Exercise calories - how many to eat back

Hi
Just a bit of general advice wanted really
I understand the site overestimates calories burned. When you exercise and log it, do you eat back a percentage of what you burned?
Or do you have a standard, i.e. 1200 calories non exercise day, 1500 calories exercise day - irrelevant how much exercise you do?
Thanks in advance

Replies

unknown

also i have seen your diary. buy some food scales and weigh things in grams. trusting cups and oz just isnt enough as you are probably under or over estimating. if you are using measuring spoons then fine but a tea spoon (15ml) is not as much as you think when you just spoon something out.

unknown

bennett180790 wrote: »

also i have seen your diary. buy some food scales and weigh things in grams. trusting cups and oz just isnt enough as you are probably under or over estimating. if you are using measuring spoons then fine but a tea spoon (15ml) is not as much as you think when you just spoon something out.

You are so right! I have recently done that. I am building up my recipes, and am gob smacked at how much in the past I have underestimated what I was eating.

unknown

One more vote for eating back half of the assigned workout calories.

unknown

Lola2248 wrote: »

I understand the site overestimates calories burned. When you exercise and log it, do you eat back a percentage of what you burned?

I used to and did for the majority of my loss on MFP. For me, it depended on the exercise. I ate back all running calories up to 500 and whatever I felt like after that (this only affected my one long run of the week). I ate about half my biking calories, and same with cardio-based exercise classes or the elliptical. I have no clue how to measure strength, so would usually do about 100 for an hour.

I used Fitbit for straight walking calories or included them in my activity setting (lightly active instead of sedentary), but I walk a pretty consistent amount and for errands and commuting, not specifically for exercise.

Doing this I generally lost more than MFP predicted, so it seemed to be an undercount, not an overcount.

I got tired of this especially when I started being unable to stand the super low calorie off days and unable to eat the extra on big running or biking days, so I switched to TDEE where you include exercise you typically do in the calorie estimate. That worked really well for me for the remainder of my loss. (I've either been taking a diet break or in maintenance for a bit, but TDEE method is also what I plan to do for maintenance.)

I think you should include exercise in your calorie estimate in some way, especially if you are doing hard exercise, have fitness-related goals (I was training for a 10K and then half marathon and continue to train for races, and am now trying to make strength goals as well), or have an aggressive deficit and are not extremely obese/under a doctor's care. The basic idea is that 1% of total weight or 1-2 lb/week is the maximum that most people should aim for with their deficit (made up of diet and exercise) and MFP at -2 lb/week + lots of exercise is going to be overkill for many, at least if you log accurately. (Some simply don't count exercise to make up for poor logging.)

Bigger guys may have so many calories and such a high weight or maintenance that this is less of an issue, as even with the deficit plus exercise it's not that aggressive in a relative sense, but it is an issue for most women.

unknown

jemhh wrote: »

I eat them all back.

My suggestion is to choose one method, whether it is eating them all or a portion. Stick with it for 3-4 weeks. If you are losing significantly slower than what you chose on your MFP profile, eat fewer exercise calories. If you are losing significantly faster (a rate that veers into the "too fast" territory), eat more exercise calories.

In terms of practically how to do it, this is the best answer, IMO.

unknown

brianpperkins wrote: »

ljcolasanto wrote: »

My understanding is that chest-based HRMs are the best, with wrist-based trackers being decent, and MFP being all over the place on these? But yes, even HRMs are not completely accurate, though they are said to be the best from what I've read. For the record, I do not eat back my exercise calories and I have been losing weight. I also use a fitbit flex. For me, the value is that it is repeatable and I can easily compare my alleged calorie burn over time. You can then adjust it if you think it's too high or low, but at least using one device to track it will give you consistency.

Best for what?

Chest straps and some arm mounted optical HRMs are great at counting heart beats at rest and during activity. The wrist mounted ones tend to become inaccurate during activity. All HRM caloric estimates are based on formulas built around steady state cardio ... none do lifting, intervals (to include HIIT), Zumba, yoga, etc accurately.

This gets repeated as a mantra, however any HRM monitor using first beat technology is based on non-steady state activity with accuracy in the 90%+.

unknown

EvgeniZyntx: How do you feel about the use of chest straps for people with heart issues? I have avoided using the chest strap during rowing because it's I know my heart isn't beating normally. Do you think it will account for that or still a bad idea?

unknown

lmr0528 wrote: »

I don't focus on eating back or not eating back a certain amount. If I'm hungry and I have calories left, I eat.

^^ this.

i wear an HRM during my workouts and enter that as cals burned instead of relying on what this app tells me. also, i eat when i'm hungry, i don't eat when i'm not...the way it's supposed to be. i use this app to make sure that i'm within my target caloric range. yesterday i was short 500cals but wasn't hugry at all so 500cals short it was.

use this app for reference only ie. to make sure you're eating within your range but also LISTEN to your body! that's more important

unknown

EvgeniZyntx wrote: »

brianpperkins wrote: »

ljcolasanto wrote: »

My understanding is that chest-based HRMs are the best, with wrist-based trackers being decent, and MFP being all over the place on these? But yes, even HRMs are not completely accurate, though they are said to be the best from what I've read. For the record, I do not eat back my exercise calories and I have been losing weight. I also use a fitbit flex. For me, the value is that it is repeatable and I can easily compare my alleged calorie burn over time. You can then adjust it if you think it's too high or low, but at least using one device to track it will give you consistency.

Best for what?

Chest straps and some arm mounted optical HRMs are great at counting heart beats at rest and during activity. The wrist mounted ones tend to become inaccurate during activity. All HRM caloric estimates are based on formulas built around steady state cardio ... none do lifting, intervals (to include HIIT), Zumba, yoga, etc accurately.

This gets repeated as a mantra, however any HRM monitor using first beat technology is based on non-steady state activity with accuracy in the 90%+.

Even First Beat hasn't jammed the scientific square peg into a round hole. They are getting better at trying to account for intervals ... they still can't do HIIT, lifting, yoga, etc ... the relationship between HR, VO2 max, scalable to effort level, and calories simply is not there.

unknown

My uncle has given me advice when i asked him about that regarding walking. He has a masters in nutrition and a martial artist so i trust his advice.

"You should eat unprocessed foods, eat when your hungry and eat till your full. Healthy fats are very good for you and being healthy on the inside is more important then being skinny."

Makes sense to me, i don't have access to fresh food since Im not home a lot and fresh food goes bad and then it becomes wasteful. I think its possible to lose weight and be healthy i think its also healthier to take his advice. I will try it soon as possible but i need to be more active. But then again gorging on veges and rice and some fruit more and meat less (but still included) makes it possible for one to be more healthy. My aunt issnt skinny but she isn't even pudgy-just curvy and a little thick but not very thick so they do follow there advice.

unknown

I eat back at least 50% sometimes closer to 75% and I've had no trouble losing.