24 - 36 hour shifts?

thisisjl

Ok I work over nights and I have between 2-4 days per month where I work or I am awake for 24-36 hours. On these days what is your opinion on adding in an extra meal of 300-400 calories due to the extra calories burned by being active and not sleeping? I already log different than most by logging 7am-7am rather than mid-mid.

I also ask because right now I'm on a med that is causing severe insomnia in addition to I'm only sleeping 2 1/2 - 4 1/2 hours a day this week (14.25 hours sleep since Sunday at 8pm). Just wondering if I should be adding in extra until my sleep gets back to normal so I don't screw my body up to much.

foxyforce

i think you most definitely should add the extra cals, maybe not so much that you are gaining, but i wouldn't add a deficit on those days necessarily. overnights are truly really difficult shifts. we know, we are both working one right now! but i can't imagine staying up for that period.

thisisjl

Ya Foxy working nights is the pits. The 24-36 hour days are normally my turn around days. The day I go back to work since I normally flip flop to a normal sleep schedule (sleeping at night) on my days off I tend to be up the day I go back to work then up until the next day.

sunnie326

I have often wondered that myself. Working nights leaves us up for many more hours at a time than most and man, sometimes I get hungry when I have been up for 20 plus hours.

chosengiver

I wore my HRM while sleeping once and since my resting HR is between 47-52, I burn a whopping 15 cals in 15 min--60 cals/hr, which = 1440 cals/24hrs if I were completely comatose.
I guess it's easy to understand why I have lost NO WEIGHT in a year, despite being extremely active!

If you have a HRM, I'd wear it on one of your 24hr days--all day and all night to get an idea of how many cals your burning, because just because you're awake doesn't mean you're going to be burning an extra 300-400 cals.

Just a suggestion.

thisisjl

I don't own an HRM

dachic4

opinions right?? I would go the maintain route until things/routine get under control. I also switch back and forth between nights and days. So far adding the little bit extra of calories to get me over the edge has helped my energy level and i havent gained, just maintained. ( I dont consistently work out. 5'8 168 now. shift work 911 dispatch)

Cait_Sidhe

24 hour is 24 hours. I also work overnights and stay awake for ungodly amounts of time. I allot myself 1660 calories for each 24 hour period. Your goal is 1760 per 24 hour period.

thisisjl

yep totally just looking for opinions. Thank you for yours. I know everyone bmr is different and being that I'm slightly larger 210 I figured 300 calories for the extra 8 hours of activities time rather than sleeping wasn't to much maybe it is....

Cait_Sidhe

I wore my HRM while sleeping once and since my resting HR is between 47-52, I burn a whopping 15 cals in 15 min--60 cals/hr, which = 1440 cals/24hrs if I were completely comatose.
I guess it's easy to understand why I have lost NO WEIGHT in a year, despite being extremely active!

If you have a HRM, I'd wear it on one of your 24hr days--all day and all night to get an idea of how many cals your burning, because just because you're awake doesn't mean you're going to be burning an extra 300-400 cals.

Just a suggestion.

Also, this is a bad idea. HRM's are not meant to be accurate when worn for anything other than exercise and certainly not for long periods of time.

foxyforce

elisa knows everything, look no further

thisisjl

24 hour is 24 hours. I also work overnights and stay awake for ungodly amounts of time. I allot myself 1660 calories for each 24 hour period. Your goal is 1760 per 24 hour period.

yes I get that but it's figured based on the assumption you will be sleeping and not active 7-8 hours of that time period and not burning many calories. So if you are active not sleeping your calorie usage per day goes up.

Cait_Sidhe

24 hour is 24 hours. I also work overnights and stay awake for ungodly amounts of time. I allot myself 1660 calories for each 24 hour period. Your goal is 1760 per 24 hour period.

yes I get that but it's figured based on the assumption you will be sleeping and not active 7-8 hours of that time period and not burning many calories. So if you are active not sleeping your calorie usage per day goes up.

But it's all about averages. In 48 hours, I am still going to consume 1660 (which is my personal goal) per 24 hours whether I sleep or not. Sometimes I'm too tired to be hungry and that's okay. But I do try to be consistant on my daily intake.

justjenn1977

I have an exercise called "work" that is 300 cals (hehe for one minute LOL) that I use on nights I work... I am ALWAYS hungry... and I am a nurse in intensive care so I am running all night... I don't usually log the minutes from my fitbit... (because it give me too many) but I like a *little* extra...

I also allow myself 300 extra when I am sick... so if I am sick AND working I allow 600 extra... because being sick takes more energy

Sarauk2sf

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

Sarauk2sf

I would suggest that it you are more active, then you can add a few extra hundred in, but on days that you end up less active, you might want to think about cutting a little more so it evens itself out over the week. However, assuming you are set to a pound a week loss - even if you are eating a little more than the extra you are burning, you will still be at a deficit. It is probably better to make sure you are 'fueled' properly for the more grueling days than those few extra hundres calories of deficit. If you find you have stalled on your weight loss, you can always adjust accordingly.

roachhaley

you burn more calories when awake but not anything like 500+ calories worth. eat more if you feel you need it, otherwise don't stress too much... your body isnt going to "go into starvation mode" because you ate too few calories one or two days a week.

foxyforce

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

Sarauk2sf

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I was commenting on the accuracy of use of an HRM for non-cardio activities.

foxyforce

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I was commenting on the accuracy of use of an HRM for non-cardio activities.

sorry, to clarify....people will say that their hrm is assessing them burning high calories for doing very sedentary things. but if you are saying that hrm's only correctly measure cardio type activities then it should be safe to say that their readings are wrong.

thisisjl

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

Don't these also take into concideration the calories burned just by normaly daily activity? There for cooking calories should be figured into you daily activity level? Unless you are on a cooking show and you are crazily running back and forth through a kitchen with boiling pots of water and strange ingrediants ;-)

Sarauk2sf

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. I was commenting on the accuracy of use of an HRM for non-cardio activities.

sorry, to clarify....people will say that their hrm is assessing them burning high calories for doing very sedentary things. but if you are saying that hrm's only correctly measure cardio type activities then it should be safe to say that their readings are wrong.

It is safe to say that the readings are likely wrong. But you have to remember that even HRMs for cardio activities are not 100% accurate as they are based on certain algorithms. These do not work very well at all when your heart rate is not elevated, or when your heart rate is raised for non cardiovasular endurance reasons (weight training, panic etc).

Sarauk2sf

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

Don't these also take into concideration the calories burned just by normaly daily activity? There for cooking calories should be figured into you daily activity level? Unless you are on a cooking show and you are crazily running back and forth through a kitchen with boiling pots of water and strange ingrediants ;-)

That is the subject of a whole lot of other posts and imo, the answer is generally I would say yes, but it depends if these activities are really included in the normal activity setting someone is on.

NormalSaneFLGuy

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

I think you're just a hater. Maybe they have a special outfit they wear with a fold out cutting board and utensils, they then cook while they run around the block and they stop when everything is cut, properly seasoned, and ready to hit the pan. You don't know!!!

foxyforce

elisa knows everything, look no further

Actually, in this case she is correct. HRMs are only useful for cardio type exercises and are not accurate for daily monitoring of calories burned.

so, when people say they burn 230 calories cooking is it safe to say they really didn't?

I think you're just a hater. Maybe they have a special outfit they wear with a fold out cutting board and utensils, they then cook while they run around the block and they stop when everything is cut, properly seasoned, and ready to hit the pan. You don't know!!!

i totally don't. but i do know i would love to burn that many calories in my daily cooking.

thisisjl

Golly Gee I opened a can of worms with this thread. Thanks for everyones opinions I'll think over what I plan to do.