Lightly active versus active -differentiate please

change the settings and do the math as your results will not be the same as mine.

for me, a 200 lb male the light active setting adds 290 calories over the sedentary setting.
the active setting adds 380 calories to the light active and very active adds 320 to the active setting. that is a whooping 990 calories between being sedentary and very active for me.

also note that does not include exercise as you add that separately.

When in doubt pick the lower option.

The difference isn't all that large is it?

Means you might lose slightly more than your goal.

Choosing sedentary when your very active I can see being and issue but active to lightly active, fugedaboutit.

I have mine set to lightly active but never eat any extra exercise calories back. That way I feel I have covered myself as I walk everywhere and have a on my feet most of the day job.

I tried having it set at sedentary and letting my Fitbit give me extra calories but that was ridiculous as I'm not sedentary and really didn't want to be eating an extra 1000 calories on top of the 1280 it gave me On MFP ha ha.

christinev297 wrote: »

Ok what if you pick lightly active or active, and your calories are adjusted higher. What happens, if forever reason on some days here and there you are not lightly active or active. Do you still eat your active amount of calories allocated to you?
The reason i'm asking is because i upped mine from sedentary to lightly active a couple days ago. But i cant promise hand on heart that i'm going to be lightly active every single day... What if i go visit my mum or a friend and sit around the whole day chatting, doing zero activity, do i still eat the same amount of calories or i do i go back to sedentary on those days.
Am i over thinking things??

If youve enabled the negative calorie option, fitbit will subtract on days your more inactive.

OP never said he had a Fitbit.

The only way to know is to try a calorie number for a while and see if you lose weight at the expected pace. Let's say you put 'lightly active' and your goal is 1lb/week. If after 4-6 weeks you're losing weight much faster than 1lb/week, then you can increase your activity level or your calorie goal since you're probably more active than you think you are. If after 4-6 weeks you're averaging slower losses, decrease your activity level since you're probably less active than you think. (Remember to discount the first couple of weeks since lots of people lose faster than usual due to an initial water weight drop.)

Sometimes you'll find your actual results are right in the middle of two activity levels. For instance, I lose faster than "lightly active" but slower than "active". In that case, I'd suggest choosing the more conservative one, and eating back more exercise calories.

stefng33 wrote: »

hey there! So I want to know what the difference is between lightly active and active?
I have mine set to lightly and so my deficit is about 1470. This works for me. But I wonder if I'm more on the active scale and if so, should I be putting myself there in terms of calories? I figured it's a good thing if I can handle a lower deficit because I'll be that much more likely to lose weight...even when I refeed, since in technically already eating much less than I can handle.
Is this true?? Anyone know??

Lately I've been feeling quite hungry but I am sure it's that I am not eating enough protein.

How long does it take to start figuring all this out? I want to do what's best for my body.

Thanks all

You have a deficit of 1470 calories? Did you mean calorie target?

Do you also mean "if I can handle a lower *calorie target*"?

If you're hungry, make sure you're getting enough fat and fibre also. And get protein and fibre each time you eat, not just in total. But if you seriously have a 1470 deficit, that would explain the hunger.

Do you really only have 12 lbs to lose, or is your ticker wrong?

christinev297 wrote: »

Ok what if you pick lightly active or active, and your calories are adjusted higher. What happens, if forever reason on some days here and there you are not lightly active or active. Do you still eat your active amount of calories allocated to you? (snip)
Am i over thinking things??

Christine you are over-thinking it!

Today I have not been nearly as active as my setting. I am aware of it and have eaten slightly less so far. And I just might STILL go out for a good long walk and catch up!

In any case, you, personally, are at 20,000+ steps: i.e. well above the VERY active setting! Unless you tank out for several days in a row, why worry about it? Worse case scenario you will end up with an "I ate at maintenance" day.

Eventually you will be doing that anyway... right?

PAV8888 wrote: »

christinev297 wrote: »

Ok what if you pick lightly active or active, and your calories are adjusted higher. What happens, if forever reason on some days here and there you are not lightly active or active. Do you still eat your active amount of calories allocated to you? (snip)
Am i over thinking things??

Christine you are over-thinking it!

Today I have not been nearly as active as my setting. I am aware of it and have eaten slightly less so far. And I just might STILL go out for a good long walk and catch up!

In any case, you, personally, are at 20,000+ steps: i.e. well above the VERY active setting! Unless you tank out for several days in a row, why worry about it? Worse case scenario you will end up with an "I ate at maintenance" day.

Eventually you will be doing that anyway... right?

you are so right

Admittedly since getting a fit bit I have started to obsess over every little thing! I was cruising along quite nicely before that.
I'm going to again go with the flow, and trust the numbers like I always have. And tweak things if I have to....

Thank you Pav xx

stefng33 wrote: »

Oh! I didn't realize people could see that? What else can you see, lol!? I tried to keep it pretty private. (snip) Glad I didn't get myself a Fitbit like I wanted! Sounds like something that would make me mental!

It IS pretty private.
You can adjust things on the web by going to /Settings/Privacy Settings for who sees your profile.
/Settings/Diary Settings for who sees your Diary and
/Settings/Automatic News Feed Update Settings to adjust what gets posted on your "Home" page.

I have a Fitbit and think that for a relatively inaccurate device it does a pretty good job of being useful

stefng33 wrote: »

for monitoring heart rate and stuff like that..sleep patterns...the good stuff Thanks for the replies!

<hmm: I will summarize because I see I went on a tangent!>
Fitbit is kewl. Web site is kewl. Graphs are kewl. Works well with MFP. It is actually useful if you're unsure about your activity level and engage in steady state aerobics. It is not super accurate in either the step counts or heart rate, in particular if you are a very fast walker, a hand talker, or sweat bullets when you exercise. And yet... most people on MFP find that their weight loss seems to correlate well with the Calories Out part given by their Fitbit.

The Mio products (and Tom Tom Cardio that use the same sensor) have more accurate HRM than Fitbit. They don't have the web site. The Mio Fuse step counting, in an attempt to be accurate, is incredibly low.

Scorsche's Rhythm+ is a strap HRM replacement that can transmit your HR information to a phone (or watch or other device) for a period of 6 to 7 hours.

Their sensor and Mio's sensor are ahead of Fitbit's when it comes to accuracy and ability to operate in exercise conditions.

Again, they don't have the complete package offered by Fitbit.

(I've owned and used all these products except the Cardio).