Question about consuming calories earned from exercise

quickbeam

So, to date I've not been consuming the calories I've earned for exercise, but I'm wondering if there's ever a stage when you should start to consume more based on the calories burned?

To explain by example:
Say I need to consume 1,500 calories to lose a pound a week. I then do 100 calories worth of exercise one day. I'm still going to only consume 1,500 calories, and leave the 100 earned as "bonus" so that maybe I'll lose more than a pound a week.

But let's say that I go on a mammoth training session (currently doing some long runs, so calories earned are now increasing), and earn 1,000 calories. Should I still count them as a bonus and still only consume 1,500 calories. Or am I doing the body a disservice by not feeding it to replenish the energy consumed?

If I should eat more to at least consume some of the calories earned, then where is the break-even point? Is there any kind of simple guideline on this, like say, anything up to 500 can be counted as a bonus, but feed your body anything above and beyond that? Or is it a case of listening to your body and feeding yourself if you feel you need it.

Truthfully, up to now I've been keeping *all* calories as a bonus, and I feel okay with it, but I am starting to worry that I'm causing more damage to myself in the long term by doing this.

I'm also aware that the calories that apps tell me I've earned are to be taken with a pinch of salt, I don't rely on them too much, which is another reason I stick to the 1,500 limit.

Thoughts?

mathie

quickbeam wrote: »

So, to date I've not been consuming the calories I've earned for exercise, but I'm wondering if there's ever a stage when you should start to consume more based on the calories burned?

Just recounting what I do personally but I would definitely consume more on days I've exercised than on days I haven't. I saw an interview with the Team Sky nutritionist (cycling) and he was saying similar. Eat more around longer and harder rides. Eat less when you aren't going hard.

quickbeam wrote: »

To explain by example:
Say I need to consume 1,500 calories to lose a pound a week. I then do 100 calories worth of exercise one day. I'm still going to only consume 1,500 calories, and leave the 100 earned as "bonus" so that maybe I'll lose more than a pound a week.

But let's say that I go on a mammoth training session (currently doing some long runs, so calories earned are now increasing), and earn 1,000 calories. Should I still count them as a bonus and still only consume 1,500 calories. Or am I doing the body a disservice by not feeding it to replenish the energy consumed?

IMHO you definitely need to fuel your exercise. Post exercise you need to immediately replenish you energy (glycogen stores) with high carbs and then within a few hours consume some good protein to aid the repair.

quickbeam wrote: »

If I should eat more to at least consume some of the calories earned, then where is the break-even point? Is there any kind of simple guideline on this, like say, anything up to 500 can be counted as a bonus, but feed your body anything above and beyond that? Or is it a case of listening to your body and feeding yourself if you feel you need it.

Truthfully, up to now I've been keeping *all* calories as a bonus, and I feel okay with it, but I am starting to worry that I'm causing more damage to myself in the long term by doing this.

I personally listen to my body. I've calorie restricted before and found it didn't go well with training. I'd lose weight but also lose energy to a far greater degree and it just wasn't worth it.

RE Calories as a bonus ...An incredibly difficult one to answer but have a read of this ...

https://www.nia.nih.gov/newsroom/announcements/2009/05/study-shows-metabolic-adaptation-calorie-restriction

quickbeam wrote: »

I'm also aware that the calories that apps tell me I've earned are to be taken with a pinch of salt, I don't rely on them too much, which is another reason I stick to the 1,500 limit.

Thoughts?

You'd be right to question it and I started a thread on the very subject.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=103627289

"However, errors on energy expenditure were far greater, ranging from the lowest at 27.4% for the FitBit Surge to the highest error of 92.6% for the PulseOn device. Data on energy expenditure was not available for the Samsung device."

That's quite a margin of error!

mathie

Another one to look at ...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19197210

Zillah

I wouldn't count the exercise calories at all if I was trying to lose weight. If you're lucky it will help counteract our disposition towards optimism when measuring what we've eaten (low balling portions, forgetting the occasional snack, etc). Running is a very energy efficient exercise, it would take a hell of a lot to burn 1000. Any device making those measurements is making a very big guess; personally I think it's mostly voodoo.

But there's a very easy test: if you're losing weight too quickly then you're not eating enough. Maybe the portions are too small, maybe you're burning a lot more than you think through exercise (unlikely).

If you're not losing weight too quickly then your calorie intake is fine. You should always be meeting your protein needs of course.

I am starting to worry that I'm causing more damage to myself in the long term by doing this.

Are you losing weight? How quickly?

quickbeam

Zillah wrote: »

Are you losing weight? How quickly?

Averages about 1.5 pounds a week which is reasonable I should think. However the last few weeks has been more like 2.5 pounds a week which would coincide with the increased distances I'm running. Not an excessively huge amount but based on the premise of 1-2 pounds per week a little on the high side.

Obviously I'm delighted seeing the results but it did get me wondering / worrying if I was doing myself damage in the long run by not eating more.

Alf Veedersane

What is the ultimate goal?

Are you looking to lose weight and just running to help with that?

If it's just to lose weight and depending on the weight you have to lose, it's probably not going to be a problem. Not at 2.5 lbs per week. But like I said, that kind of depends on how much you could stand to lose.

quickbeam

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

What is the ultimate goal?

Are you looking to lose weight and just running to help with that?

If it's just to lose weight and depending on the weight you have to lose, it's probably not going to be a problem. Not at 2.5 lbs per week. But like I said, that kind of depends on how much you could stand to lose.

I am still officially overweight by BMI (and just by how I look and feel) so another stone would be primary goal. This after many, many months working on it so you can guess from where I started. Once that stone is lost we'll see how I feel and maybe look to lose another stone but no more.

Yes, I took up running mainly as a way to lose weight but I like it too and won't be quitting any time soon and certainly not just because I reach goal weight.

I'd expected weight loss to slow down as I got nearer to goal so it's been a (pleasant) surprise that it's actually speeding up. At least if the trend of the last few weeks continues.

Alf Veedersane

quickbeam wrote: »

I am still officially overweight by BMI (and just by how I look and feel) so another stone would be primary goal. This after many, many months working on it so you can guess from where I started. Once that stone is lost we'll see how I feel and maybe look to lose another stone but no more.

Yes, I took up running mainly as a way to lose weight but I like it too and won't be quitting any time soon and certainly not just because I reach goal weight.

I'd expected weight loss to slow down as I got nearer to goal so it's been a (pleasant) surprise that it's actually speeding up. At least if the trend of the last few weeks continues.

If you start feeling like you're flagging sooner than you should during a run, don't be afraid to start eating into your deficit a bit more.

Otherwise, you're probably good to go as is.

quickbeam

Thanks. I've bought fuel* to try on long runs and will start to need them pretty soon. As to whether the calories in the fuel will be taken out of the baseline figure or considered extra I'll see towards the end if the day by how my energy levels feel.

*dates and raisins - trying to keep away from the processed gunk.

Alf Veedersane

quickbeam wrote: »

Thanks. I've bought fuel* to try on long runs and will start to need them pretty soon. As to whether the calories in the fuel will be taken out of the baseline figure or considered extra I'll see towards the end if the day by how my energy levels feel.

*dates and raisins - trying to keep away from the processed gunk.

Just add them as extra intake. It's just to inform your weight loss against caloric intake, e.g. I had X calories across the week, ran Y km and lost Z lbs.

Also, you don't need the extra fuel on the runs per se

Mellor

There's too many variables to give a fits-all answer. But in general, I'd say that if the goal is to lose weight. Then eating back the calories is counter productive.
Also, if you've already made an allowance for activity when working out your bmr. Then you're already including them. Adding then on is counting them twice

quickbeam

Mellor wrote: »

There's too many variables to give a fits-all answer. But in general, I'd say that if the goal is to lose weight. Then eating back the calories is counter productive.
Also, if you've already made an allowance for activity when working out your bmr. Then you're already including them. Adding then on is counting them twice

I'm not doing this. I have been saving them. My question was, does it get to the point that you should at least consume some of the calories burned through exercise.

My BMR calculation is based on a sedentary lifestyle, so calories burned through exercise are only counted once, and saved to help the weigh loss along.

Zillah

You should also consider some resistance exercise. It's one thing to lose weight, it's another to actually be strong and healthy. You won't build much muscle running around all the time.

quickbeam

Zillah wrote: »

You should also consider some resistance exercise. It's one thing to lose weight, it's another to actually be strong and healthy. You won't build much muscle running around all the time.

That's true, and something I am missing, and am looking to get in to, hopefully in the near future.

Mellor

quickbeam wrote: »

I'm not doing this. I have been saving them. My question was, does it get to the point that you should at least consume some of the calories burned through exercise.

I said it is counter productive, not that you were doing it.


Your questions is way to vague to give any sort of accurate answer. There is a point where it's better to consume some energy back. But off the top of my head; bmr calories, size of deficit, exercise energy burned, body fat percentage are all factors.

quickbeam

Mellor wrote: »

I said it is counter productive, not that you were doing it.


Your questions is way to vague to give any sort of accurate answer. There is a point where it's better to consume some energy back. But off the top of my head; bmr calories, size of deficit, exercise energy burned, body fat percentage are all factors.

Thanks. I guess the best course of action is to listen to the body and gauge weight loss on calories consumed and go from there.