Currently exercising more should I update my activity level?

Angelbunny111

So basically I have it set to sedentary since I mostly just walked for like 15 min since July and not until this month I started working out more since my child is 10 months I have more time to do workouts. I’ve been working out now 3-6 times a week for 3 weeks now should I change my levels to moderately active now ? For workouts I do kickboxing, ballet , belly dancing , dancing , hiit, Pilates and yoga. I would like to lose fat and gain muscle. Any tips would be helpful! 😊 I just recently got an Apple Watch in November been using that I lovve this thing lol keeps me motivated to workout

NorthCascades

The way MFP was designed is for your activity level to describe everyday, like what you do for work. If your exercise isn't that consistent, MFP intends for you to add it as exercise instead.

At the end of the day, what matters is you're exercising, sticking to your calorie goal, and adjusting that goal to account for your exercise. If one method of accounting works better for you for that than the others, use it. 🙂

sijomial

If you are trying to manage your calorie balance then yes of course you should take increased calorie burn into account.
But MyFitnessPal isn't designed for that to be done via the activity setting as that is nothing to do with your purposeful exercise. You could be sedentary and run marathons or very active and do no exercise and every other combination.

BTW - I'd be very surprised if sedentary is accurate for your daily routine movement when you have a young baby. Sedentary is a very low expectation. Any idea of your daily steps (excluding exercise?)

First decide if you want a same every day calorie goal. (I'm making the assumtion you are eating to your MFP goal and haven't synched your watch.)

If you want to eat the same every day bump up your daily calories.
If you want calories to vary in line with exercise then log that exercise to get an increased calorie allowance on those days. (That can be part of the motivation to keep up your workouts.)


Ultimately let your weight trend be your guide but 3 weeks into a new routine is quite early to be seeing the true effect of that change.

Angelbunny111

sijomial wrote: »

If you are trying to manage your calorie balance then yes of course you should take increased calorie burn into account.
But MyFitnessPal isn't designed for that to be done via the activity setting as that is nothing to do with your purposeful exercise. You could be sedentary and run marathons or very active and do no exercise and every other combination.

BTW - I'd be very surprised if sedentary is accurate for your daily routine movement when you have a young baby. Sedentary is a very low expectation. Any idea of your daily steps (excluding exercise?)

First decide if you want a same every day calorie goal. (I'm making the assumtion you are eating to your MFP goal and haven't synched your watch.)

If you want to eat the same every day bump up your daily calories.
If you want calories to vary in line with exercise then log that exercise to get an increased calorie allowance on those days. (That can be part of the motivation to keep up your workouts.)


Ultimately let your weight trend be your guide but 3 weeks into a new routine is quite early to be seeing the true effect of that change.

Ahh I see I didn’t know that honestly about the sedentary thing wow I’m glad I’ve been informed!


the Apple Watch without exercising it says I average about 2000-3000. When I’ve been exercising it’s been 5000-9000 steps.

I haven’t yet synced up my watch and mfp as I’m still learning how to use this watch lol and I love that idea of planning out the workouts to the days I think I’ll actually do that

Right now I eat anywhere from 1400-2000+ a day and I’ve maintained weight. I want to gain muscle while working out so I want to make sure I’m eating enough. Back in the day I unhealthy got fit my goal for this year is to be healthy and fit ! Thanks so much for the helpful information and motivation 😊

sijomial

Honestly I'd advise against syncing your Apple watch. Apple didn't integrate properly with MyFitnessPal and don't send over the correct data.

Although in theory a watch giving you a variable daily activity and exercise allowance sounds good it isn't necessary to manage weight successfully. Your long term weight trend (evening out perfectly normal short term fluctuations) is your best guide.

Loving your goals by the way!

Angelbunny111

sijomial wrote: »

Honestly I'd advise against syncing your Apple watch. Apple didn't integrate properly with MyFitnessPal and don't send over the correct data.

Although in theory a watch giving you a variable daily activity and exercise allowance sounds good it isn't necessary to manage weight successfully. Your long term weight trend (evening out perfectly normal short term fluctuations) is your best guide.

Loving your goals by the way!

Hmm well darn oh well not too huge of an inconvenience though!
Right now on my Apple health it says my average weight from September-now is 102 lbs which I don’t care too much about weight but my body fat is still quite high for how low my weight is so basically want to lose fat and gain muscle never tried this before ! I’m actually wanting to do light weight training! I know this will take time obviously but hopefully I’ll see improvements soon 🤩 even if it’s not physically !

Thank you!! Main goal this year is to care for mind body and soul and try to be kinder to others haha !

sijomial

If you want to gain muscle you have to stress / stretch your muscle's current capabilities.

"Light weight training" is a lot better than nothing but really you want heavy (heavy for you and your current capabilities) weight training. Yes muscle can be built with light weights and high reps but it's a very inefficient way to train if your main goal is adding muscle. You are doing plenty of other exercise for general fitness and don't need your lifting to be more of the same.

Think of it a bit like my main exercise of cycing.....
Sure I can build some muscle through cycling, especially if I take on extreme hills and sprints but I would be spending perhaps 10 hours a week to achieve much less than I could in a couple of hours in the gym and the upper limit of what's possible would be far, far lower.

Yes it takes time to build appreciable muscle but takes less time if your training is more appropriate for your goals and ambitions.

AnnPT77

sijomial wrote: »

If you want to gain muscle you have to stress / stretch your muscle's current capabilities.

"Light weight training" is a lot better than nothing but really you want heavy (heavy for you and your current capabilities) weight training. Yes muscle can be built with light weights and high reps but it's a very inefficient way to train if your main goal is adding muscle. You are doing plenty of other exercise for general fitness and don't need your lifting to be more of the same.

Think of it a bit like my main exercise of cycing.....
Sure I can build some muscle through cycling, especially if I take on extreme hills and sprints but I would be spending perhaps 10 hours a week to achieve much less than I could in a couple of hours in the gym and the upper limit of what's possible would be far, far lower.

Yes it takes time to build appreciable muscle but takes less time if your training is more appropriate for your goals and ambitions.

^^ This is really good advice, OP. This might not be true of you, @Angelbunny111, but as a fellow woman (unlike sijomial 😉), I've learned that some women do think that lifting light weights is how we get "toned", but lifting heavy weights will make us "bulky". That's not true at all.

It takes years of very intentional, well-planned hard work for a woman to get extremely muscular, like a bodybuilder. That can be a great thing, but it's not what every woman prefers.

Lifting heavy (for us) weights, heavy enough to be challenging while avoiding injury, is the fastest way (in calendar time) and most efficient way (least hours per week) to get to a nice "toned" appearance, or to points of muscularity beyond that if we want those. "Toned" is a combination of some healthy muscle, and being at a body fat level that allows it to show in a way we individually prefer.

The effective route is to lift challenging weights, then - if going for a certain appearance - to switch from a "gain muscle" training approach to a "keep the muscle I have" routine. (There'll be time enough along the way to learn the difference between those two things.) We don't suddenly wake up one morning and - poof! - all muscular, overnight. It's a slow-build thing, requiring patience, with plenty of time along the way to figure out how far we want to go, and what to do when we get there.

You've got great goals, now it's time to go out and pursue them. Go, you!

pridesabtch

You are very small, your BF% may be off if you are just using a scale.

Also remember there are certain parts of the female anatomy, breast that are primarily fat. When I was at 105lbs and quite "tone" my scale still read 28% BF. I was mortified that I had worked so hard and still wasn't even close to my goal of <20% BF. It was suggested that I have my BF% measured by a professional with calipers. I did and was actually around 15%. I am large chested and that was enough to skew the scale. 10 pounds of boobs on a 105 pound person is almost 10% right off the top. Just saying the scales have limitations, at least that was my experience.

AnnPT77

pridesabtch wrote: »

You are very small, your BF% may be off if you are just using a scale.

Also remember there are certain parts of the female anatomy, breast that are primarily fat. When I was at 105lbs and quite "tone" my scale still read 28% BF. I was mortified that I had worked so hard and still wasn't even close to my goal of <20% BF. It was suggested that I have my BF% measured by a professional with calipers. I did and was actually around 15%. I am large chested and that was enough to skew the scale. 10 pounds of boobs on a 105 pound person is almost 10% right off the top. Just saying the scales have limitations, at least that was my experience.

It's even simpler than that, I think:

As a generality, those scales aren't very accurate at measuring body fat. They don't "measure" it at all, in fact. They send a weak electrical current through your feet (and hands, for the 4-point ones with hand-holds), measure what comes through the circuit that includes your body, estimate body fat from that . . . not very well.

Breasts are just one case that confuses them.