when I have hard workouts I get very hungry the next day, therefore I eat more. That's just how my body works..it's different for everyone.
  • theflyingartist
    theflyingartist Posts: 385 Member
    Eating less than a NET of 1200 calories a day, for some people, can lead to a slowed metabolism. The net of 1200 a day is already a deficit. Netting 600 a day might help you lose weight in the short term, but in the long run it might hinder.

    THIS! This right here! I would have never had to do strength training daily if I cut my calories the right way, taking a smaller deficit (even 1/2 to 1 pound loss a week if you are extremely overweight) instead of cutting 600+ calories a day from my diet.

    Think of it this way: you're training your body to sustain itself on 600 calories a day. You burn 600 calories of food/energy in your workout, whether it comes from your fat or your muscle. Except if you consistently leave your body with less calories to work with, it will store any additional calories as fat for survival purposes. Biologically, we can't surpass this yet.
    Let's face it, we aren't going to eat perfectly every day to sustain fat loss forever. So to keep your healthy lifestyle consistent, just cut your calories by no more than 300 a day (that's 300 left over, at most).
    At the end of the day you will make your own decision. Your metabolism and blood sugar levels will hold you steady for the rest of your life if you take this other step, as painful and slow as it may seem right now.
  • Dtho5159
    Dtho5159 Posts: 1,054 Member
    I would suggest trying it both ways. I tried not eating any of them back and was hungry and cranky and really not losing. Ive lost 41lb by eating some back.. I usually keep 100 in reserve in case something isn't measured out right or I accidentally forget a seasoning or something weird. I have mine set for 2lb/week and usually eat the majority of them back. When I had it set for 1lb/week, I ate around half back. Just depends on what works for you.
  • gatecityradio
    gatecityradio Posts: 401
    The reality is, you should never eat back your exercise calories because they should already be factored into your daily caloric needs.......obviously you didn't do that.

    I don't see why anyone would do this....IMO. I have my calories set up for sedentary, because most days I'm in front of a computer at work. When I do exercise at the gym or ride my bike I add it as cardio or strength (isn't that what it's for anyway?) This way I know my calorie needs on a daily basis depending on if I worked out and how much I work out.

    I haven't been eating mine back on most days, mostly because if I'm not hungry I don't eat. I'm really early on in my diet so I can't say how this is working out for me.
  • tataliciousd89
    tataliciousd89 Posts: 465
    Eating less than a NET of 1200 calories a day, for some people, can lead to a slowed metabolism. The net of 1200 a day is already a deficit. Netting 600 a day might help you lose weight in the short term, but in the long run it might hinder.
    Absolutely. It will only work well for the first couple of weeks trust me. You dont have to eat back every single calorie, but your body really does need that to repair your muscles after a good workout.
  • tataliciousd89
    tataliciousd89 Posts: 465
    Because 1+1=2
    Yes, love it. It really is plain and simple as that.
  • HorrorChix89
    HorrorChix89 Posts: 1,229 Member
    Does anybody have a link to an actual scientific study reinforcing this?

    Yes, popular belief is that you need to eat back the calories, that you shouldn't go under 1200 per day, etc., but everything I've been able to find that is an actual scientific study does NOT reinforce this theory.

    Just because a lot of people believe something, doesn't make it true.

    ^^this
  • MariaAlbinaxoxo
    MariaAlbinaxoxo Posts: 290 Member
    I eat mine back and I still lost my projected .5lbs/week this week (:
  • dvcab
    dvcab Posts: 78
    Well, you want to NET at least 1200 calories per day. So, if your goal is 1200 calories, you eat 1200 calories, okay, and then you burn 600 calories at the gym, you're really only netting 600 calories. That means you're only giving yourself 600 calories to live on for the day. Doing this for an extended amount of time (not saying that you are, I'm just saying if you did), would cause your muscles to start breaking down to fuel your body, and your metabolism would slow waaay down, causing your weight loss to stall or stop altogether. Doing once in awhile if you're truly not hungry won't hurt you in the long run, but overall you have to be eating enough calories to fuel your body.

    So, if you eat 1800 calories and you work 600 calories off working out, you're still netting 1200 calories, which is your goal. So it's really better to "eat them back." Concentrate on what you're netting rather than the total calories you're consuming.

    Does it make sense? I thought it was ridiculous too until I had an "aha" moment where I suddenly understood.

    Ah ha thankyou this now makes sense to me too now! Sometimes you just need to write down all the figures to help you see it:flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:
  • MeRoBi
    MeRoBi Posts: 127 Member
    I know I'm probably going to get a lot of grief for this, but here's my question. Why would I spend an hour at the gym burning 500 calories, to then consume an additional 500 calories?

    I go to the gym everyday, shoot to burn about 500 calories (wear a HR monitor that shows calories burned), and on most days do not eat them. I'm losing weight consistently, but really just want to do the "right" thing. So can someone explain it to me?
  • LilacDreamer
    LilacDreamer Posts: 1,364 Member
    The reality is, you should never eat back your exercise calories because they should already be factored into your daily caloric needs.......obviously you didn't do that.
    actually the way mfp works, is you enter you daily activity EXCLUDING exercise - notice when it asks your daily activity it doesnt list exercise, just professions.
    i do agree that if you include your exercise in your daily activities, you shouldnt eat your exercise calories, but thats not the way this site was designed.

    so if I am unemployed i should choose sedentary? I have it set to lightly active.
  • rockerbabyy
    rockerbabyy Posts: 2,258 Member
    The reality is, you should never eat back your exercise calories because they should already be factored into your daily caloric needs.......obviously you didn't do that.
    actually the way mfp works, is you enter you daily activity EXCLUDING exercise - notice when it asks your daily activity it doesnt list exercise, just professions.
    i do agree that if you include your exercise in your daily activities, you shouldnt eat your exercise calories, but thats not the way this site was designed.

    so if I am unemployed i should choose sedentary? I have it set to lightly active.
    it depends on how active you are doing the day, not counting calories. do you have kids you run after? do you do housework? do you have a dog you take for walks?
    im a stay at home mom of two kids, i have mine set at lightly active (and that might be wrong, tbh) beause i walk my daughter to and from school a few times a week and i keep up the house work.
  • HorrorChix89
    HorrorChix89 Posts: 1,229 Member
    I know I'm probably going to get a lot of grief for this, but here's my question. Why would I spend an hour at the gym burning 500 calories, to then consume an additional 500 calories?

    I go to the gym everyday, shoot to burn about 500 calories (wear a HR monitor that shows calories burned), and on most days do not eat them. I'm losing weight consistently, but really just want to do the "right" thing. So can someone explain it to me?

    I've had this same question as well and I get hit with a bunch of math problems about calories intake vs calorie needs and blah blah blah. I'm waiting for an answer that makes sense.
  • rockerbabyy
    rockerbabyy Posts: 2,258 Member
    I know I'm probably going to get a lot of grief for this, but here's my question. Why would I spend an hour at the gym burning 500 calories, to then consume an additional 500 calories?

    I go to the gym everyday, shoot to burn about 500 calories (wear a HR monitor that shows calories burned), and on most days do not eat them. I'm losing weight consistently, but really just want to do the "right" thing. So can someone explain it to me?
    you would exercise so that when you hit your goal weight, your body will look better, and you will be in better shape. and you eat the calories back so that you properly fuel your body and dont create too large of a deficit.
    you would still lose the same amount of weight if you didnt work out, and ate your calories set by mfp. your body just wouldnt look at toned and fit in the end.
  • ShrinkRapt451
    ShrinkRapt451 Posts: 447 Member
    I know I'm probably going to get a lot of grief for this, but here's my question. Why would I spend an hour at the gym burning 500 calories, to then consume an additional 500 calories?

    I go to the gym everyday, shoot to burn about 500 calories (wear a HR monitor that shows calories burned), and on most days do not eat them. I'm losing weight consistently, but really just want to do the "right" thing. So can someone explain it to me?

    I've had this same question as well and I get hit with a bunch of math problems about calories intake vs calorie needs and blah blah blah. I'm waiting for an answer that makes sense.

    Because a skinny and sedentary person has more health risks, long term, than a fit overweight person. There's body fat and then there's cardiovascular health. NOT the same thing.

    But if you want to limit the discussion to weight loss only, exercise boosts your metabolism. To varying degrees, for varying amounts of time, whatever. But the more fit you are, the better your body burns those calories.

    And if you have MFP set to lose 2 lbs/week, you're already at the far edge of what's considered a safe (and likely to stick) weight loss goal. Increasing your deficit by another 500 calories does not necessarily help you, long-term.
  • j4nash
    j4nash Posts: 1,719 Member
    I "buy" the whole eating excercise calories back IF you're NOT "obese". If you are obese then I think a 1000 calorie deficit is fine. Just my opinion though. The closer you get to your goal the more exercise calories I think a person should eat.
  • Longbowgilly
    Longbowgilly Posts: 262 Member
    Well, you want to NET at least 1200 calories per day. So, if your goal is 1200 calories, you eat 1200 calories, okay, and then you burn 600 calories at the gym, you're really only netting 600 calories. That means you're only giving yourself 600 calories to live on for the day. Doing this for an extended amount of time (not saying that you are, I'm just saying if you did), would cause your muscles to start breaking down to fuel your body, and your metabolism would slow waaay down, causing your weight loss to stall or stop altogether. Doing once in awhile if you're truly not hungry won't hurt you in the long run, but overall you have to be eating enough calories to fuel your body.

    So, if you eat 1800 calories and you work 600 calories off working out, you're still netting 1200 calories, which is your goal. So it's really better to "eat them back." Concentrate on what you're netting rather than the total calories you're consuming.

    Does it make sense? I thought it was ridiculous too until I had an "aha" moment where I suddenly understood.

    Thank you for explaining it in a way I can understand, it totally makes sense now!
  • peacelily0507
    peacelily0507 Posts: 114
    actually the way mfp works, is you enter you daily activity EXCLUDING exercise - notice when it asks your daily activity it doesnt list exercise, just professions.
    i do agree that if you include your exercise in your daily activities, you shouldnt eat your exercise calories, but thats not the way this site was designed.
    [/quote]
    This site works either way. Either you set your activity level to include your exercise(then you don't enter it), or you set it to sedentary and enter your exercise. Either way is the same net effect.
    [/quote]


    this kind of confuses me because after reading that i reset my activity level from active to sedentary and it changed nothing on my log as far as how many calories are allotted to me...should it or are you just suppose to know not to eat back your calories?
  • rockerbabyy
    rockerbabyy Posts: 2,258 Member
    actually the way mfp works, is you enter you daily activity EXCLUDING exercise - notice when it asks your daily activity it doesnt list exercise, just professions.
    i do agree that if you include your exercise in your daily activities, you shouldnt eat your exercise calories, but thats not the way this site was designed.
    This site works either way. Either you set your activity level to include your exercise(then you don't enter it), or you set it to sedentary and enter your exercise. Either way is the same net effect.

    this kind of confuses me because after reading that i reset my activity level from active to sedentary and it changed nothing on my log as far as how many calories are allotted to me...should it or are you just suppose to know not to eat back your calories?
    it should have changed - i know there have been some glitches lately with things not updating properly. maybe try logging out and back in?
    also - and i know this sounds lame. but sometimes when changing settings, i forget to actually click the "save" button..or update, or whatever.
    at lightly active it gives me 1520, when i change it to sedentary i get 1340.
  • skygoddess86
    skygoddess86 Posts: 487 Member
    It's a secret.
    Hahahahahaha :laugh:
This discussion has been closed.

Categories