I have been told different things by different people/threads/forums etc.
How do you go about this. Let's say I want to stick to a 1200 calorie diet for example.
Does that mean I eat 1200 calories and then workout (say I burn 600 calories) and I get to eat 600 more calories?
Or is 1200 calories what i eat, regardless of my workouts?
I ask because I try to stick between 1100-1600 calories on a rotating every other day schedule and I probably burn close to 800 calories a day in workouts/yoga. So I eat to compensate and have the right fuel.
Recently though, somebody told me this was wrong. I don't know how I could live off of 200 calories a day though.
Does this question make sense? I am happy with my progress, so this is really more of a "want to know" basis. Thanks so much!
I never eat back my exercise calories - when I did, I gained weight. I'll be interested to hear the feedback from everyone because it's never made sense to me.....
There are different schools of thought on this. It seems like MOST people at 3FC don't "eat back" exercise calories. This is for a few reasons...primary among them being that there is no real way to know how many calories you're burning. Even with expensive gadgets like the bodybug or heart rate monitors, it's all just a guess.
Take my own personal example. I wore a heart rate monitor that tracked my HR and measured my calories burned for 4 months straight in early 2010. It said that I burned an average, in all of my activity, of 3200-3800 calories per day. I was eating 1800 and I barely maintained, and in fact, had to go just a bit lower to counteract a slow gain that was going on. My body is not the "standard body" that they use in those HRM calculations. So who knows what I burn? And that was with a "precise" measurement tool. Calculators on the internet, meters on cardio machines...those are even less precise (and most people have found, an overestimation when compared even to a heart rate monitor number).
Another thing to consider - if you're eating 1200 calories and burning 800, it's not as though the caloric burn also gets rid of all of the nutrients you ate. You still get the vitamins, minerals, amino acids, etc associated with your food. So you're not "living on" 400 calories, you're living on the nutrients of 1200 calories.
So, if you're happy with your rate of loss, and with what you're eating, there's no reason to change it. If you find yourself extra hungry from long workouts, eat a bit more. If not, stay where you are. The exercise will be a "bonus" on your deficit, and you won't need to spend time worrying about how many you burned and how many you need to eat back.
My body is not the "standard body" that they use in those HRM calculations. So who knows what I burn?
THIS^^! I don't think those monitors are the least bit accurate and am a fan of listening to your own body. EXECELLENT ADVICE Mandalinn82 just gave you OP...spot on!
I don't eat back my calories after exercising. As it was mentioned above, who knows what you are *really* burning, so I don't keep track of it. I view the calories I burn from exercising as an extra perk.
Ditto for me. I don't eat back my exercise calories. The only time I could was when I was playing rugby-- practicing 3x a week and a game on Saturday, plus training on off days. Even then, despite all the exercise, I was maintaining and not losing.
I'd say if what you are doing is working for you then stick with it. Only when it stops working OR you feel like you are starving then I'd add more in. It seems you are compensating on days you are eating around 1600 calories anyways.
I agree with the others, I dont eat back my exercise calories. I treat the calories I burn as a bonus and I dont even track them. As the others said, you never REALLY know.
I want an overall -500 calories a day. So I look at it from that perspective.
Either from diet alone or combo exercise and diet.
So yes, I do eat back my exercise calories if I need the extra snack. -1000 sounds lovely, but not so great if it leads to a binge a day or too later because it dipped too low.
I rather lose slower and saner. I don't need my blood sugar bopping around.
Wow, thank you so much! I am happy to be losing weight, but not losing the 2 pounds a week I have in the past (because of eating back some calories).
I do eat when I am hungry. No need to kill my metabolism and torture myself.
I guess it's hard because I never thought about the "nutrient" factor! Awesome post by the way!
It is hard to know exactly how many calories I burn, so perhaps I will take that into consideration now.
I am just very active and I don't to hurt my body while losing weight.
I do Bikram yoga every day and sometimes twice a day. I typically do cardio 3x a week and weights/resistance one a week. Most days I also do a vinyasa yoga, so i really eat to fuel properly.
ANOTHER QUESTION: I am 5"3 and 138-140 pounds right now. I want to lose about 2 pounds a week. What is my calorie intake then? Or what should it be? Is the 1200-1600 too much? too little? Should I even worry about it? Oh man, this is confusing!!!
Quick Question...
I don't think those monitors are the least bit accurate and am a fan of listening to your own body. EXECELLENT ADVICE Mandalinn82 just gave you OP...spot on!
