To ask about Calories burnt in Exercise?

[Sarahh2014]

Obviously put here for traffic ☺ I'm currently burning 250 calories on average a day through exercise,if I eat say 1500 calories a day does it literally mean it's like I've really eaten 1250? Sorry if this is a moronic question I didn't know if should eat the calories back as 1250 isn't a lot to have per day.Thanks

I’d like to know this too. I’ve got a habit of watching the calories count up on the bike or treadmill and mentally equate that to which treat I can have afterwards! I feel I might be missing the point slightly! 😂

yes, pretty much

Say you lose weight on 1500 calories.

If you eat 1500 calories, and exercise 250 calories, you will lose weight a bit faster.

If you eat 1750 calories and exercise 250 calories, then that's 1500 net and loss will be nearer predicted rate.

When I was actively losing weight, I tended not to eat back exercise calories and they were my hedge against under estimating the amount I was eating or forgetting to log something. And different apps/charts gave differing numbers of calories for the same activity which made me less sure even if I used the more pessimistic figures.

But when I donmt need to lose, I eat them,

No, you've still eaten 1500, but you've burnt an extra 250, however this calculation should be approached with caution as it's very difficult to measure calorie burn accurately. If you're aiming for weight loss, don't eat the extra 250, if not, go ahead!

OP, you are nearly right, but don't forget those calories burnt on exercise could also go on building up muscles. A lot depends on the nature of the exercise, how intense it is etc.

No it doesn't.

Your body burns a certain amount of energy (measured as calories) each day just to function. (Called your basal metabolic rate). This will vary according to a lot of factors, but will be c. 1400 if you are a middle aged woman.

So the first 1400 calories your body uses each day keep you - well, alive basically.

Activity on top of that then uses more calories. So the typical "recommended" amount is c. 2000 for a woman, covering general daily activity (e.g. getting out of bed!).

Exercise on top of that burns more calories. So if you're burning 250 a day, then maybe you're burning 2,250 calories of energy per day.

Where does the energy come from - the easiest source is the food you eat. So burn 2,250 calories and eat 2,250 calories = your weight maintains, because your body uses that source of energy for its fuel.

If you eat fewer calories than you burn, your body will access them elsewhere in your body, and you will lose weight through burning those stored calories.

It is all more complicated than that makes it seem in terms of how the body decides what energy store to use, but ultimately if you are eating 1,750 calories, and burning off 2,000 calories in a day, that should result in weight loss. But it's not that the 250 cals you're burning through exercise don't count...

Everyone's basic daily rate is different, few people are up at the 2000 mark.

It basically means the more calories you burn the higher the deficit will be and the quicker you will see results. If you offset that exercise by eating those calories back, then clearly you will not see results as fast, or no results.

Are you really going to the gym just so you can eat more? Are you just going for the health benefits?

I went on a very strict diet a few years ago, where I weighed and measured everything I ate and calculated my calorie burn quite precisely (running, so time/pace calculation).

I found that I could predict my weight loss very, very accurately indeed by adding up all the calories I ate and 'minusing' the exercise. The exception was around my period, when the weight would 'stick' for a few days, and then all fall off in one go. (I suspect this was water retention)

I also found that a very restricted diet (800 calories net) and a great deal of exercise (10k of running 5 times a week) were needed for me to maintain 2lb of weight loss a week over months and months. It was really hard work!

I definitely need to get back to it though!

Yes that's basically right. Eating them back or not is the tricky bit. I would be fine on 1200 a day for weight loss so wouldn't eat them back, but your bare minimum recommended cal intake may be different. As above it depends on your bmr. If my exercise took me under 1200 I would eat some back.

You're still eating 1500 a day, which for many is quite a lot if trying to lose weight . You're just burning 250 more than you would if you didn't go to the gym..someone will come along and tell you how to work out your recommended daily allowance of calories for your height/weight/lifestyle.

Thanks all I'm eating more like 1200 a day if I'm honest I can't lose weight if eat more

if You're exercising to lose weight, then eating back those calories isn't a great idea.

Firstly, often equipment is very wrong in terms of calories burnt. It's too general and often high, Secondly the more calories you eat, the less the deficit is and the slower uou lose weight.

It's your call on whether to eat them back or not, but just be aware it will either slow or halt weight loss depending on how much you eat. You can then make an informed decision,

No... Whilst there's a general correlation between calories consumed and weight lost/gained (after all compare eating 1 brussels sprout vs daily XL pizza and doughnuts), it's a non-linear relationship.

If you were a simple machine, then basic thermodynamic physics would account for energy in vs energy out and work done, like shoveling coal into a steam train and it going x far down the tracks. But you're not, you're a complex biochemical, endocrinological, metabolic and microbiological being, (psychological and cultural aspects are important too). All those factors make calories uneven on their effect on the body.

In short, it's about macros - carbohydrates, proteins and fats - and their ratio in the diet. Carbohydrates elicit a strong insulin response in your body and it is insulin which signals to your body to convert carbs to fat and to lay them down around your abdomen. Insulin response is a crucial piece of the calorie equation... calories cannot be counted in isolation alone. Further to this, abdominal fat can lead to insulin resistance, meaning your body has to pump out more and more insulin to cope with the same amount of carbs. This cycle out of control becomes obesity/T2 diabetes/related conditions. 500 calories of buttery bacon and mushroom omelette has a totally different metabolic effect on the body as munching 500 calories of haribo & crisps. There are other appetite hormones too such as ghrelin and leptin which signal feeling hungry and full up. Eating carby junk sends these signals out of whack.

If you eat low carb, medium protein and high fat, you will find your appetite and cravings will settle down after the first few groggy days. Protein and fat are natural appetite regulators, carbs not so much, which is why you can stuff yourself so much more eating junky carbs than eating steaks & salads.

Exercise is also non-linear in relation to calories, it has a tenuous link to weightloss. See it as a qualitative thing in relation to your overall health, metabolism and mental wellbeing, rather than a quantitative metric in relation to calories in your diet.

There's also a lot of increasing evidence that the profile of micro-organisms you have in the gut affects your weight and health. Some types of microbe consume fat, so it doesn't get assimilated by your own body. So eat unprocessed pre- and pro- biotic foods such as vegetables, salad, berries, kimchi, sauerkraut, kefir, live yoghurt etc.