Major Flaw in MFP and eating back your calories?

The base amount of calories burnt while just living is already factored into the BMR calculations. You'd be adding it twice by your method.

If you don't eat your workout out calories, you are now at a calorie count lower than your 1lb/2lb per week schedule.

Can you explain this a bit more? I'm confused.

2400 calories is what you would would burn or need to burn to let's say lose 1lb per week.

Exercise 1 hour. ie.. 600 calories.

If you eat 2400 calories + 600 calories, you eat 3,000 calories and still would lose 1lb per week.

If you didn't eat the 600 calories, you NET calorie count would be 1800 calories. Or if you ate on 300 calories back, you would NET 2100 calories.

Assuming you already ate the 2400 calories + whatever calories you just burnt exercising minus the calories burnt doing nothing (2400) + whatever calories you burnt while working out = net calorie count for the day.

I eat back my exercise calories. I lost 42 lbs. in 4 months doing it. And I also continue to do it even with the elevated calorie allowance in maintenance and have not gained any back in 8 months.

Never eat back workout calories! Determine your caloric goal based on your actual daily activity.


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Weight Loss Tools

Not everyone can lose this way. I have to eat back ALL of my exercise calories or else I don't lose any weight.

It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.

The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.

When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.

Grr. I just typed this then lost the page. So typing again.

FItness trainers and nutritionists use a different formula than MFP. They actually do have you eat back your exercise calories, they just build it into their number.
They figure your BMR (basic rate you burn just to live), then factor in daily activity (like how active your job is), then anticipate how often and how hard you will work out each week. They then take that number, subtract a modest amount to create a deficit, and there is your number. Exercise calories included.
MFP figures your BMR and your daily activity but does not account for exercise, which is why the site is set up to tell you to eat them back.
In the end, it is usually pretty much the same.
For example, MFP gave me a number of like 1400 for a pound a week. I went to a trainer for a workout program and she gave me a goal of around 1700. I kept tracking on MFP. When I put in all my food, and log my exercise, guess what I end up netting, 1400. So it didn't matter if I ate 1400, then an extra 300 for my exercises, it came out to the same thing.

There are a number of reasons why you could be "failing" when you eat your calories back. You will fail following a trainer or nutritionist if you don't maintain the level of activity anticpated. No method is perfect.

ETA -
If you are going by the nutritionist or trainers numbers and eat back your exercise calories, then yes, you may gain weight, since it has already been accounted for.

It seems like most people don't understand your question. the way I read it is if MFP or the machine says you burned 600 calories is that already taking out the "maintenance" calories or is that just the additional calories. I don't believe MFP or the machines calculate the net, just what was burned during that hour. So, yes the amount burned is over estimated. I believe MFP overestimates in general but that's just me.

Either way as long as you are losing there is no need to change the process. It isn't an exact science because there is a lot of guessing going on for BMR, Calories burned, Calories consumed, etc. If it isn't working, change it up.

That doesn't really matter when you consider the fact that HRMs are not 100% accurate down to the last .00001 of a calorie, and when you consider that most of the exercises used on here for logging are not exact. Not to mention how precise you are with logging every last mg of your diet.

If it does matter to you that much then I am sure that you will burn that 100 extra calories freaking out over every last drop of food or .00001 calorie consumed and over last 0.00001 calorie burned.

If it doesn't, then try eating back half of your exercising calories or finding a good balance between the calories you eat on rest days and the calories you eat on workout day. :flowerforyou:

Worry less, exercise more, eat better.

yep!!! best post I have seen in a LONG TIME

Fit_Britt, I think what you're saying makes perfect sense and is quite observant of you too! I think that this maybe just a bit too precise for most of us here at MFP. One stair stepper says I burn X many calories per hour and another says I burn Y many calories per hour. I don't think any of us know exactly how many calories we are burning doing anything. This includes exercise or regular day to day activities. I don't think any of us really know what our metabolic rate is either.
I believe that most of us are just making educated guesses and some of us cheat at those guesses.
So for your example where the 600 calories should really be 500, I don't think that 100 calories really matters. If we were hooked up to blood machines all day and knew exactly the calories in vs. the calories out, I think then we could worry about this.
Until then, I am going to trust my scale and my health to guide me.

I didn't intend this to be rude in any way so please don't take it that way. Just my opinion.

personally after I got my HRM I log my net calories, not my total burned calories for the exercise.

so for every hour of exercise I take away 100 cal from the total burned. It's not accurate, but close enough for me.

^^^^^ THis is what i do also.

For every hour that i workout, i deduct 100 calories from what my HRM recorded as my total burn. Just to be safe

Also, I'm one of those who eats back almost every exercise calorie. I lost over 35 pounds and now that I'm in maintenance, I'm maintaining it. :flowerforyou:

I've also noticed my HRM reads lower than MFP exercises because MFP doesn't know what shape you are in just the weight. As for eating the calories, I stay above 1200 on a non-workout day but eat more on the workout days.

It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.

The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.

When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.

I agree completely. My mother has a friend who is a doctor with a PhD in weight management/obesity and she told me that eating back those calories basically defeats the purpose of burning those calories through exercise.

I guess you don't the quote about walking in another man's shoes.

I'm sure it's already been said, but I'm not going to read through all the entries. In my opinion, the bottom line is Eat Less - Move More. Without some research into the site, I at first didn't realize that day to day stuff was factored in already...however, its all averages or best guesses anyway. Eat less...Move More. It really is that simple. Of course if you have depression or other mental issues...that throws a kink into things.;)

One thing I have been wondering is why MFP does not incorporate NET workout calories. Since you burn calories constantly, you need to subtract your baseline calories for that amount of time you worked out right?

Lets say someone's basal metabolic rate is 2400 calories a day. That's and average of 100 calories an hour. They work out 1 hour and burn 600 calories. MFP would tell that person that they could eat 3000 calories that day. BUT what MFP does not factor in is that, for that 1 hour they worked out, they would have burned 100 calories that hour without working out. Therefore, their net work out calories burned is 500. So, they could eat 2900 calories, and 3000 calories would actually lead to a weight gain right?

I try not to eat my workout calories, but I'm just wondering since a lot of people do. Any ideas?

No, MFP accounts for that already.
MFP has already figured out your total calories you need to eat per day to lose 1lb etc. a week.
That's WITHOUT exercise. You'll notice that when you actually add exercise in, the calorie limit goes up to include what you would have burned doing nothing.

You missed her point, she is saying of the 600 that you burned from exercise would you not have burned 100 of those had you not worked out.

The answer is yes if you add the full 600 you would double count the 100 cals as calories burned is total cals, not extra or net cals burned from exercise. So if you didn't workout for that hour and watched EV instead you would have burned 100 instead of 600.

For those that don't eat your exercise calories, don't use this as an excuse as why not, you could just choose to eat 75-90% of them. If you are following MFP caloric intake before exercise you should not have more than 100 or so cals remaining at the end of the after exercise is entered. leaving this little wiggle room will account for that flaw, but it isn't MFP's flaw it is the way all cardio machines, on-line calorie burned calculator and even HRM's are programed. They were not set up with MFP in mind.

<<<<Eats back her calories, has since day 1. :happy:

It's a major flaw IMO because you end up over eating and not losing weight and in some cases gaining weight.

The fitness trainers and nutritionists that I have seen have given me a flat 2000-2200 calorie diet. They never mention eating back my calories.

When I do eat back my calories, I fail. When I do not, I lose weight. I will stick with the results.

I agree completely. My mother has a friend who is a doctor with a PhD in weight management/obesity and she told me that eating back those calories basically defeats the purpose of burning those calories through exercise.

It would defeat the purpose IF your calories weren't set at a deficit already.