What should my activity level be set to?

the_nerdgasm
the_nerdgasm Posts: 86 Member
edited November 24 in Health and Weight Loss
Currently, I'm set to lightly active. I'm a librarian, and a good portion of my work day is spent in the stacks, finding books, showing patrons where books are, trying to work our printer, showing patrons how to do computer stuff, etc. Recently, though, my car went up in smoke (literally!). I don't have the money for repairs or a new car, so I'm now riding my bike or walking to work and most other places. I live downtown, so I'm only 1/2 mile from where I work and less that 3-4 miles from just about any place I would need to go to. There are a few hills, but it's not like I live in SF or anythign. Should I up my activity level to active, or keep it at lightly active?

Replies

  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    I would probably leave it as is, wait a few weeks to see how your weight loss is affected, if at all, and then tweak my calories up or down from there.
  • nordlead2005
    nordlead2005 Posts: 1,303 Member
    If lightly active worked for you before your car bit the bullet (i.e. you had a goal rate of 1lb/week and lost at 1lb/week), then leave it where it is. Instead, start logging the bike riding and walking as exercise and eat those calories back.

    If you plan on biking/walking indefinitely, then there might be an advantage of setting it to active (less logging). However, logging exercise for a while will give you an idea if moving to active is too big or too small of a change.
  • Traveler120
    Traveler120 Posts: 712 Member
    Wait, what? You live a half mile from work and you've been driving? That ain't right. Anyway, as far as activity level, I'd still consider it lightly active.
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,603 Member
    Lightly active. Certainly not more.
  • minties82
    minties82 Posts: 907 Member
    Traveler120 wrote: »
    Wait, what? You live a half mile from work and you've been driving? That ain't right. Anyway, as far as activity level, I'd still consider it lightly active.

    This!

    Also sounds lightly active to me.

  • pmm3437
    pmm3437 Posts: 529 Member
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    If lightly active worked for you before your car bit the bullet (i.e. you had a goal rate of 1lb/week and lost at 1lb/week), then leave it where it is. Instead, start logging the bike riding and walking as exercise and eat those calories back.

    If you plan on biking/walking indefinitely, then there might be an advantage of setting it to active (less logging). However, logging exercise for a while will give you an idea if moving to active is too big or too small of a change.

    ^ This ^ is your best option.

  • Asher_Ethan
    Asher_Ethan Posts: 2,430 Member
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    If lightly active worked for you before your car bit the bullet (i.e. you had a goal rate of 1lb/week and lost at 1lb/week), then leave it where it is. Instead, start logging the bike riding and walking as exercise and eat those calories back.

    If you plan on biking/walking indefinitely, then there might be an advantage of setting it to active (less logging). However, logging exercise for a while will give you an idea if moving to active is too big or too small of a change.


    This ^. Only change I would make is only eat half the exercise calories back.
  • the_nerdgasm
    the_nerdgasm Posts: 86 Member
    Traveler120 wrote: »
    Wait, what? You live a half mile from work and you've been driving? That ain't right. Anyway, as far as activity level, I'd still consider it lightly active.

    It clearly states on my profile I have 100 pounds to lose still. Did you really think I was walking somewhere I could have driven?
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    Activity level is what it is, lightly active. Exercise is logged separately.
  • the_nerdgasm
    the_nerdgasm Posts: 86 Member
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    If lightly active worked for you before your car bit the bullet (i.e. you had a goal rate of 1lb/week and lost at 1lb/week), then leave it where it is. Instead, start logging the bike riding and walking as exercise and eat those calories back.

    If you plan on biking/walking indefinitely, then there might be an advantage of setting it to active (less logging). However, logging exercise for a while will give you an idea if moving to active is too big or too small of a change.

    This is what I'm going to do. Biking to and from work today was about 15 minutes of biking, which was just a little over 100 calories burned. Going up an activity level gets me an extra 400 calories. I think logging it in as exercise is the way to go. Thank you!
  • Traveler120
    Traveler120 Posts: 712 Member
    edited September 2015
    the_nerdgasm wrote: »
    Traveler120 wrote: »
    Wait, what? You live a half mile from work and you've been driving? That ain't right. Anyway, as far as activity level, I'd still consider it lightly active.
    It clearly states on my profile I have 100 pounds to lose still. Did you really think I was walking somewhere I could have driven?
    Such proximity to work is a GIFT that even I am envious of. If I were in your shoes, I would NOT increase intake. Unless I'm mistaken, you've indicated in the previous post that you'll eat an extra 400 calories even though you've determined your bike commute is burning 100 calories? You'll be 'in the hole' by 300!

    Another suggestion is that instead of biking 15 min to work, take the long route and make it last at least 30 minutes. And on your way home, take an even longer route. Or better yet, walk instead of bike. If your previous calories were satisfying enough, I'd keep them the same and take advantage of your increased activity for the extra deficit.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    leave it where it is...start tracking real world data and use that...once you have your own data, you really don't need a calculator to give you some kind of general estimate based on population statistics.
  • the_nerdgasm
    the_nerdgasm Posts: 86 Member
    edited September 2015
    Traveler120 wrote: »
    Such proximity to work is a GIFT that even I am envious of. If I were in your shoes, I would NOT increase intake. Unless I'm mistaken, you've indicated in the previous post that you'll eat an extra 400 calories even though you've determined your bike commute is burning 100 calories? You'll be 'in the hole' by 300!

    Another suggestion is that instead of biking 15 min to work, take the long route and make it last at least 30 minutes. And on your way home, take an even longer route. Or better yet, walk instead of bike. If your previous calories were satisfying enough, I'd keep them the same and take advantage of your increased activity for the extra deficit.

    Oh, I'm not saying it's not a gift. I bought the bike in July because I realized just how close I lived to my work, and how silly it was to drive. Now that my car is a smoking heap of metal, I'm really glad I have the bike, and I'm EXTREMELY thankful for the close proximity to the library.

    And it's actually about a 7.5 minute ride (15 minutes round trip lol). But I do like the idea of extending that to a half hour and getting some extra time in (and burning some extra calories burned)! :)

    I do walk on days I'm starting to feel burnt out in the legs, as walking is easy and biking is a bit harder for me because of the hills. But biking is seriously so much more fun! I think it's really the first time I've enjoyed any sort of exercise.
  • Traveler120
    Traveler120 Posts: 712 Member
    Agreed. I was never into exercise until this year. I've come to love cycling so much that I've decided to cancel my gym. I've had the bike for more than 10 years, never used it and it was still brand new. Then several months ago, out of the blue, I decided to try it and loved it. I've lost more weight doing it because it's fun and low impact and when I have time, I can go for a couple hours without getting bored. At the gym, I'd be staring at the clock. So it's fantastic that you've found something you like to do. Keep it up and you'll do really well. Good luck.
  • hamptontom
    hamptontom Posts: 536 Member
    the_nerdgasm wrote: »
    But biking is seriously so much more fun! I think it's really the first time I've enjoyed any sort of exercise.

    when i started this program, the first toe i dipped into the water was to walk for an hour during my lunch break at work...but when i decided to step up my game and get on the bike, it was like something snapped. the additional speed and the extra breeze and whatever the other intangible rewards are, that just did it for me.

    enjoy it while you can. the days will get shorter soon, and it'll be a little tougher...
  • the_nerdgasm
    the_nerdgasm Posts: 86 Member
    hamptontom wrote: »
    when i started this program, the first toe i dipped into the water was to walk for an hour during my lunch break at work...but when i decided to step up my game and get on the bike, it was like something snapped. the additional speed and the extra breeze and whatever the other intangible rewards are, that just did it for me.

    enjoy it while you can. the days will get shorter soon, and it'll be a little tougher...

    Yesterday I was biking home, and the wind was on my back. Oh man, I flew and it was awesome! Not even hills were a challenge!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories