Eating Back Exercise Calories
Discussion
I have been trying to lose weight for a bit and have had some success. I have now decided to tackle it properly instead of farting about.
I am tracking my eating in MFP and where possible weighing my food so I get my portions right.
One thing I don't understand is when I enter the calories from exercise (taken from my Garmin) it then says I need to eat all those calories back. Doesn't that defeat the object of exercising?
Also what am I supposed to eat. Take yesterday for example, my target calories were 1760. I am triathlon training at the minute and burned 1100 calories during exercise. My meals took me to 1760 but I can't eat another 1100 healthy calories. I can easily shove a couple of mars bars down to get the numbers up but that seems stupid.
I need to lose about 4 stone so I have plenty of fat reserves. Do I really need to eat back those calories?
I am trying to make sure when I do eat that I get plenty of fibrous veg, lean protein and wholegrains.
I am tracking my eating in MFP and where possible weighing my food so I get my portions right.
One thing I don't understand is when I enter the calories from exercise (taken from my Garmin) it then says I need to eat all those calories back. Doesn't that defeat the object of exercising?
Also what am I supposed to eat. Take yesterday for example, my target calories were 1760. I am triathlon training at the minute and burned 1100 calories during exercise. My meals took me to 1760 but I can't eat another 1100 healthy calories. I can easily shove a couple of mars bars down to get the numbers up but that seems stupid.
I need to lose about 4 stone so I have plenty of fat reserves. Do I really need to eat back those calories?
I am trying to make sure when I do eat that I get plenty of fibrous veg, lean protein and wholegrains.
I've had success with my diet following the guidelines in this link -
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121...
You calculate your protein and fat intakes and then make up the rest of your calories with carbs. In your case I'd start at a 500 calorie deficit so
(1760 + 1100) - 500 = 2360
Try this for a couple of weeks and then adjust the carb calories up or down if you're not losing fat or have no energy for training.
Adding in nuts as a snack twice a day or a nice steak in the evening will bump up the calories.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121...
You calculate your protein and fat intakes and then make up the rest of your calories with carbs. In your case I'd start at a 500 calorie deficit so
(1760 + 1100) - 500 = 2360
Try this for a couple of weeks and then adjust the carb calories up or down if you're not losing fat or have no energy for training.
Adding in nuts as a snack twice a day or a nice steak in the evening will bump up the calories.
Edited by cliffe_mafia on Wednesday 8th May 10:16
MFP's approach is fine but you need to understand their reasoning. It is about having a mild calorie deficit. Search on their forum for "In place of a road map" as it gives a very good explanation of how it works as a lifestyle rather than a quick fix (only to be rebroken).
VLCDs don't work in the long run and that is what MFP is trying to help you avoid.
Also, if you're training for a triathlon, a VLCD is the worst thing to do so definitely do eat your calories back BUT make sure you're not over-estimating the calorie burn.
VLCDs don't work in the long run and that is what MFP is trying to help you avoid.
Also, if you're training for a triathlon, a VLCD is the worst thing to do so definitely do eat your calories back BUT make sure you're not over-estimating the calorie burn.
Thanks. The calories I take from my Garmin which is set up for my weight. It doesn't use the HR to adjust calories though. I usually knock 50 off to be sure.
I think on the days I am training I will have a bigger breakfast and lunch and maybe add a snack to up the calories a bit.
I have a lot to lose and want to lose some of it quickly but ultimately I want to keep it off and be able to train all year long.
I think on the days I am training I will have a bigger breakfast and lunch and maybe add a snack to up the calories a bit.
I have a lot to lose and want to lose some of it quickly but ultimately I want to keep it off and be able to train all year long.
The problem with rapid weight loss from a VLCD is that it f
ks up your metabolism. The body is good at protecting us from trying to kill ourselves. You will suffer a decreased metabolism plus a decrease in lean body mass (muscle) as much as you will lose fat. And then when you move to maintenance, you'll put on weight (ie won't really maintain).
Since you're training and clearly have time and energy for it, I'd focus on training and let nature do the rest. Eat to train - you need food for your body's natural functioning, food for the exercise and food for recovery.
Of course, there's nothing stopping you calorie cycling, carb cycling or practising Intermittent Fasting.
An example: my cousin (same age as me) was getting slightly podgy as he got lazy with exercise. Although MFP forumites swear by lifting, my cousin isn't interested in that or indeed any gym work. Instead he hit the swimming pool. A year later, he's got quite a decent swimmer's physique despite continuing to eat loads.
Train like an athlete, eat like an athlete, look like an athlete!
ks up your metabolism. The body is good at protecting us from trying to kill ourselves. You will suffer a decreased metabolism plus a decrease in lean body mass (muscle) as much as you will lose fat. And then when you move to maintenance, you'll put on weight (ie won't really maintain). Since you're training and clearly have time and energy for it, I'd focus on training and let nature do the rest. Eat to train - you need food for your body's natural functioning, food for the exercise and food for recovery.
Of course, there's nothing stopping you calorie cycling, carb cycling or practising Intermittent Fasting.
An example: my cousin (same age as me) was getting slightly podgy as he got lazy with exercise. Although MFP forumites swear by lifting, my cousin isn't interested in that or indeed any gym work. Instead he hit the swimming pool. A year later, he's got quite a decent swimmer's physique despite continuing to eat loads.
Train like an athlete, eat like an athlete, look like an athlete!
Edited by Hoofy on Wednesday 8th May 11:20
Hoofy said:
The problem with rapid weight loss from a VLCD is that it fks up your metabolism. The body is good at protecting us from trying to kill ourselves. You will suffer a decreased metabolism plus a decrease in lean body mass (muscle) as much as you will lose fat. And then when you move to maintenance, you'll put on weight. Since you're training and clearly have time and energy for it, I'd focus on training and let nature do the rest. Eat to train - you need food for your body's natural functioning, food for the exercise and food for recovery.
Of course, there's nothing stopping you calorie cycling, carb cycling or practising Intermittent Fasting.
Those defense mechanisms don't really come into effect until you are at least 10-12% body fat or below, or have a huge deficit. There is no need to calorie or carb cycle, or do re-feeds etc if you are carrying a lot of fat.ks up your metabolism. The body is good at protecting us from trying to kill ourselves. You will suffer a decreased metabolism plus a decrease in lean body mass (muscle) as much as you will lose fat. And then when you move to maintenance, you'll put on weight. Since you're training and clearly have time and energy for it, I'd focus on training and let nature do the rest. Eat to train - you need food for your body's natural functioning, food for the exercise and food for recovery.Of course, there's nothing stopping you calorie cycling, carb cycling or practising Intermittent Fasting.
If you are carrying a stone or two of unnecessary fat, as long as you stay over 1500 cals/day absolutely nothing will happen to your metabolic rate, etc, even if that's a 2000 calorie deficit
pilchardthecat said:
Those defense mechanisms don't really come into effect until you are at least 10-12% body fat or below, or have a huge deficit. There is no need to calorie or carb cycle, or do re-feeds etc if you are carrying a lot of fat.
If you are carrying a stone or two of unnecessary fat, as long as you stay over 1500 cals/day absolutely nothing will happen to your metabolic rate, etc, even if that's a 2000 calorie deficit
Sure. But there's a risk he'll push more. You humans are all the same. Tsk.If you are carrying a stone or two of unnecessary fat, as long as you stay over 1500 cals/day absolutely nothing will happen to your metabolic rate, etc, even if that's a 2000 calorie deficit
pilchardthecat said:
Those defense mechanisms don't really come into effect until you are at least 10-12% body fat or below, or have a huge deficit. There is no need to calorie or carb cycle, or do re-feeds etc if you are carrying a lot of fat.
If you are carrying a stone or two of unnecessary fat, as long as you stay over 1500 cals/day absolutely nothing will happen to your metabolic rate, etc, even if that's a 2000 calorie deficit
Very good advice and spot on. I was going to say that if you have 4 stone of excess this didn't come about from just lack of exercise. My advice would be don't get too hung up on calorie counting just yet. As long as you make a change to 'clean' er foods and add in some cardio, the weight will fall off. Your metabolic rate will fall as you get leaner(and without cardio). When you get a lot leaner your body will fight it. A good idea is to then carb cycle...one day in four eat more carbs which tricks your body into thinking all is well and you're not running out of food. It is also a very good idea to add in some cheat meals, maybe 2 a week otherwise you'll lose the will to keep going. Good luck!If you are carrying a stone or two of unnecessary fat, as long as you stay over 1500 cals/day absolutely nothing will happen to your metabolic rate, etc, even if that's a 2000 calorie deficit
Edited to add. The treadmill, cycle or whatever may tell you the calories burnt but it's all rubbish. If you do enough, say 35-40 mins you will burn just as many calories again in the following 24 hours which makes a huge difference. This is why cardio is critical. Hydration is even more important for weight loss. A 3% deficit =19% less strength. Drink plenty of water for weight loss.
Edited by burwoodman on Thursday 9th May 14:35
Edited by burwoodman on Thursday 9th May 14:36
burwoodman said:
If you do enough, say 35-40 mins you will burn just as many calories again in the following 24 hours
Quick question; I read somewhere that lifting weights has a more beneficial effect wrt long term weight loss, due to increased metabolism, over the following 24-48 hours. Have I got my facts wrong?T40ORA said:
Quick question; I read somewhere that lifting weights has a more beneficial effect wrt long term weight loss, due to increased metabolism, over the following 24-48 hours. Have I got my facts wrong?
I wouldn't say 'more' beneficial. Put it this way. We get fatter as we get older (other things being equal) because we suffer from muscle atrophy (losing muscle mass). Muscles burn more calories and keep ones metabolism higher. But weight training unless very fast (circuits) is not cardio and it is cardio that creates the afterburner effect. Weights doesn't because they are sudden bursts of energy which are not enduring long after you stop doing them.For me, mainly weights and some cardio is the best of both worlds. I've never really understood why people just run or cycle to 'keep fit' when an extra 5-10 pounds of muscle will not only keep your body more efficient, it has many other benefits which really come into play when you get a lot older.
Edited by burwoodman on Thursday 9th May 15:42
burwoodman said:
I wouldn't say 'more' beneficial. Put it this way. We get fatter as we get older (other things being equal) because we suffer from muscle atrophy (losing muscle mass). Muscles burn more calories and keep ones metabolism higher. But weight training unless very fast (circuits) is not cardio and it is cardio that creates the afterburner effect. Weights doesn't because they are sudden bursts of energy which are not enduring long after you stop doing them.
For me, mainly weights and some cardio is the best of both worlds. I've never really understood why people just run or cycle to 'keep fit' when an extra 5-10 pounds of muscle will not only keep your body more efficient, it has many other benefits which really come into play when you get a lot older.
OK, so I did understand about the benefit on the metabolism increases due to weight training (muscle mass increase). I guess I just wasn't aware of the afterburner effect of CV.For me, mainly weights and some cardio is the best of both worlds. I've never really understood why people just run or cycle to 'keep fit' when an extra 5-10 pounds of muscle will not only keep your body more efficient, it has many other benefits which really come into play when you get a lot older.
Edited by burwoodman on Thursday 9th May 15:42
And I agree about the mixture. If I only do CV, my body misses the weight training exercises. And vice versa.
Hoofy said:
MFP's approach is fine but you need to understand their reasoning. It is about having a mild calorie deficit. Search on their forum for "In place of a road map" as it gives a very good explanation of how it works as a lifestyle rather than a quick fix (only to be rebroken).
VLCDs don't work in the long run and that is what MFP is trying to help you avoid.
Also, if you're training for a triathlon, a VLCD is the worst thing to do so definitely do eat your calories back BUT make sure you're not over-estimating the calorie burn.
Most tracker apps seem to do this. Livestrong wont allow you to select your target loss as greater than 2lbs a week and manages your calorie defecit accordingly.VLCDs don't work in the long run and that is what MFP is trying to help you avoid.
Also, if you're training for a triathlon, a VLCD is the worst thing to do so definitely do eat your calories back BUT make sure you're not over-estimating the calorie burn.
Hoofy said:
... BUT make sure you're not over-estimating the calorie burn.
A thousand times this. Use a HRM if you aren't already to help estimate the calories burnt, HRM aren't anywhere near 100% accurate but they are far more accurate than MFP's calorie estimates or most exercise machines I've seen.
Don't forget that as you get fitter and lighter you'll burn far less calories than when you first started out exercising when you were fat and immobile.
If you are struggling to eat back your exercise calories look into drinking recovery drinks (proper ones not that full of sugar sports drink rubbish) or make your own by mixing oats and protein powder with fruit. A good recovery drink should be between 400 and 800 calories, drink it quickly before you feel full.
Sorry if this is a bit thread from the dead, but I spotted a real world example of this calorie counting issue, so thought i'd share.
I raced this weekend. My Garmin said I'd burnt 5200 cals. Strava estimated the same data to have burnt 8900, MyPlate 8500. All have the same height and weight data.
I raced this weekend. My Garmin said I'd burnt 5200 cals. Strava estimated the same data to have burnt 8900, MyPlate 8500. All have the same height and weight data.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff