The 10,000 steps!
Replies
-
Im a stay at home mom and i still get around 14000 a day but im also pretty active but on the days im not its around 5000 if i dont leave the house at all so really its not that hard.0
-
http://www.livestrong.com/article/287638-pros-cons-of-sitting-on-a-stability-ball/
https://www.afpafitness.com/blog/benefits-of-sitting-on-a-stability-ball-
http://www.builtlean.com/2013/09/24/sitting-exercise-ball/
http://www.gearfire.net/10-reasons-to-use-an-exercise-ball-as-your-chair/
You may be interested in these links.
Mainly exercise ball instead of desk chair is good for your core. But it requires constant small adjustments which also expend more energy than passive sitting. I think of it as active sitting. You might not be able to do it all day at first but if treadmill desk won't work for you then this would at least offer something that would have positive benefits. People who use them are moving about the same amount as fidgety people, with little movements they become oblivious to which are necessary for maintaining posture and balance. It is a positive step in the right direction if it works for you. Good luck, I do hope this idea helps you!0 -
I can get to around 5,000-7,000 steps with 1 hour briskly walking around and exercising. I would say 1- 2 hours of walking/moving would get many people to around 10,000 steps. You could split that up or do most of it all at once.
People moving for 2 hours total is not really living a hard peasant lifestyle or that impossible for modern life.
http://www.discoverwalking.com/blog/10000-pedometer-steps-equals-how-many-miles-distance.php
http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/fitness_articles.asp?id=1991
http://www.thewalkingsite.com/10000steps.html
Wear a pedometer for a week or two and see how many steps you average now. Try to increase that number by 500. When you can do that aim for another 500 and so on.1 -
"Workloads and workdays must change for people to lead healthier lives - until then it's just useless shaming and blaming. "
[/quote]
I think there's another way to look at it: adjust the calories to match the lifestyle. I agree with you that for many of us, sometimes the steps (or miles, or minutes, or reps) aren't going to make it on the agenda. And so we must adjust accordingly.
So, yes, my fitbit has motivated me to be more active. But it's also a helpful reminder that sometimes I am not very active -- mostly for reasons like those you have mentioned. Many days (most), I make it to my 12,000 step goal.
But some days I'm in meetings most of the day (ick), or have a long drive, or I'm hosting people at my house, or whatever. My fitbit reminds me that I haven't burnt much energy, and so I shouldn't consume too much. I adjust my calories accordingly.
For me, the point of my fitbit isn't the steps. It's knowing (approximately) how many calories I have spent, and how many I need.
I wish I could eat like a farmer! But I'm no farmer. So, here I am -- tracking my calories like a modern-day, urban, middle-aged woman.0 -
"Workloads and workdays must change for people to lead healthier lives - until then it's just useless shaming and blaming. "
I think there's another way to look at it: adjust the calories to match the lifestyle. I agree with you that for many of us, sometimes the steps (or miles, or minutes, or reps) aren't going to make it on the agenda. And so we must adjust accordingly.
So, yes, my fitbit has motivated me to be more active. But it's also a helpful reminder that sometimes I am not very active -- mostly for reasons like those you have mentioned. Many days (most), I make it to my 12,000 step goal.
But some days I'm in meetings most of the day (ick), or have a long drive, or I'm hosting people at my house, or whatever. My fitbit reminds me that I haven't burnt much energy, and so I shouldn't consume too much. I adjust my calories accordingly.
For me, the point of my fitbit isn't the steps. It's knowing (approximately) how many calories I have spent, and how many I need.
I wish I could eat like a farmer! But I'm no farmer. So, here I am -- tracking my calories like a modern-day, urban, middle-aged woman. [/quote]
Eliza,
I think calorie reduction is definitely a good adjustment for those who simply can't be that active. My fear though, based on readings, is that this is not enough from a health perspective.
It may work from a weight maintenance standpoint, based on the CICO equation, but does it also work from a health standpoint?
It's not that I would not maintain my weight if I adjusted calorie intake below farmer level to match my lower level of activity, but sedentarism might affect health anyway.
For example, I clearly noticed my blood sugar goes down significantly when I have been very active all day plus lifting weights and putting some extra effort in it. After such a day, it was down to 76 - which was amazing. The lowest I have tested.
Otherwise, if I am relatively sedentary, the Blood glucose can go anywhere from upper 80's (best case scenario) to close to 100, which is not exactly reassuring, given that's the pre-diabetes borderline. With one parent diabetic and the other prediabetic - I freak out.
The reality is most people are forced to scramble to find time to be active - but given the circumstances, we are still left with nothing but our efforts to try to make it somehow.
As many people here said, it CAN be done - even with busy schedules - but it is definitely a frantic struggle and sometimes I am afraid that this frantic living where you try to fit in everything, including fitness on top of work - can only lead to an overall poor and stressful quality of life.
After all, they do say that the third pillar of good health, in addition to eating well and staying active, is also minimizing stress. Finding the proverbial 15 minutes where you retire to a dark room, lie down, meditate, breathe throug the abdomen, whatever - that's important too.
And yet, between work, kids, pilling vegetabkes for fresh eating, exercise intensively AND doing tips and tricks to be in motion all day - it is absolutely unclear where the 15 min of "clam and meditation" would fit in.
What I see in this big picture is a case of "something's gotta give".
But yes - I guess all we have is doing the best we can.
What I, personally, would like to see would be how employers, schools, and other institutions that affect people's lives daily can respond to public health calls to allow people to make realistic choices about their health.
Tips and tricks at the individual level without any structural accommodations are bound to fail eventually because nobody can maintain a perfectly productive schedule every minute, every day - and even then many would not have enough time to squeeze in all health-related recommendations.
(Then again I do understand a possible answer would be that not everybody is supposed to live that long, after all).
The population in first world countries has been hearing about the importance of eating well, exercise and stress minimization for many decades now. So it's not like people are uninformed.
Yet, the rates of obesity and or illnesses related to obesity, sedentarism and poor eating are nowhere on the decline.
Oh, well.
0 -
ericatoday wrote: »Im a stay at home mom and i still get around 14000 a day but im also pretty active but on the days im not its around 5000 if i dont leave the house at all so really its not that hard.
I think that on average, SAHM-s would have a significantly higher chance of getting in all the steps than desk job workers. Unless, of course, the SAHM chooses to sit on the couch all day whereas the desk worker putters around for coffee, chats with colleagues, bathroom breaks and what not, all day.
Overall, I think it is a challenge for most people - given overschedules and long distances to be covered by driving, then elevators, buttons, and the temptations of the Internet etc. (see present typing, which admittedly, I normally don't do). :-)
0 -
wisdomfromyou wrote: »ericatoday wrote: »Im a stay at home mom and i still get around 14000 a day but im also pretty active but on the days im not its around 5000 if i dont leave the house at all so really its not that hard.
I think that on average, SAHM-s would have a significantly higher chance of getting in all the steps than desk job workers. Unless, of course, the SAHM chooses to sit on the couch all day whereas the desk worker putters around for coffee, chats with colleagues, bathroom breaks and what not, all day.
Overall, I think it is a challenge for most people - given overschedules and long distances to be covered by driving, then elevators, buttons, and the temptations of the Internet etc. (see present typing, which admittedly, I normally don't do). :-)
The average American watches almost 3 hours of television a day.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/were-working-more-hoursand-watching-more-tv-1435187603
From the article:
"Even with more work, Americans still found plenty of time to kick back and relax. Leisure and sports took up five hours, 18 minutes of the average day last year, up two minutes from the prior year. That total included two hours, 49 minutes of TV time, three minutes more than in 2013"
This article talks about Americans spending 5.5 hrs a day on video content:
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/US-Adults-Spend-55-Hours-with-Video-Content-Each-Day/1012362
Unless someone is a special snowflake, there is time to get 10k steps in.3 -
IMO, just like anything else in our lives, we make the time for what we truly want.5
-
Yeah, I do agree that from a societal standpoint it's not a very good setup health-wise. Last summer I had a minimum wage job that kept me on my feet the entire time. By contrast, sometime soon I should be starting a sedentary job, but one that is much, much more significant from a career perspective. While I'm sure the constant movement I got at my previous job was great for my health, I am a little nervous as to whether I'll be able to keep my blood sugar at proper levels with my upcoming job. My hope is that getting up periodically, even for just a couple minutes, will help. But, it is what it is.wisdomfromyou wrote: »Eliza,
I think calorie reduction is definitely a good adjustment for those who simply can't be that active. My fear though, based on readings, is that this is not enough from a health perspective.
It may work from a weight maintenance standpoint, based on the CICO equation, but does it also work from a health standpoint?
It's not that I would not maintain my weight if I adjusted calorie intake below farmer level to match my lower level of activity, but sedentarism might affect health anyway.
For example, I clearly noticed my blood sugar goes down significantly when I have been very active all day plus lifting weights and putting some extra effort in it. After such a day, it was down to 76 - which was amazing. The lowest I have tested.
Otherwise, if I am relatively sedentary, the Blood glucose can go anywhere from upper 80's (best case scenario) to close to 100, which is not exactly reassuring, given that's the pre-diabetes borderline. With one parent diabetic and the other prediabetic - I freak out.
The reality is most people are forced to scramble to find time to be active - but given the circumstances, we are still left with nothing but our efforts to try to make it somehow.
As many people here said, it CAN be done - even with busy schedules - but it is definitely a frantic struggle and sometimes I am afraid that this frantic living where you try to fit in everything, including fitness on top of work - can only lead to an overall poor and stressful quality of life.
After all, they do say that the third pillar of good health, in addition to eating well and staying active, is also minimizing stress. Finding the proverbial 15 minutes where you retire to a dark room, lie down, meditate, breathe throug the abdomen, whatever - that's important too.
And yet, between work, kids, pilling vegetabkes for fresh eating, exercise intensively AND doing tips and tricks to be in motion all day - it is absolutely unclear where the 15 min of "clam and meditation" would fit in.
What I see in this big picture is a case of "something's gotta give".
But yes - I guess all we have is doing the best we can.
What I, personally, would like to see would be how employers, schools, and other institutions that affect people's lives daily can respond to public health calls to allow people to make realistic choices about their health.
Tips and tricks at the individual level without any structural accommodations are bound to fail eventually because nobody can maintain a perfectly productive schedule every minute, every day - and even then many would not have enough time to squeeze in all health-related recommendations.
(Then again I do understand a possible answer would be that not everybody is supposed to live that long, after all).
The population in first world countries has been hearing about the importance of eating well, exercise and stress minimization for many decades now. So it's not like people are uninformed.
Yet, the rates of obesity and or illnesses related to obesity, sedentarism and poor eating are nowhere on the decline.
Oh, well.
0 -
But here's the thing. While any exercise is better than none, there is research that suggests getting a bout of exercise in and then spending the rest of the day being sedentary is not enough to fully offset the issues with being sedentary.Packerjohn wrote: »wisdomfromyou wrote: »ericatoday wrote: »Im a stay at home mom and i still get around 14000 a day but im also pretty active but on the days im not its around 5000 if i dont leave the house at all so really its not that hard.
I think that on average, SAHM-s would have a significantly higher chance of getting in all the steps than desk job workers. Unless, of course, the SAHM chooses to sit on the couch all day whereas the desk worker putters around for coffee, chats with colleagues, bathroom breaks and what not, all day.
Overall, I think it is a challenge for most people - given overschedules and long distances to be covered by driving, then elevators, buttons, and the temptations of the Internet etc. (see present typing, which admittedly, I normally don't do). :-)
The average American watches almost 3 hours of television a day.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/were-working-more-hoursand-watching-more-tv-1435187603
From the article:
"Even with more work, Americans still found plenty of time to kick back and relax. Leisure and sports took up five hours, 18 minutes of the average day last year, up two minutes from the prior year. That total included two hours, 49 minutes of TV time, three minutes more than in 2013"
This article talks about Americans spending 5.5 hrs a day on video content:
http://www.emarketer.com/Article/US-Adults-Spend-55-Hours-with-Video-Content-Each-Day/1012362
Unless someone is a special snowflake, there is time to get 10k steps in.
0 -
I start work at 7 ..I get up at 5.30 so I can walk the 2.5 miles into work when I'm not driving cos it's a gym day that is. I make a point of taking my lunch hour and walking to the shops, where I will occasionally buy food for my kids' dinner or little extras I forget to put on the weekly shop ...days like that I get 15000 steps
1 -
i have a friend who says she never has time to exercise but will tell me about all the tv shows she's watching. you have to make time. i work from home - i don't have stairs to take or a parking lot to cross or a water cooler to get to - but i average 17,000 steps per day because i make time to walk. i walk my dog in the morning before work, i take a short walk at lunch, we walk after dinner. I didn't "find" the time to do this - there wasn't an hour waiting hiding behind an old pair of shoes in the closet - i made the time. i stopped watching so much tv, i started waking up earlier - i prioritized.5
-
wisdomfromyou wrote: »
There simply is not enough time during the day left for "step taking".
You have the same number of hours in your day as everyone else. How you choose to spend them will determine how many steps you take.6 -
I work a sedentary, office job. I walk an hour at lunch, and workout for an hour after work, and that gets me to 10,000+. I have a Sony Smart Watch (SmartBand Talk SWR30), and it's just perfect for my fitness needs.2
-
wisdomfromyou wrote: »Waow. Weird how so many people with very sedentary jobs seem to get so many steps in.
Based on my estimations, I am nowhere close to 10,000 steps a day - in fact, very far.
I walk back and forth to the gym and to the nearby store every day and that will give me about 2 miles at the very most. The steps I take around the house or at work (when I am there) for the rest of the day will not amount to more than a mile. I understand "the parking far away" trick and other similar measures but few acknowledge that such measures take away time from other tasks that MUST be completed during the day and for which employers or children do not make amendments.
Parking far away also means allocating extra time before leaving. I must leave much earlier which I most of the time I cannot afford because I often go with back-to-back with my tasks between children, career and cooking.
As people's workloads increase, the time they can allocate to just freely step around naturally decreases.
I will need to buy a pedometer that will give me the total number of steps I take throughout the day just to learn how far I am from the 10,000.
But based on my estimation, I am very far.
I'm not sure what kind of job you have, but do you get up to go to the bathroom during the day? Do you go get coffee/water/beverages? Do you have a break or lunch?
I do not have the luxury of using alternate transportation (I live 10 miles from my job and no busing close to where I live). As for parking farther away in the lot, it wouldn't add that much more time to do that (basing on a normal sized parking lot, it may add an extra 5 minutes or so to your time).
My husband needs to be at work an hour before I do (in the opposite direction), so I primarily take our daughter to school/daycare. Getting up even earlier in the AM for me is not an easy option due to medication regimens I am on.
I work a sedentary office job also, and currently am just beginning to get back into some exercise routines. Most days I average 6,000-7,500 steps in the day.
0 -
-
wisdomfromyou wrote: »"Workloads and workdays must change for people to lead healthier lives - until then it's just useless shaming and blaming. "
I think there's another way to look at it: adjust the calories to match the lifestyle. I agree with you that for many of us, sometimes the steps (or miles, or minutes, or reps) aren't going to make it on the agenda. And so we must adjust accordingly.
So, yes, my fitbit has motivated me to be more active. But it's also a helpful reminder that sometimes I am not very active -- mostly for reasons like those you have mentioned. Many days (most), I make it to my 12,000 step goal.
But some days I'm in meetings most of the day (ick), or have a long drive, or I'm hosting people at my house, or whatever. My fitbit reminds me that I haven't burnt much energy, and so I shouldn't consume too much. I adjust my calories accordingly.
For me, the point of my fitbit isn't the steps. It's knowing (approximately) how many calories I have spent, and how many I need.
I wish I could eat like a farmer! But I'm no farmer. So, here I am -- tracking my calories like a modern-day, urban, middle-aged woman.
Eliza,
I think calorie reduction is definitely a good adjustment for those who simply can't be that active. My fear though, based on readings, is that this is not enough from a health perspective.
It may work from a weight maintenance standpoint, based on the CICO equation, but does it also work from a health standpoint?
It's not that I would not maintain my weight if I adjusted calorie intake below farmer level to match my lower level of activity, but sedentarism might affect health anyway.
For example, I clearly noticed my blood sugar goes down significantly when I have been very active all day plus lifting weights and putting some extra effort in it. After such a day, it was down to 76 - which was amazing. The lowest I have tested.
Otherwise, if I am relatively sedentary, the Blood glucose can go anywhere from upper 80's (best case scenario) to close to 100, which is not exactly reassuring, given that's the pre-diabetes borderline. With one parent diabetic and the other prediabetic - I freak out.
The reality is most people are forced to scramble to find time to be active - but given the circumstances, we are still left with nothing but our efforts to try to make it somehow.
As many people here said, it CAN be done - even with busy schedules - but it is definitely a frantic struggle and sometimes I am afraid that this frantic living where you try to fit in everything, including fitness on top of work - can only lead to an overall poor and stressful quality of life.
After all, they do say that the third pillar of good health, in addition to eating well and staying active, is also minimizing stress. Finding the proverbial 15 minutes where you retire to a dark room, lie down, meditate, breathe throug the abdomen, whatever - that's important too.
And yet, between work, kids, pilling vegetabkes for fresh eating, exercise intensively AND doing tips and tricks to be in motion all day - it is absolutely unclear where the 15 min of "clam and meditation" would fit in.
What I see in this big picture is a case of "something's gotta give".
But yes - I guess all we have is doing the best we can.
What I, personally, would like to see would be how employers, schools, and other institutions that affect people's lives daily can respond to public health calls to allow people to make realistic choices about their health.
Tips and tricks at the individual level without any structural accommodations are bound to fail eventually because nobody can maintain a perfectly productive schedule every minute, every day - and even then many would not have enough time to squeeze in all health-related recommendations.
(Then again I do understand a possible answer would be that not everybody is supposed to live that long, after all).
The population in first world countries has been hearing about the importance of eating well, exercise and stress minimization for many decades now. So it's not like people are uninformed.
Yet, the rates of obesity and or illnesses related to obesity, sedentarism and poor eating are nowhere on the decline.
Oh, well.
[/quote]
So you don't have much extra time( even though we all get 24 hrs per day) but yet can be online writing these lengthy posts? Seems legit. ...3 -
@wisdomfromyou Can you say what kind of work you do & how many days a week you work? I re-read your posts and I realized that the main problem is that you don't like exercise, and in fact prefer a sedentary lifestyle. Your only motivation is fear, which is a powerful short-term motivator, but not a very good long-term motivator. I wish you could find something fun, like belly dancing or bicycle riding with your children, or boxing, or yoga or ballroom dancing. It would be easier to commit to the time if the exercise was fun, or you were doing it with your children or husband.1
-
zoeysasha37 wrote: »wisdomfromyou wrote: »"Workloads and workdays must change for people to lead healthier lives - until then it's just useless shaming and blaming. "
I think there's another way to look at it: adjust the calories to match the lifestyle. I agree with you that for many of us, sometimes the steps (or miles, or minutes, or reps) aren't going to make it on the agenda. And so we must adjust accordingly.
So, yes, my fitbit has motivated me to be more active. But it's also a helpful reminder that sometimes I am not very active -- mostly for reasons like those you have mentioned. Many days (most), I make it to my 12,000 step goal.
But some days I'm in meetings most of the day (ick), or have a long drive, or I'm hosting people at my house, or whatever. My fitbit reminds me that I haven't burnt much energy, and so I shouldn't consume too much. I adjust my calories accordingly.
For me, the point of my fitbit isn't the steps. It's knowing (approximately) how many calories I have spent, and how many I need.
I wish I could eat like a farmer! But I'm no farmer. So, here I am -- tracking my calories like a modern-day, urban, middle-aged woman.
Eliza,
I think calorie reduction is definitely a good adjustment for those who simply can't be that active. My fear though, based on readings, is that this is not enough from a health perspective.
It may work from a weight maintenance standpoint, based on the CICO equation, but does it also work from a health standpoint?
It's not that I would not maintain my weight if I adjusted calorie intake below farmer level to match my lower level of activity, but sedentarism might affect health anyway.
For example, I clearly noticed my blood sugar goes down significantly when I have been very active all day plus lifting weights and putting some extra effort in it. After such a day, it was down to 76 - which was amazing. The lowest I have tested.
Otherwise, if I am relatively sedentary, the Blood glucose can go anywhere from upper 80's (best case scenario) to close to 100, which is not exactly reassuring, given that's the pre-diabetes borderline. With one parent diabetic and the other prediabetic - I freak out.
The reality is most people are forced to scramble to find time to be active - but given the circumstances, we are still left with nothing but our efforts to try to make it somehow.
As many people here said, it CAN be done - even with busy schedules - but it is definitely a frantic struggle and sometimes I am afraid that this frantic living where you try to fit in everything, including fitness on top of work - can only lead to an overall poor and stressful quality of life.
After all, they do say that the third pillar of good health, in addition to eating well and staying active, is also minimizing stress. Finding the proverbial 15 minutes where you retire to a dark room, lie down, meditate, breathe throug the abdomen, whatever - that's important too.
And yet, between work, kids, pilling vegetabkes for fresh eating, exercise intensively AND doing tips and tricks to be in motion all day - it is absolutely unclear where the 15 min of "clam and meditation" would fit in.
What I see in this big picture is a case of "something's gotta give".
But yes - I guess all we have is doing the best we can.
What I, personally, would like to see would be how employers, schools, and other institutions that affect people's lives daily can respond to public health calls to allow people to make realistic choices about their health.
Tips and tricks at the individual level without any structural accommodations are bound to fail eventually because nobody can maintain a perfectly productive schedule every minute, every day - and even then many would not have enough time to squeeze in all health-related recommendations.
(Then again I do understand a possible answer would be that not everybody is supposed to live that long, after all).
The population in first world countries has been hearing about the importance of eating well, exercise and stress minimization for many decades now. So it's not like people are uninformed.
Yet, the rates of obesity and or illnesses related to obesity, sedentarism and poor eating are nowhere on the decline.
Oh, well.
So you don't have much extra time( even though we all get 24 hrs per day) but yet can be online writing these lengthy posts? Seems legit. ...[/quote]
True.. I kill 2 birds with one stone and read my phone while I'm walking, where there's a will there's a way.3 -
Yes it does take time to take steps , exercise, or otherwise take care of yourself!2
-
I'm sorry but reading each of your post, at least to me just sounds like your making excuses. We all have busy lives it just depends how you want to make time for it.
5 -
Christine_72 wrote: »zoeysasha37 wrote: »wisdomfromyou wrote: »"Workloads and workdays must change for people to lead healthier lives - until then it's just useless shaming and blaming. "
I think there's another way to look at it: adjust the calories to match the lifestyle. I agree with you that for many of us, sometimes the steps (or miles, or minutes, or reps) aren't going to make it on the agenda. And so we must adjust accordingly.
So, yes, my fitbit has motivated me to be more active. But it's also a helpful reminder that sometimes I am not very active -- mostly for reasons like those you have mentioned. Many days (most), I make it to my 12,000 step goal.
But some days I'm in meetings most of the day (ick), or have a long drive, or I'm hosting people at my house, or whatever. My fitbit reminds me that I haven't burnt much energy, and so I shouldn't consume too much. I adjust my calories accordingly.
For me, the point of my fitbit isn't the steps. It's knowing (approximately) how many calories I have spent, and how many I need.
I wish I could eat like a farmer! But I'm no farmer. So, here I am -- tracking my calories like a modern-day, urban, middle-aged woman.
Eliza,
I think calorie reduction is definitely a good adjustment for those who simply can't be that active. My fear though, based on readings, is that this is not enough from a health perspective.
It may work from a weight maintenance standpoint, based on the CICO equation, but does it also work from a health standpoint?
It's not that I would not maintain my weight if I adjusted calorie intake below farmer level to match my lower level of activity, but sedentarism might affect health anyway.
For example, I clearly noticed my blood sugar goes down significantly when I have been very active all day plus lifting weights and putting some extra effort in it. After such a day, it was down to 76 - which was amazing. The lowest I have tested.
Otherwise, if I am relatively sedentary, the Blood glucose can go anywhere from upper 80's (best case scenario) to close to 100, which is not exactly reassuring, given that's the pre-diabetes borderline. With one parent diabetic and the other prediabetic - I freak out.
The reality is most people are forced to scramble to find time to be active - but given the circumstances, we are still left with nothing but our efforts to try to make it somehow.
As many people here said, it CAN be done - even with busy schedules - but it is definitely a frantic struggle and sometimes I am afraid that this frantic living where you try to fit in everything, including fitness on top of work - can only lead to an overall poor and stressful quality of life.
After all, they do say that the third pillar of good health, in addition to eating well and staying active, is also minimizing stress. Finding the proverbial 15 minutes where you retire to a dark room, lie down, meditate, breathe throug the abdomen, whatever - that's important too.
And yet, between work, kids, pilling vegetabkes for fresh eating, exercise intensively AND doing tips and tricks to be in motion all day - it is absolutely unclear where the 15 min of "clam and meditation" would fit in.
What I see in this big picture is a case of "something's gotta give".
But yes - I guess all we have is doing the best we can.
What I, personally, would like to see would be how employers, schools, and other institutions that affect people's lives daily can respond to public health calls to allow people to make realistic choices about their health.
Tips and tricks at the individual level without any structural accommodations are bound to fail eventually because nobody can maintain a perfectly productive schedule every minute, every day - and even then many would not have enough time to squeeze in all health-related recommendations.
(Then again I do understand a possible answer would be that not everybody is supposed to live that long, after all).
The population in first world countries has been hearing about the importance of eating well, exercise and stress minimization for many decades now. So it's not like people are uninformed.
Yet, the rates of obesity and or illnesses related to obesity, sedentarism and poor eating are nowhere on the decline.
Oh, well.
So you don't have much extra time( even though we all get 24 hrs per day) but yet can be online writing these lengthy posts? Seems legit. ...
True.. I kill 2 birds with one stone and read my phone while I'm walking, where there's a will there's a way.[/quote]
1. Yes, I write very fast.
2. No, this is not typical for a regular day for me.
0 -
wisdomfromyou wrote: »"Workloads and workdays must change for people to lead healthier lives - until then it's just useless shaming and blaming. "
I think there's another way to look at it: adjust the calories to match the lifestyle. I agree with you that for many of us, sometimes the steps (or miles, or minutes, or reps) aren't going to make it on the agenda. And so we must adjust accordingly.
So, yes, my fitbit has motivated me to be more active. But it's also a helpful reminder that sometimes I am not very active -- mostly for reasons like those you have mentioned. Many days (most), I make it to my 12,000 step goal.
But some days I'm in meetings most of the day (ick), or have a long drive, or I'm hosting people at my house, or whatever. My fitbit reminds me that I haven't burnt much energy, and so I shouldn't consume too much. I adjust my calories accordingly.
For me, the point of my fitbit isn't the steps. It's knowing (approximately) how many calories I have spent, and how many I need.
I wish I could eat like a farmer! But I'm no farmer. So, here I am -- tracking my calories like a modern-day, urban, middle-aged woman.
Eliza,
I think calorie reduction is definitely a good adjustment for those who simply can't be that active. My fear though, based on readings, is that this is not enough from a health perspective.
It may work from a weight maintenance standpoint, based on the CICO equation, but does it also work from a health standpoint?
It's not that I would not maintain my weight if I adjusted calorie intake below farmer level to match my lower level of activity, but sedentarism might affect health anyway.
For example, I clearly noticed my blood sugar goes down significantly when I have been very active all day plus lifting weights and putting some extra effort in it. After such a day, it was down to 76 - which was amazing. The lowest I have tested.
Otherwise, if I am relatively sedentary, the Blood glucose can go anywhere from upper 80's (best case scenario) to close to 100, which is not exactly reassuring, given that's the pre-diabetes borderline. With one parent diabetic and the other prediabetic - I freak out.
The reality is most people are forced to scramble to find time to be active - but given the circumstances, we are still left with nothing but our efforts to try to make it somehow.
As many people here said, it CAN be done - even with busy schedules - but it is definitely a frantic struggle and sometimes I am afraid that this frantic living where you try to fit in everything, including fitness on top of work - can only lead to an overall poor and stressful quality of life.
After all, they do say that the third pillar of good health, in addition to eating well and staying active, is also minimizing stress. Finding the proverbial 15 minutes where you retire to a dark room, lie down, meditate, breathe throug the abdomen, whatever - that's important too.
And yet, between work, kids, pilling vegetabkes for fresh eating, exercise intensively AND doing tips and tricks to be in motion all day - it is absolutely unclear where the 15 min of "clam and meditation" would fit in.
What I see in this big picture is a case of "something's gotta give".
But yes - I guess all we have is doing the best we can.
What I, personally, would like to see would be how employers, schools, and other institutions that affect people's lives daily can respond to public health calls to allow people to make realistic choices about their health.
Tips and tricks at the individual level without any structural accommodations are bound to fail eventually because nobody can maintain a perfectly productive schedule every minute, every day - and even then many would not have enough time to squeeze in all health-related recommendations.
(Then again I do understand a possible answer would be that not everybody is supposed to live that long, after all).
The population in first world countries has been hearing about the importance of eating well, exercise and stress minimization for many decades now. So it's not like people are uninformed.
Yet, the rates of obesity and or illnesses related to obesity, sedentarism and poor eating are nowhere on the decline.
Oh, well.
[/quote]
What I was trying to say was to do the best you can with the situation.
Obviously, physical activity is a key element of health. But if you truly can't do it, you can't do it. In that case, I think a healthy goal would be to keep a healthy weight by reducing calories to match the lack of activity.
0 -
I have a Fitbit and I keep everything set to sedentary because I usually spend the day in my small apartment playing games or cleaning. But now I do a lot more grocery shopping, and I walk to 3 different stores all the time. Just today I walked over 14k steps, over 6 miles, and according to my Fitbit and MFP, I burned 500 calories.
Did I actually? Someone else told me that walking doesn't actually burn calories.0 -
I have a Fitbit and I keep everything set to sedentary because I usually spend the day in my small apartment playing games or cleaning. But now I do a lot more grocery shopping, and I walk to 3 different stores all the time. Just today I walked over 14k steps, over 6 miles, and according to my Fitbit and MFP, I burned 500 calories.
Did I actually? Someone else told me that walking doesn't actually burn calories.
You can burn tons of calories from walking. Here's a screenshot of my fitbit page.
0 -
I have a Fitbit and I keep everything set to sedentary because I usually spend the day in my small apartment playing games or cleaning. But now I do a lot more grocery shopping, and I walk to 3 different stores all the time. Just today I walked over 14k steps, over 6 miles, and according to my Fitbit and MFP, I burned 500 calories.
Did I actually? Someone else told me that walking doesn't actually burn calories.
They would be wrong. Everything you do in a 24 hr period burns calories. Even sitting on the couch and sleeping (though it's not a lot) your body burns calories to keep your heart pumping. So yes your walk burns calories. Maybe not as many as a run, but it's more than what you burn sitting on the couch.
0 -
I have a Fitbit and I keep everything set to sedentary because I usually spend the day in my small apartment playing games or cleaning. But now I do a lot more grocery shopping, and I walk to 3 different stores all the time. Just today I walked over 14k steps, over 6 miles, and according to my Fitbit and MFP, I burned 500 calories.
Did I actually? Someone else told me that walking doesn't actually burn calories.
Actually you burned more than 500 cals walking, that's just the exercise adjustment that MFP gave you after syncing with FitBit. Your body burns calories all day long - sleeping, sitting on the couch gaming, walking to the store, and any other activity and exercise you do. Look at your FitBit for total calories burned - that's how many you burned in a whole day with all your activity.
FitBit then sends that to MFP and it calculates an adjustment based on what MFP thinks your total sedentary calorie burn would be, excluding exercise. You burned 500 more than it thought, so you get a "credit" if you will. You should be eating some of those calories back, if you aren't already.
I'm not sure who told you walking doesn't burn calories but that person needs a refresher course.1 -
I work a full-time desk job. A normal day where I don't go out of my way to walk around more will net me around 5-7K steps.
I drink a LOT of water - between 1.5-2L before leaving at 5 - and thus means a lot of walks to the ladies room. This serves two purposes: I'm well-hydrated and it forces me to get up from my desk. I go to the gym MWF mornings, and generally choose running or elliptical. I can very easily get in 7-10K steps before starting work. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, I try to use the treadmill and walk during my lunch break, although sometimes I don't. I might go to the supermarket across the street and grab some water enhancers or a small snack. When I'm home, I find it easier to get my step count up. My sister purchased a little mini-elliptical that I like to use while watching TV. I might go for a walk, though not as often now that it's hot as hell outside.0 -
I have a Fitbit and I keep everything set to sedentary because I usually spend the day in my small apartment playing games or cleaning. But now I do a lot more grocery shopping, and I walk to 3 different stores all the time. Just today I walked over 14k steps, over 6 miles, and according to my Fitbit and MFP, I burned 500 calories.
Did I actually? Someone else told me that walking doesn't actually burn calories.
Over time (2 years) I have found that that kind of calorie burn for that kind of step count is completely accurate and I have happily eaten to that level1 -
Posting this from another thread: OP is not fat, but interesting article nonetheless...
https://www.t-nation.com/blogs/the-real-reason-everyones-fat1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions