10,000 Steps or not?

fitmom4lifemfp

MelanieCN77 wrote: »

fitmom4lifemfp wrote: »

MelanieCN77 wrote: »

Firstly I agree that being more active even just be getting up and walking around a little is better than not BUT as this is in the General Diet and Weight Loss area of the boards, in that sense I want to agree with TeaBea that getting 10k steps over the 16 or so hours or so a day you are up and about will have negligible effect on your calories out.

10K steps over the *very few hours* that I am up and about (8 hours at a desk, 8 hours in bed, 1 hour sitting in a car) absolutely makes a difference in MY calories out.

Your very few hours versus piecemeal over a whole day was the point I was making.

I don't get your point though. 5 miles for me, is about 500 calories. If I didn't bother, it would be easy to go home with less than 2k steps. That's quite difference, calorie-wise. Over a week, that's the difference between losing a pound and NOT losing a pound.

spiffychick85

I love hitting at least 10k steps a day...I'm a teacher so I hit 7k before I even get home for the evening. Honestly though some of these responses have me wondering...is it a waste of my time? If I pace around my house for the evening to get those last 3k steps...do they not "count" as exercise? I don't plan on giving up on it at the moment. My fit bit estimates CO is 2200....I honestly eat between 1300-1500 so I figure I'm at a deficit regardless.

SusanMFindlay

MelanieCN77 wrote: »

I wasn't being snobby. If I ate those Fitbit calories back I wouldn't lose, so that tells me something about the calories out not quite being correct.

When I didn't realize I needed to eat them back, I lost weight disturbingly fast. They count. A lot.

IMO, most people who think they don't fall into one of three categories: misunderstanding what FitBit is telling you (confusing total burn with exercise burn), underestimating calorie intake, or low end of the normal distribution of metabolic rates. Be completely sedentary for a month then get 10,000 steps for a month. Eat the same. Guarantee you'll lose more weight the second month (and it will be a statistically significant difference).

Christine_72

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

mlinci

I do 10-12k steps a day and earn betweeen 400-550 extra calories for that. So that makes an enourmous difference to my TDEE, from 1600 to over 2000. I'm a 5'5 woman, current weight just over 140.
This was particularly important to me when I was losing 1lb per week - difference between eating 1100 per day (not recommended) and eating about 1600 per day. Massive difference.

MelanieCN77

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

That's what I figure but I think it's different horses for different courses. Everything we'll hear is anecdotal from both sides, unless there's long term data out there somewhere.

For the record, why I hold this opinion: I used Fitbit in the past, then changed to an Apple Watch. I recently started wearing both and comparing, with only the AW linked to MFP. MFP has a quirk whereby it'll give me step calories it gets from iOS but as soon as I log a workout it will take them away for the day, even if they were earned at a totally different time than the workout (it's not negative calories, just a software bug). It was never a ton, 40 or 50 tops, so I let it be and figure if it was a real thing it'd roll into my deficit and be helpful. Now I am within 5lbs of my weight goal and boy has my loss rate slowed. If I were to look at Fitbit right now it would have more calories for me than AW/MFP tells me as it is still counting those casual steps that the MFP/AW bug takes away, which is what has worked for me for 8 months now, I'm down 30lbs, not excessively fast at all. Today Fitbit has about 175 more cals that it says I earned with those steps. Every day I have a couple hundred extra deficit calories I am not paying attention to? Why am I not losing as much as such a deficit would imply? Because that casual steps to calories isn't accurate. Not for me.

Like I said I wasn't being snobby, I have data that bears it out for me. Obviously some of you here have different experience but I think everyone should consider both ideas as it might become relevant somewhere down the line when you really have to tighten up to get the last leg done.

no44s4me

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

My adjustments on days when I just arbitrarily log 10K versus days when I purposefully rack up the steps seem to be lower. I found this article one day about the impact of getting 3000 purposeful steps:
http://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019/404/

Maybe it has some merit, but to me there's no holy step grail. I think just being more active is better than sitting all the time which is what my life lends itself to be. 2 years of TDEE data from FitBit bears out that maybe it does overestimates my daily burn, but I just adjust the MPF number to compensate. No big deal, I think most people overthink the pursuit of the magical TDEE number. I think it's just a range for most people, and hard as hell to nail down exactly.

Keapix

MelanieCN77 wrote: »

I wasn't being snobby. If I ate those Fitbit calories back I wouldn't lose, so that tells me something about the calories out not quite being correct.

I have my goals set to a 1/2 lb loss per week, but if I don't eat my Fitbit calories back I lose around 2 lb per week. If I eat some back I lose around 1lb per week.

1234newman

Christine_72 wrote: »

1234newman wrote: »

That study I quoted worries me. Because over the years with work and family dominating I found myself without a close group of friends. That probably didn't help with weight too.

How I remedy that in retirement is my present problem, along with losing weight and getting some uni study going for interest.

I would have thought having a close group of friends would promote weight gain.. More friends equal more socialising, equal more eating and drinking.

Hi Christine,
The doctor told me that while being a carer (plus regular work too) I had fallen into the habit of eating a lot at the end of the day and calorie dense for convenience because I didn't feel like making myself a regular meal and not so much in the am and lunch, where coffee often sufficed.

When the birds flew the nest and I moved too (ceased the carer role), however I continued the habit/practice of not getting out much - no friends. But friends give you the reason and opportunity to get about and keep active and busy. So I am now trying to correct that for good reasons. I hope that explains it.

Francl27

Christine_72 wrote: »

1234newman wrote: »

That study I quoted worries me. Because over the years with work and family dominating I found myself without a close group of friends. That probably didn't help with weight too.

How I remedy that in retirement is my present problem, along with losing weight and getting some uni study going for interest.

I would have thought having a close group of friends would promote weight gain.. More friends equal more socialising, equal more eating and drinking.

No lie. I gained 5 lbs last year because I see my friends every week end!

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

I actually burn more calories for the same amount of steps if I have an active day at home than if I use the treadmill for an hour then sit the rest of the day. Something about having my heart rate elevated for most of the day I guess? (I use a fitbit charge 2).

Tacklewasher

Francl27 wrote: »

I actually burn more calories for the same amount of steps if I have an active day at home than if I use the treadmill for an hour then sit the rest of the day. Something about having my heart rate elevated for most of the day I guess? (I use a fitbit charge 2).

I find this as well.

ritzvin

Christine_72 wrote: »

1234newman wrote: »

That study I quoted worries me. Because over the years with work and family dominating I found myself without a close group of friends. That probably didn't help with weight too.

How I remedy that in retirement is my present problem, along with losing weight and getting some uni study going for interest.

I would have thought having a close group of friends would promote weight gain.. More friends equal more socialising, equal more eating and drinking.

Depends on the friends. Sedentary friends who always want to go to a restaurant or bar and just sit and hang out - then probably yes. Most of my current friends, I know from hiking, cycling, orienteering, or dancing...we rarely just sit around and eat/drink except after or during a physical activity.

fitmom4lifemfp

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

I prefer to RUN. Certainly there is more cardio benefit that way. But until my knee feels like it can take it, I am stuck with walking. But I walk pretty briskly...3.5 to 4 mph, sometimes faster, when I am walking for exercise. As far as calories, yes I believe the calorie burn is a bit more - my HRM always shows maybe 10-15 calories less a mile for walking vs running. But it isn't enough for me to worry about. For me it's more about the cardio benefit.

SusanMFindlay

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

Slow shuffling will definitely burn fewer calories than taking normal steps or brisk walking. I don't think it matters at all, though, whether the walking is "purposeful" (i.e. "I'm going for a walk to get exercise") or "incidental" (walking from my car to the office, walking from my office to my classroom, walking around running errands, etc.)

Ming1951

I also think it doesn't matter, when I started to just walk..I wasn't burning a lot of calories but just walking made me burn some...as I continue to walk my distance has increased 1/4 mile to sometimes 3 miles. Some days even my speed has increased. Last week I did 3 miles in 56 minutes. I know that isn't great but I have bad knees and I'm older. Not all my 10,000 is in "my wall" but at least 1/4-1/2 is. It is helping me immensely.

fitmom4lifemfp

Ming1951 wrote: »

I also think it doesn't matter, when I started to just walk..I wasn't burning a lot of calories but just walking made me burn some...as I continue to walk my distance has increased 1/4 mile to sometimes 3 miles. Some days even my speed has increased. Last week I did 3 miles in 56 minutes. I know that isn't great but I have bad knees and I'm older. Not all my 10,000 is in "my wall" but at least 1/4-1/2 is. It is helping me immensely.

That's 3.21 mph, and definitely a good pace. Good job!

For reference, you can check your pace here.
http://www.calculator.net/pace-calculator.html

LessCookiess

I think it's a good goal to have especially if someone is usually sedentary at least having a number in mind which is usually about 3 miles.