Beginning to think it's Calories consumed vs. NET instead

I've read through this thread and it thoroughly took me down the rabbit hole, but now I'm back. I think there are a couple major problems that everyone here has (and these are my opinion with a healthy dose of deductive reasoning and skepticism):

1) The activity calculators cause a huge amount of error in TDEE. I mean, we obsess over a calorie here and a calorie there, and the multiplier meanwhile is multiplying the whole number by a guesswork factor!

2) Exercise Machines over-estimate calories. Period. There is a marketing benefit to estimating the calories high- e.g. if a machine tells you it is burning X number of calories and the effort seems a whole lot easier than plodding out that same calories on a treadmill (which is more correct) then you with a gym membership want that machine and the gym buys that machine. Arc trainers (at low resistance) are a great example. They have ridiculous calorie burns. Most of the research done on calorie burning for different activities has been done on walking, running and cycling. If your calories seem easier to get on anything else, they are probably wrong. .....Rant complete.
...almost. For HRM calories you can only use their calorie counter for cardio- even circuit training they can be really really off- like 1/3 too high...can't be used for strength training or yoga or stretching....ok rant complete.

3) If you eat back your exercise calories, you need to subtract your hourly BMR, that is your BMR/24. If your BMR is 2400, you need to subtract 100 calories per hour of exercise from your added exercise goal, because those calories are already included in your BMR.

4) As mentioned by many others, everyone should be using the Katch equation to estimate BMR- lean mass uses more calories than fat, so the more muscle you have the higher your BMR should be. Uh-Oh! Body fat is just ANOTHER estimate in this mix! The best way is to get it tested (using bod pod or DEXA) , second best would be to have a properly trained person use calipers and a close third would be to use an electrical impedence device- but its very important to follow the directions for the electrical impedence b/c your level of hydration/dehydration seriously affects the reading. Fourth best is to use the online calculators- and fourth is way, way behind the first 3.

5) People wrongly estimate their food portions when logging AND companies regularly underrepresent their portion size when calculating/printing their nutritional facts. This, like the calorie burns on the machines, is beneficial to the manufacturer- their calories PER WEIGHT SERVING are mostly correct, but the serving size you get in a package is commonly bigger than the weight listed.

So, my solutions are:
A)Use a low TDEE multiplier, like 1.2 or 1.1, and be diligent about entering all your daily activity, and be really careful to get those estimates as accurate as possible. A fitbit or similar device might be really useful for this purpose (I don't have one but I assume that would be the best way to capture everything). **Set your goal as your BMR x Low Multiplier, then eat back your exercise calories, but leave a buffer big enough to account for miscalculation** Also, I don't know what to do about strength training- I haven't figured that out yet. Theres just no good way to enter it! If your exercise calories don't give you a cushion of a couple hundred calories a day, you should cut your total number, but never go lower than your BMR.
B)If your gym (or wherever) does body composition testing get it done. Else, buy an inexpensive electrical impedence BF device and use it to track your progress. (even if its not super accurate, it should be the same amount of inaccurate all the time, so it should be a good tool to track progress).
C)Weigh EVERYTHING (that you can). Enter it in to your diary by grams, rather than portions like "1 Slice" that might be magically disappearing calories from your consumption totals. Obviously you can't weigh food when you're out, but every time you cut down the error will help.
D)KNOCK IT OFF with the 2-lb per week or 1-lb per week goals. They are calorie cuts that assume all of your weight loss will be fat loss (3500cal/lb fat). Muscle loss is like 600 or 800 cals/lb (not sure about that value) but people get super excited when their 3500 cal deficit creates like 5 lbs lost....If you lose MORE than you calculated, its not good, its either muscle loss or water. Let your lbs/week be determined by how hard you work every week, not some arbitrary number you want to work to- its more gratifying and less insane.

OR alternately, don't obsess with details and just eat when you're hungry and exercise- and see what works for you....Hahaha if that were a real option you wouldn't be on this site. :laugh: :laugh:

Ive lost 43 since march 1st
I don't eat back what I burned
Simply because...that's my deficit...why work out to burn calories if I'm just Goin to eat them back...it's a concept that dosent make any sense to me.

Ive lost 43 since march 1st
I don't eat back what I burned
Simply because...that's my deficit...why work out to burn calories if I'm just Goin to eat them back...it's a concept that dosent make any sense to me.

If you do not have a deficit built into your base target that makes absolute sense. However, MFP already builds a deficit in to the base target.

Sorry but a lot of over weight people have 'lost' that hunger feeling they don't know what it is as they've spent years comfort eating


To the poster above so should we work out our lean BMR and eat that my BMR is 1649 my lean BMR is 1340 I burn 3000 cardio exercise calories a week by fitbit?Should I eat 1340 gross calories a day or 1649?

The more I watch people's weight loss journey's the more I am convinced that as long as your "calories consumed" is over your BMR it does not matter what you burn off.....

I have tried all methods, eating 1200 and excercise cal back, eating my BMR plus exercise calories, eating TDEE -15%, and the people I see with the greatest results and consistant weight losses are the ones who regularily eat over their BMR, closest to maintenance and don't bother with worrying about their net calories even if they are UNDER their BMR...

Could it be that eating back what you burn off is the reason people are not losing weight ? Maybe our body's do not care if we net below our BMR as long as we EAT/CONSUME over BMR's ????

I think the word NET is what is screwing everyone up on here.....just eat over your BMR and leave it at that !

Thoughts ???

I posted very similar thoughts about a week ago. A couple people got it, most didn't. As far as I can tell, "netting BMR" can mean one of two things:

If you ignore the MFP interface (which treats calories from your activity level and calories from exercise differently), then "netting BMR" means the same as "eating TDEE", which would result in no weight gain or loss.

If you use MFP's display of calories, then people who set a higher activity level in their profile can eat more calories while still looking like they "net their BMR", even if they have identical caloric intake and TDEE as someone who set their activity level to Sedentary and just logged more exercise. In other words, what MFP shows as your Net Calories for the day are completely meaningless when compared to your BMR.

It may be a good thing to consume more calories (gross, not net) than your BMR. I don't know that for certain one way or another, but beyond that, the only thing that matters is TDEE. Eat less than TDEE, lose weight over time.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/566837-exercise-calories-versus-daily-activity-eating-bmr

Netting bmr is not the same as eating tdee. My tdee is 2600, I eat around 2000 and net after exercise is around 1600 (bmr is 1568).

Read the thread I linked, or the similar example I typed up a little later in this thread. What most people refer to as "net calories" is based on what MFP shows them, and it's meaningless. Two people with identical TDEE and calories consumed for the day will show different "net calories" based on which one had more calories in the activity multiplier versus logged exercise.

You should eat back half of how many calories you burn during exercise. NOT ALL. So if your goal is 1500 and you burn 500 calories your net would be 1,000 so you need to eat back 250 calories at a minimum. If you don't eat within 30 minutes of working out you lose half of your workout. I think it's more of what type of calories and foods people are putting into their bodies then eating back exercise calories. It also depends on a million different factors, age, gender, etc.

Sorry, I hate to potentially start another sub-thread here, but there is no evidence to suggest eating 30 minutes after a workout is better than eating say 4 hours after a workout (unless you are hungry of course!). Also, the only reason why you should not eat all your exercise calories back, assuming you already have an appropriate deficit built into your base and your base target does not include exercise, is really because of the fact that MFP and the exercise machines usually over-estimate them.

Ya I thought that was a totally bizarre thing to say. How can half your workout just "poof" disappear. Ummmm research!

I've done plenty of research http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/exercises/after-exercise-recovery-what-to-eat-and-drink.html

To quote:

These after-workout foods and drinks should be consumed as soon as possible after you are finished working out. Don’t wait longer than 30 minutes to refuel your body. For best results for after-workout recovery, combine protein and carbohydrates into one small meal. The combination of a protein- and carbohydrate-rich meal will increase your athletic performance and promote muscle recovery.

You misunderstood what I said. I never said okay you workout and eat 3 hours later and there goes your work out. But your muscles need to refuel soon after a workout and if nothing is going in then they have nothing to work with.

i find that if i work out and i am needing refuel then by all means i refuel within means and the best post workout is egg whites or protien bc it helps the mucsles so for me i do eat to refuel i still lost weight clean homemade pretien bars are the best

I agree! I want to start making my own bars too!

still agree with her, if your gonna eat all the calories back, you might as well watch tv and do nothin, same results is what everybody is saying

Because exercise has absolutely no other benefits.

Exactly. I've been eating back half if not more of my calories back from exercise and I've lost 10 pounds. So to each their own but I'm going to keep doing whats working for me.

It really, really depends on the person. Some people need to eat back exercise calories, and some don't.

For me, I'm lucky to not "need" to eat back my exercise calories. If I eat at a 500 cal a day deficit (1700 cal) and burn an extra 10,000 cal for the week, I'll lose a bit under 2kg/4lb. If I eat a 500cal a day deficit and eat back my exercise cals, I'll lose under 1kg/2lb.

I started in January 2011 and lost 26 pounds eating back all my exercise calories.

Since August of 2011...I have lost TWO pounds.

I don't know what I am doing wrong...I work out 6 days a week and never eat below 1500-1600 calories NET.

THIS IS SOOO FRUSTRATING!!!

NUMBERS, NUMBERS, NUMBERS

Three MFP volunteers, for the good of our cyber community, volunteer to be placed in a medically induced coma for three months. We instruct that one is feed exact BMR, One 15% over, one 15% under via their naso-gastric tubes. Observe resulkts and publish. Any takers?

Me!!! I could do with a good rest :yawn: