Set myself to active
whitpauly
Posts: 1,483 Member
After being at lightly active for months and losing some of the 15 lbs I needed to lose I decided to switch to active to get more daily calories cuz I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not? Anyways being set to active gives me 1760 for the day and I exercise too every day,the question is will a 5'5 137 44 year old woman still lose(although slooow) on this many calories? Any words welcome please:)
0
Replies
-
What rate were you losing at when you stuck to 1560 calories? When you ate over your goal were you maintaining, gaining or still losing?
If you only have 15 lbs to lose then a small deficit of 250 calories is appropriate.
1760 sounds reasonable for weight loss if you are actually active without exercise.
Try it for 3-4 weeks and see what happens.2 -
The activity levels are just MFP's way of estimating how many calories you burn during the day outside of intentional exercise. Assuming that you haven't changed your usual daily routine, then changing the setting won't do anything by itself. It sounds like your real issue is that your prior calorie goal was too restrictive and you were going way overboard as a result. In that case, setting a higher calorie target is probably a good plan, assuming that higher target is still a deficit. Depending on how much you were overeating before, sticking to the higher daily goal might even result in faster weight loss - so if your goal before was 1560 but your binges brought your average up to 2060, then 1760 would lead to increased weight loss. It all depends on your specific numbers, though.2
-
Rather than adjust the activity setting, have you tried just adjusting to a more suitable rate of loss (you should be set at 0.5lb per week as you don't have a whole lot to lose it will be much slower) perhaps you have the rate of loss set too high?
Activity setting should reflect your non-exercise activity level, not your day inclusive of exercise.
This is how MFP comes up with your calorie allowance:
3 -
Your records are your only and best tool here.
Every single calculator out there is created by using a wide swath of people who are similar. (Height/weight/age/activity.) Add in the subjective factors of daily activity AND exercise intensity, and really no one can answer that for you.
As always, keep good records. Try to input your food as accurately as possible. Use your past results to guide you.
It's your experiment to run. Do it long enough to get good reliable data (like 4-6 weeks) before you make more changes.2 -
Thanks everyone for the input,yea I figure I'll try this for a couple of weeks,if I start to gain I'll switch it back but honestly it's easier mentally to keep below or at 1760 on a steadier bases than being all over the map with the 15601
-
I set my rate of loss goal to be 0.5 lb for the same reason. It gives me a high target to be under.0
-
I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you've gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining a few days a week is OK. You can still lose weight if you eat less than that a few days of the week.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight any easier. It comes down to you.5 -
I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining on a few days is OK but gaining is not.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight.
If changing the settings makes it easier for someone to consistently hit a deficit (and having a higher goal can help some people), then it will result in weight loss.
Just because it wouldn't work for you doesn't mean that it won't work for someone else.8 -
Doesn't seem liked messed up logic at all to me. I know personally I aim to be able to eat as much as possible while still losing weight. Isn't that the American Dream?
6 -
After being at lightly active for months and losing some of the 15 lbs I needed to lose I decided to switch to active to get more daily calories cuz I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not? Anyways being set to active gives me 1760 for the day and I exercise too every day,the question is will a 5'5 137 44 year old woman still lose(although slooow) on this many calories? Any words welcome please:)
Why not just set it to maintenance?2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining on a few days is OK but gaining is not.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight.
If changing the settings makes it easier for someone to consistently hit a deficit (and having a higher goal can help some people), then it will result in weight loss.
Just because it wouldn't work for you doesn't mean that it won't work for someone else.
You either eat a deficit or you don't, the website setting needs to be accurate to ensure that. If she sets the setting inaccurately just to make it easier, then it's possible MFP's recommendation isn't actually a deficit.
Active, as the sites says, "Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity". Lightly Active reads "Spend a good part of the day on your feet ". So unless she exercises daily, plus has a job that is semi-physical labor (most people do not), then the "active" setting is not accurate for her.
Sedentary/Lightly Active fits the demands of most jobs. What does OP do for a living?Doesn't seem liked messed up logic at all to me. I know personally I aim to be able to eat as much as possible while still losing weight. Isn't that the American Dream?
(Sarcasm?) If not, good luck with that.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining on a few days is OK but gaining is not.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight.
If changing the settings makes it easier for someone to consistently hit a deficit (and having a higher goal can help some people), then it will result in weight loss.
Just because it wouldn't work for you doesn't mean that it won't work for someone else.
You either eat a deficit or you don't, the website setting needs to be accurate to ensure that. If she sets the setting inaccurately just to make it easier, then it's possible MFP's recommendation isn't actually a deficit.
Active, as the sites says, "Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity". Lightly Active reads "Spend a good part of the day on your feet ". So unless she exercises daily, plus has a job that is semi-physical labor (most people do not), then the "active" setting is not accurate for her.Doesn't seem liked messed up logic at all to me. I know personally I aim to be able to eat as much as possible while still losing weight. Isn't that the American Dream?
(Sarcasm?) If not, good luck with that.
If she's exercising every day then active might be an appropriate setting...basically using the TDEE method. I have a desk job but exercise everyday...the calories for "active" were pretty accurate for me when I went to the TDEE method.
1,760 calories could easily be a deficit (though likely not a large one) for a female who is exercising most days. My wife is 42 and 5'3" on a good day and runs most days and lifts 2-3x per week...she loses weight pretty effortlessly on about 1800 calories.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining on a few days is OK but gaining is not.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight.
If changing the settings makes it easier for someone to consistently hit a deficit (and having a higher goal can help some people), then it will result in weight loss.
Just because it wouldn't work for you doesn't mean that it won't work for someone else.
You either eat a deficit or you don't, the website setting needs to be accurate to ensure that. If she sets the setting inaccurately just to make it easier, then it's possible MFP's recommendation isn't actually a deficit.
Active, as the sites says, "Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity". Lightly Active reads "Spend a good part of the day on your feet ". So unless she exercises daily, plus has a job that is semi-physical labor (most people do not), then the "active" setting is not accurate for her.Doesn't seem liked messed up logic at all to me. I know personally I aim to be able to eat as much as possible while still losing weight. Isn't that the American Dream?
(Sarcasm?) If not, good luck with that.
We have no indication that she has set it accurately or inaccurately. My point is that if "active" does represent a deficit for someone they will lose weight. And if they find it easier to adhere to a higher calorie goal (that still has them at a deficit) than a lower one, then changing the settings *will* result in weight loss.
OP was losing weight on "Lightly Active" even while having binges. While it's impossible for us to know if "Active" is indeed the right setting for her (or whether or not she is logging her exercise or including it in her activity), it's possible that it could.
But my point is this: that a calorie goal you adhere to is (and then adjust if you find it doesn't result in a deficit) is much easier to manage than a calorie goal that one is consistently unable to meet.3 -
I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you've gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining a few days a week is OK. You can still lose weight if you eat less than that a few days of the week.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight any easier. It comes down to you.
Why's that messed up? I was eating that many calories at "lightly active" and still losing,although slowly,,the "active"setting motivates me to be more active,I'm a hairstylist so on my feet at work and I cram in a lot of exercise when not at work,I feel like I'm starving at the suggested 1560,not munchy,,pit of stomach starving so I upped it3 -
Yes you will still lose. I am shorter (5ft 2) and a bit older and I can lose 0.5lb - 0.75lb a week on 1750. I'm pretty active, somewhere between lightly active and active.2
-
As she said, if she gains weight she'll know she's eating too much and eat less....I don't see what's wrong with that? She's got 15 lbs to lose, not 150, it's okay if she has a small deficit.1
-
If you are truly that active it looks like you will be at about 1/2 lb./week loss. You realize that exercise calories are added to your daily calorie budget, therefore if you exercise regularly then you should have that many calories extra to eat. I think that would be a better and more controlled way of adjusting your intake rather than arbitrarily raising your activity level.0
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining on a few days is OK but gaining is not.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight.
If changing the settings makes it easier for someone to consistently hit a deficit (and having a higher goal can help some people), then it will result in weight loss.
Just because it wouldn't work for you doesn't mean that it won't work for someone else.
You either eat a deficit or you don't, the website setting needs to be accurate to ensure that. If she sets the setting inaccurately just to make it easier, then it's possible MFP's recommendation isn't actually a deficit.
Active, as the sites says, "Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity". Lightly Active reads "Spend a good part of the day on your feet ". So unless she exercises daily, plus has a job that is semi-physical labor (most people do not), then the "active" setting is not accurate for her.Doesn't seem liked messed up logic at all to me. I know personally I aim to be able to eat as much as possible while still losing weight. Isn't that the American Dream?
(Sarcasm?) If not, good luck with that.
If she's exercising every day then active might be an appropriate setting...basically using the TDEE method. I have a desk job but exercise everyday...the calories for "active" were pretty accurate for me when I went to the TDEE method.
1,760 calories could easily be a deficit (though likely not a large one) for a female who is exercising most days. My wife is 42 and 5'3" on a good day and runs most days and lifts 2-3x per week...she loses weight pretty effortlessly on about 1800 calories.
I guess I don't consider exercising for 30 minutes to 1hr a day an "active" lifestyle. You burn so much more than that if you have an active job that keeps you always walking, moving things, etc throughout the entire day. The description reads "physical activity most of the day". If she's constantly walking around at her job, plus daily intense exercise, then the "active" setting is probably right for her.
Personally, I exercise daily and lift 2-3 times a week but still use "Sedentary" because the rest of the time I am sitting at a desk and it's description reads "spend most of the day sitting (e.g. bank teller, desk job)". My goal is 2 pounds/week, and I've been averaging about 2.5 pounds/week so I could probably switch it to "Lightly active".0 -
I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you've gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining a few days a week is OK. You can still lose weight if you eat less than that a few days of the week.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight any easier. It comes down to you.
Why's that messed up? I was eating that many calories at "lightly active" and still losing,although slowly,,the "active"setting motivates me to be more active,I'm a hairstylist so on my feet at work and I cram in a lot of exercise when not at work,I feel like I'm starving at the suggested 1560,not munchy,,pit of stomach starving so I upped it
Oh you were still losing while overeating the recommended calories? My bad I missed that part. I thought you were eating too much, then just eating way more because you "gave up" for that day.
For example, there's some people that will accidentally eat too much in a day, then go eat a bucket of ice cream because they feel like that day no longer matters.
1 -
After being at lightly active for months and losing some of the 15 lbs I needed to lose I decided to switch to active to get more daily calories cuz I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not? Anyways being set to active gives me 1760 for the day and I exercise too every day,the question is will a 5'5 137 44 year old woman still lose(although slooow) on this many calories? Any words welcome please:)
I'm close to your stats and at that level, I would simply maintain. I'm on maintenance now, and that's about what I eat.
ETA: Now that I think about it, with consistently added exercise, that could be a slow weight loss over time.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »I was almost always going over the recommended calories of 1560 then binging cuz I figured I'd already blown it why not?
Seriously what kind of mess up logic is that? Instead of maintaining, now you gained weight that day. You aren't that big, maintaining on a few days is OK but gaining is not.
Changing a setting on a website isn't going to make you lose weight.
If changing the settings makes it easier for someone to consistently hit a deficit (and having a higher goal can help some people), then it will result in weight loss.
Just because it wouldn't work for you doesn't mean that it won't work for someone else.
You either eat a deficit or you don't, the website setting needs to be accurate to ensure that. If she sets the setting inaccurately just to make it easier, then it's possible MFP's recommendation isn't actually a deficit.
Active, as the sites says, "Spend a good part of the day doing some physical activity". Lightly Active reads "Spend a good part of the day on your feet ". So unless she exercises daily, plus has a job that is semi-physical labor (most people do not), then the "active" setting is not accurate for her.Doesn't seem liked messed up logic at all to me. I know personally I aim to be able to eat as much as possible while still losing weight. Isn't that the American Dream?
(Sarcasm?) If not, good luck with that.
If she's exercising every day then active might be an appropriate setting...basically using the TDEE method. I have a desk job but exercise everyday...the calories for "active" were pretty accurate for me when I went to the TDEE method.
1,760 calories could easily be a deficit (though likely not a large one) for a female who is exercising most days. My wife is 42 and 5'3" on a good day and runs most days and lifts 2-3x per week...she loses weight pretty effortlessly on about 1800 calories.
I guess I don't consider exercising for 30 minutes to 1hr a day an "active" lifestyle. You burn so much more than that if you have an active job that keeps you always walking, moving things, etc throughout the entire day. The description reads "physical activity most of the day". If she's constantly walking around at her job, plus daily intense exercise, then the "active" setting is probably right for her.
Personally, I exercise daily and lift 2-3 times a week but still use "Sedentary" because the rest of the time I am sitting at a desk and it's description reads "spend most of the day sitting (e.g. bank teller, desk job)". My goal is 2 pounds/week, and I've been averaging about 2.5 pounds/week so I could probably switch it to "Lightly active".
Have you ever looked at a TDEE calculator? There descriptors will mention exercise.
Do you understand that you would eat exercise calories back with MFP so you would actually take in more than your base calories? If you're set to sedentary and then do exercise...guess what? You're not sedentary.
A lot of people who exercise regularly and consistently prefer the TDEE method...where you include exercise in your activity level. A lot of people start with a number and manually adjust it as per their actual results...these numbers aren't some kind of gospel. I only briefly used MFP's numbers and then adjusted according to my actual results and desired rate of loss while I was losing.
Personally, I think I'm doing ok...lost 40+ Lbs and will be 5 years maintenance this spring.
4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions