Not active+excersise or lightly active no exercise?

JK1542020

So im sorry to repeat my question and im grateful to everyone who replied last time but...its still not going in.

I dont know if i should set myself as not active and log my excersise or if i should set myself as lightly active and not bother logging the excersise?

I am in lockdown right now and cant leave the house even for a walk. My house is small, I have 2 young kids but stuck in the house im mostly supervising sitting down. Yes im doing housework but its not very strenuous. Some days more than others. I do a walking workout excersise video which is 30 minutes low impact every day.

I dont like logging excersise because i cant see how it can possibley know how many calories i burnt or be accurate. So i set myself as lightly active and just didnt input the excersise. Is that ok, assuming i do the work out every day?

AnnPT77

freelymama wrote: »

So im sorry to repeat my question and im grateful to everyone who replied last time but...its still not going in.

I dont know if i should set myself as not active and log my excersise or if i should set myself as lightly active and not bother logging the excersise?

I am in lockdown right now and cant leave the house even for a walk. My house is small, I have 2 young kids but stuck in the house im mostly supervising sitting down. Yes im doing housework but its not very strenuous. Some days more than others. I do a walking workout excersise video which is 30 minutes low impact every day.

I dont like logging excersise because i cant see how it can possibley know how many calories i burnt or be accurate. So i set myself as lightly active and just didnt input the excersise. Is that ok, assuming i do the work out every day?

That's not theoretically ideal, but you can do it. Monitor your weight loss rate carefully. If you seem to be losing too fast, especially after the first week, and alongside that you start feeling weak or fatigued for otherwise unexplained reasons, eat more. Losing too slowly is frustrating, but losing too fast can be a health risk.

If you seem to be going along OK, stick with that routine for 4-6 weeks (at least one full menstrual period if you're in fertile years, so you can compare the same relative point in two different cycles). If the first one or two weeks are very unusually high or low loss compared to the others, ignore those and use a full cycle after that. Your average weekly weight loss rate from that period should give you enough data to adjust your calorie goal to lose at a sensible rate, going forward.

Here's the thing, with exercise or even daily activity: If you've been doing a particular routine, and targeting a fixed number of calories while doing it, and get particular results . . . then there's some change in your activity routine . . . that can have a meaningful impact on your results. Sometimes even sort of subtle changes have an effect. So, be aware of that, and watch for it.

Example: If you're working out daily and then something comes up where you only have time to work out twice a week, that may make a difference, and slow down loss. Or, if you get much more active outdoors as lockdowns loosen, and you're out playing with the kids more, that may speed things up. It's important to pay attention to results, and adjust if necessary.

Make sense?

Best wishes!

JK1542020

This makes a lot of sense thank you for taking the time to answer! Can i ask one more thing so i dont mess it up if i do syary logging the excersise...do i eat all those calories back? Are they accurate? What if the mfp calories is way off and i end up over?

AnnPT77

freelymama wrote: »

This makes a lot of sense thank you for taking the time to answer! Can i ask one more thing so i dont mess it up if i do syary logging the excersise...do i eat all those calories back? Are they accurate? What if the mfp calories is way off and i end up over?

It's hard to make a generalization about the calories for exercise. Many people worry that they may be over-estimated, so start by eating back 50% of the estimate.

Here's the thing: If we set up MFP based on daily activity (as designed), and we do some exercise on top of that, but don't log it and eat it back . . . we know for 100% sure that that zero calorie estimate for the exercise is wrong. If we log what MFP says, it might be too high, or it might not.

But think about it in context: If I tell MFP I want to lose a pound a week, and I set my activity level based on daily life activity (before exercise) as per instructions, MFP gives me an estimated daily calorie goal that has a 500 calorie daily deficit built into it (in general terms).

Let's say that I then do some exercise for which MFP estimates 500 calories (which would be quite a lot of exercise calories, really - many people's regular estimates would be less). Let's say that exercise estimate is (eek!) twice as many calories as reality. The exercise was actually 250. But I ate the whole 500. I'm still 250 calories under my maintenance calories (ate up half my MFP deficit). Even if I do that every single day, I'll still lose weight, if the base calorie estimate is on point. I'll just lose a little more slowly than I expected.

After doing this for 4-6 weeks, I'll see that I lost more slowly than expected, and that I still have room to lose a little faster safely, and I'll adjust my calorie goal downward by 250 calories. So, in the big picture, it isn't usually a big deal. Not worth worrying about: Experience will sort things out.

So, if you're worried, you can eat a portion of the exercise estimate, if you like. Then, after 4-6 weeks, you still can adjust. If the exercise estimate was right all along, you get to eat more when you adjust. Still no big deal. Not worth worrying about: Experience will sort things out.

Eating zero calories for exercise is a bad plan (without adding to activity level) generally, because it can be a health risk. Eating some or all of logged exercise is safer. The "eat 50%" idea is just kind of a safe-ish middle ground for starters, if worried about it being overestimated.

The one thing I'd advise against: Being inconsistent. Pick a way of accounting for your exercise, and how much of it you'll eat back, and stick with it for the trial period. If you change your mind and your practice lots of times during your 4-6 week period, it garbages up your experience data, and makes it less useful. Pick an approach, one that feels manageable, and stick with it that long. If you decide you don't like that approach, you can always start another trial period with a different approach later.

I know patience is hard, but it's kind of magical. Worry is optional, the 4-6 weeks experience will sort things out.

JK1542020

AnnPT77 wrote: »

freelymama wrote: »

This makes a lot of sense thank you for taking the time to answer! Can i ask one more thing so i dont mess it up if i do syary logging the excersise...do i eat all those calories back? Are they accurate? What if the mfp calories is way off and i end up over?

It's hard to make a generalization about the calories for exercise. Many people worry that they may be over-estimated, so start by eating back 50% of the estimate.

Here's the thing: If we set up MFP based on daily activity (as designed), and we do some exercise on top of that, but don't log it and eat it back . . . we know for 100% sure that that zero calorie estimate for the exercise is wrong. If we log what MFP says, it might be too high, or it might not.

But think about it in context: If I tell MFP I want to lose a pound a week, and I set my activity level based on daily life activity (before exercise) as per instructions, MFP gives me an estimated daily calorie goal that has a 500 calorie daily deficit built into it (in general terms).

Let's say that I then do some exercise for which MFP estimates 500 calories (which would be quite a lot of exercise calories, really - many people's regular estimates would be less). Let's say that exercise estimate is (eek!) twice as many calories as reality. The exercise was actually 250. But I ate the whole 500. I'm still 250 calories under my maintenance calories (ate up half my MFP deficit). Even if I do that every single day, I'll still lose weight, if the base calorie estimate is on point. I'll just lose a little more slowly than I expected.

After doing this for 4-6 weeks, I'll see that I lost more slowly than expected, and that I still have room to lose a little faster safely, and I'll adjust my calorie goal downward by 250 calories. So, in the big picture, it isn't usually a big deal. Not worth worrying about: Experience will sort things out.

So, if you're worried, you can eat a portion of the exercise estimate, if you like. Then, after 4-6 weeks, you still can adjust. If the exercise estimate was right all along, you get to eat more when you adjust. Still no big deal. Not worth worrying about: Experience will sort things out.

Eating zero calories for exercise is a bad plan (without adding to activity level) generally, because it can be a health risk. Eating some or all of logged exercise is safer. The "eat 50%" idea is just kind of a safe-ish middle ground for starters, if worried about it being overestimated.

The one thing I'd advise against: Being inconsistent. Pick a way of accounting for your exercise, and how much of it you'll eat back, and stick with it for the trial period. If you change your mind and your practice lots of times during your 4-6 week period, it garbages up your experience data, and makes it less useful. Pick an approach, one that feels manageable, and stick with it that long. If you decide you don't like that approach, you can always start another trial period with a different approach later.

I know patience is hard, but it's kind of magical. Worry is optional, the 4-6 weeks experience will sort things out.

Thanks so much this make sense to me