Job and logging burnt calories

It looks like if you change your profile to "Active" (mail carrier, etc), it should take it into account. Or log it

I never count my job. To me exercise is diligently setting aside time and doing some diliberate exercise. I don't count cleaning either but I see many people do. I guess I just take those kinds of calories burned as bonus but perhaps that is my plateau problem. I just may not be eating enough. Oh, darn it. Now I am second guessing myself when I was just trying to help. Shoot. :sad:

id log it i walk ALOT for my job and log it, my setting are set to sedentary, as i was until i started working

best wishes
Kirstie x

As others have said, that's a change to your activity level, not added exercise. Exercise is what you do above and beyond your normal daily activity. HRMs aren't meant to be worn during times of non-heart rate elevated activity. They aren't designed to accurately record caloric burn for times that your heart rate isn't elevates during actual exercise, so you'll be recording inaccurate info into your log and possibly eating the wrong amount of calories for what you're doing.

Up your activity level to the one that sounds like what you'll be doing at the new job. Then continue to log any additional exercise outside of that.

I never count my job. To me exercise is diligently setting aside time and doing some diliberate exercise. I don't count cleaning either but I see many people do. I guess I just take those kinds of calories burned as bonus but perhaps that is my plateau problem. I just may not be eating enough. Oh, darn it. Now I am second guessing myself when I was just trying to help. Shoot. :sad:

Till I found this site I never heard of people saying they might not be eating enough as the reason for not losing weight - I think it's bizarre, and would like to see hard medical facts on this, as many African countries might be interested in the theory...

Long term starvation due to lack of appropriate amounts of food and nutrients such as is seen in African nations is very different than creating a stalled or mildly slowed metabolism from not eating enough calories comparatively to what your burning. Personally, when I stalled and bought a BodyMedia Fit to see what I was truly burning each day compared to what I was eating I found I could add 200-400 calories a day (depending on what workout I did) and be closer to my desired caloric deficit than I had been. So I did and I began losing again.

Basically, when your body doesn't get enough fuel in the form of food, it first begins holding onto what it is given moreso than before. That is a typical weight loss plateau. If a person continues to severely undereat for extended periods of times, that is when the body will begin to actually feed on itself to survive. That is where you get anorexics and actual starvation.

So the short term effects that people talk about here, on a weight loss site, are going to be very different than a lifetime of malnutrition in an impoverished country and it's really not logical to try to compare the two discussions.

I wore a heartrate monitor to work one day. I noticed it kept counting calories, even when I was sitting behind the computer doing nothing. I wouldn't know how to deduct the basic calories mfp decides from my bmr, so I went with a pedometer instead, and counted those ones. Some days I have at work are more active than others, and I get real hungry at while I'm working. I figured a pedometer was safer.

I never count my job. To me exercise is diligently setting aside time and doing some diliberate exercise. I don't count cleaning either but I see many people do. I guess I just take those kinds of calories burned as bonus but perhaps that is my plateau problem. I just may not be eating enough. Oh, darn it. Now I am second guessing myself when I was just trying to help. Shoot. :sad:

Till I found this site I never heard of people saying they might not be eating enough as the reason for not losing weight - I think it's bizarre, and would like to see hard medical facts on this, as many African countries might be interested in the theory...

Long term starvation due to lack of appropriate amounts of food and nutrients such as is seen in African nations is very different than creating a stalled or mildly slowed metabolism from not eating enough calories comparatively to what your burning. Personally, when I stalled and bought a BodyMedia Fit to see what I was truly burning each day compared to what I was eating I found I could add 200-400 calories a day (depending on what workout I did) and be closer to my desired caloric deficit than I had been. So I did and I began losing again.

Basically, when your body doesn't get enough fuel in the form of food, it first begins holding onto what it is given moreso than before. That is a typical weight loss plateau. If a person continues to severely undereat for extended periods of times, that is when the body will begin to actually feed on itself to survive. That is where you get anorexics and actual starvation.

So the short term effects that people talk about here, on a weight loss site, are going to be very different than a lifetime of malnutrition in an impoverished country and it's really not logical to try to compare the two discussions.

Thanks wolfchild! You do a very nice job of explaining!