"Eating back exercise-burned calories" seems to be causing a lot of people to plateau and/or gain

Could it be that the site's tools significantly overestimate calories burned for various activities, or posters are overestimating how vigorously/long they're working out, or both?

I personally don't factor in my calories burned in exercise in with what I eat. I eat a little less than the maintenance calories for my GOAL WEIGHT with LIGHT ACTIVITY - that's it, no added calories to cover a jog or a walk or biting my nails or anything else I do, and I've had good, consistent loss of 2 lbs per week at first and 1.5 lbs per week for the last month or so.

I'm sorry, but unless you're doing massive amounts of exercise, I think adding extra calories to your intake to "compensate" for some theoretical calorie burn is just bogus.

 

(puts on flame-proof trenchcoat)

 

 

PS - I don't want ANYONE to seriously undereat. If you're gaining and you suspect that your calorie intake may be too high because of eating those "burn calories", maybe doing a waist measurement every week for a while would be a good idea. If you gain weight but your waist is shrinking - no worries, you're puttting on muscle. But if you're gaining and your waist is expanding, then I'd say you're way overestimating your calorie burn...

Honestly, I think it's 20% overestimate burn, 80% underestimate burn.

It's important to disect each post to find out the real route to the problem.

There are a lot of women on this site who continue to eat 1200 calories and then suddenly decide to add walking for 30 mins each day, which could burn anywhere from 200-500 calories, I hope you would agree that in those cases, they do need more than 1200 a day.

Original Post by udokier:

Could it be that the site's tools significantly overestimate calories burned for various activities, or posters are overestimating how vigorously/long they're working out, or both?

I personally don't factor in my calories burned in exercise in with what I eat. I eat a little less than the maintenance calories for my GOAL WEIGHT with LIGHT ACTIVITY - that's it, no added calories to cover a jog or a walk or biting my nails or anything else I do, and I've had good, consistent loss of 2 lbs per week at first and 1.5 lbs per week for the last month or so.

I'm sorry, but unless you're doing massive amounts of exercise, I think adding extra calories to your intake to "compensate" for some theoretical calorie burn is just bogus.

 

(puts on flame-proof trenchcoat)

 I have to agree with you. Until I came to this site I have never heard of eating back calories. And I am on another diet and exercise board and they never said anything about that. When I started this journey I just found out what I need to eat to maintain my current weight and subtract 500 from that at that was what I ate. I never worried about eating back calories or calculating that it. I do sometimes log what I exercise but thats more for curiosity purposes. Now I am at goal and I don't think I am going to get much lower. I have tried but I am where I am and I am happy with that. 

I don't eat back calories burned through sex, unless it's a particularly vigorous and long adventure.  I don't eat back the calories I burn walking through a store, or chasing around one of these babies, or going up and down the stairs to do laundry.  I certainly don't eat back the calories I burn from stalking the forums throughout the day, typing my responses, googling for answers, so on and so forth.

But when I park my ass on that stationery bike for thirty minutes with high tension, or an hour with moderate tension, you better believe I'm logging those calories and eating back some of them.  If I'm on the bike for an hour at moderate effort, it's about five hundred calories.  I'll then indulge in one of those little burritos in the freezer, loaded with hot sauce, a side of corn and black beans, and maaaaaaaybe a dollop of sour creme depending on if I add too much hot sauce.  Total that's about four hundred twenty-five of those five hundred and some odd number calories I burned.

I did the same thing from August to October, only instead of an exercise bike I did pilates and walked to the store, and I had a consistant two pound per week weight loss.  Since the beginning of this year, after I got settled in my new home, I've started doing it again, and am still losing a steady two pounds, every week.

Original Post by momto2siameses:

I have to agree with you. Until I came to this site I have never heard of eating back calories. And I am on another diet and exercise board and they never said anything about that. When I started this journey I just found out what I need to eat to maintain my current weight and subtract 500 from that at that was what I ate. I never worried about eating back calories or calculating that it. I do sometimes log what I exercise but thats more for curiosity purposes. Now I am at goal and I don't think I am going to get much lower. I have tried but I am where I am and I am happy with that.

Thanks.  I did add in a codicil, since there may be some people who are gaining, but actually putting on muscle.

 

It's just that I see these posts with the SAME theme EVERY DAY.  Like "I don't understand it, I supposedly burn 1500 calories on the elliptical and  I eat 3000 calories per day, why am I not losing???"

seems like a really pronounced pattern... 

Weird, cause I never see those posts.

All I see are "I eat 1500 calories and burn 3000, why am I not losing?!?"

Original Post by cellulitedelight:


But when I park my ass on that stationery bike for thirty minutes with high tension, or an hour with moderate tension, you better believe I'm logging those calories and eating back some of them.

...

I did the same thing from August to October, only instead of an exercise bike I did pilates and walked to the store, and I had a consistant two pound per week weight loss. Since the beginning of this year, after I got settled in my new home, I've started doing it again, and am still losing a steady two pounds, every week.

 I'm glad that's working for you!  But clearly, "eating back exercise calories" is causing problems for some people.  Personally, I wouldn't do it.  I don't feel any hungrier after a long bike ride, and I feel like I'm more than adequately nourished and simply do not see the need.  

Original Post by nocturne:

Weird, cause I never see those posts.

All I see are "I eat 1500 calories and burn 3000, why am I not losing?!?"

I see those a lot too.  I don't know how to account for that.  I suppose some of them are people who vastly underestimate what they eat.  Others may just be impatient people with unrealistic expectations that the weight will melt off in a week - I don't know.

 

Cutting calories has never not worked for me, but I'm a big guy.  I know that for women of small stature, it can be a much more stubborn problem.

 

Anyway, my comments in the OP are strictly for people EATING BACK CALORIES, not barely eating and working out like crazy. 

*nod nod*

I understand what your OP is about, I was just commenting that it SEEMS to me, to be a smaller percentage of the problem as to why people plateau or gain.

It's just very important to me that everyone understands that their bodies need *net* calories, not just 1200 or 1500.

I have to eat them back.  I have a sodium issue or other and don't retain water and nutrients (suggested from past bad habits) like I should, so if I don't drink enough water as soon as I wake up, eat enough throughout the day, as well as eat a little extra to make up for additional activities, I risk fainting and I'm sick of having to explain awkward bruises on my face from hitting a desk or something on the way down.

I'm a bit of a special case with this.  I do strongly believe there're others who can benefit from eating back those calories, but there're also people who'll only hinder their weightloss from it.  Every single person is different, which is one of the main reasons I don't mind people posting over and over again about why they're having problems losing weight.  It's just the five sushi threads in a row that bug me.  ;]

Anyone who has read my journal on this thing knows I strongly believe my body is in control of me.  It will do what it wants.  If I want it to lose some arm flab, it'll give me boney feet.  If I want my butt smaller, it'll shrink my stomach.  You've got to figure out your relationship with your body and what works for it.  I was lucky.  I found out what works for mine on the first try.

I agree with udokier. It has always amazed me that some people actually log things like washing dishes or watering flowers. Come on! This is NOT exercise. I wouldn't log anything that doesn't bring my heart rate to 130 for at least 15 mins.

I just came back from the gym where I spent 2 h 20 minutes:

15 min warmup walking on a treadmill (2.0 incline, 7 km/h)

1 h BodyPump

1 h BodyAttack

5 min cooldown

That is exercise, and I'm certainly logging it. Polar shows I burned 775 kcal, which brings my burn meter to the total of 1510(sedentary)+775=2285? NO! 2140. But still, that's 630 extra kcal which should not (and will not ) be ignored. I will certainly not eat all of that back, but if I don't eat over my usual 1400, I'd have too much of a deficit.

I absolutely agree with maha-kisa.  I count my exercise but if it says I burn 300 I count it.  If I chase after 4 kids, laundry, cleaning, up and down my stairs, you bet your bottom dollar I'm taking my 300.

Udokier, no flames from me.

In fact I don't bother figuring out how many calories I've burned in my exercise and I certainly don't bother trying to eat them back. That's just way too much work for me.

Instead I stick with the same budgeted amount every day. I noticed when I ramped up my exercising that I dropped some weight, so I just upped my daily calorie count.

Bottom line, this strategy works for me. Obviously YMMV.

This is something I worry about a bit because of my Arthritis even when I work out I barely qualify as sedentary, it is difficult for me to walk much and my workouts are very limited, Basicly treading water adn upper body.

Because of this I lowered my goal intake to 2000 from 2800 (which is what a semi active person as big as me needs) to compensate for the lack of calorie burn.

I am actually having to work hard to get my 2000 so before I work out I eat a really healthy trail mix worth about 200 calories too help.

 I am only just starting so we will see how it goes.

granted, I keep a loose count, but I've always figured that if I'm not losing, to up the exercise and/or lower calories.

I try to find what works for me, while trying for 1,200 min a day, (female) and not losing more than 2# a week.

I never eat back my workout calories. - My daily calorie goal, is my daily calorie goal. 

The daily deficit is not a goal.  I work on a weekly average of calories consumed and I try to overestimate when I add foods.  It is working for me.  All though I track activity, I don't work back from it to do my calorie estimates.  All activity is a bonus.  I see many that try to adjust, and then complain the program does not work.

One note on the burn meter - it double counts when activity is added.  If you burn 300 calories walking for an hour, it adds 300 to your daily total.  But you would have burned 60-80 calories just sitting at your computer.  The burn meter just adds the 300, without considering the calories included in the BMR total, so the calories are double counted. 

I add in 100 miscellaneous calories every day.  That covers hidden calories like condiments, supplements and so on.

I think the burn estimates on the machines are a gross overstatement to keep you feeling good about yourself and coming back. If you even eat 85% of what you burned you'll probably defeat the purpose.  As an example I got one of those silly bodybugg things and it says I burn 6 cals/minute on the elliptical and the elliptical says 10. That's a pretty hefty difference!

 I set my "activity" to active to get a decent daily burn amount and then DON'T count the exercise (because that's what made me "active" in the first place).  The exception is on days like today when I'm going to spend about 4-5 hours snowshoeing. In that case I can & should eat a little extra.

I think it varies by age and amount to lose. I think the 'eat back' idea is most important for, as stated above, young women (or men) that are already close to undereating.

I can attest to the fact that many people who are obese are not instructed to 'eat back' burned calories by their physicians.

Original Post by strikez:

One note on the burn meter - it double counts when activity is added. If you burn 300 calories walking for an hour, it adds 300 to your daily total. But you would have burned 60-80 calories just sitting at your computer. The burn meter just adds the 300, without considering the calories included in the BMR total, so the calories are double counted.

The burn meter does NOT double count the exercise calories and what you would have burned anyway (this is what maha-kisa was showing) -- it only counts the calories once.

I don't like to think of it as eating back -- because then you end up with a reward system and rewarding myself with food got me where I started. I only count traditional exercise -- doesn't matter how many times I circle the mall, or go up and down the apartment steps, my 60--75 mins in the pool, or my gym time, is the only time I add to my log. But I don't begrudge or judge, those who count non-traditional exercise -- if it's working for them, then it's working for them.

On the days I work out, I only look to make sure my deficit is under 1000 -- sometimes this means eating more than my daily target goal, sometimes not. I, personally, have never reached a 3000 burn (trying though), so I can't identify with those folks. I can't "survive" on 1200-1300 cals regularly (I've done it only a few times in past 5 mons), by day 3 or 4 I'd be ordering midnight pizzas, so I can't identify with those who stay there, either. I believe that FOR ME, exercise is the key and that with my exercise and 90% clean eating, I will continue to lose. But I have to eat to lose. 50+ pounds so far, less than 15 to final goal.

I think we have to remember that bodies are different and what works for one may not work for another. And what one person considers intense exercise may be a walk in the park for others. The important thing to remember is that your body needs fuel in order to burn -- if the tank is empty, it will feed off of what is most easily accessible (which is muscle in many cases).

I exercise 6 days a week, so I never contemplated "eating back calories." I think people need to be more accurate about their activity level. Someone who works out is no longer sedentary.

People are different.  I need to eat more on days that I work out or I get really hungry and feel awful.