Lightly Active vs. Active
Options
newwed412
Posts: 68 Member
How do I determine which one I am? I don't want to cheat myself by I also don't want to give myself too many calories either. I workout 6 days a week for at least an hour but I also have a desk job. So should I say lightly active?
0
Replies
-
I get about 12-15k average daily steps and I still have myselfnat liggtliggt active, plus I train 3/week with weights. I'd say start at lightly active.0
-
Neither. Exercise isn't included in MFP's activity level, so you would be considered sedentary.11
-
I believe the activity level is correlated to the number of steps you take a day (excluding exercise). I'd probably start sedentary and get yourself a pedometer or something like that, track for a couple of weeks and adjust as appropriate (I aim for 10-11k steps a day which puts me solidity in the active range (IIRC)2
-
I have a Fitbit and I usually average between 13,000-15,000 steps a daydeannalfisher wrote: »I believe the activity level is correlated to the number of steps you take a day (excluding exercise). I'd probably start sedentary and get yourself a pedometer or something like that, track for a couple of weeks and adjust as appropriate (I aim for 10-11k steps a day which puts me solidity in the active range (IIRC)
0 -
I have a Fitbit and I usually average between 13,000-15,000 steps a daydeannalfisher wrote: »I believe the activity level is correlated to the number of steps you take a day (excluding exercise). I'd probably start sedentary and get yourself a pedometer or something like that, track for a couple of weeks and adjust as appropriate (I aim for 10-11k steps a day which puts me solidity in the active range (IIRC)
what works for me is setting myself to sedentary, and then just letting fitbit do the adjustments for me, I eat what it tells me to eat. I generally leave about 200 calories to account for any errors in logging or inaccuracy from my workout.1 -
That's lightly active.0
-
this came off a search I've used before
1. Sedentary Lifestyle Index: Under 5,000 steps per day is an indicator of being inactive and sitting too much, which raises health risks.
2. Low Active: 5,000 to 7,499 steps per day is typical of daily activity excluding sports and exercise and might be considered low active. The average American walks 5,900 to 6,900 steps per day, putting the majority in the low active category.
3. Somewhat Active: 7,500 to 9,999 steps per day likely includes some exercise or walking (and/or a job that requires more walking) and might be considered somewhat active.
4. Active: 10,000 steps per day indicates the point that should be used to classify individuals as active. This makes it a good daily goal for healthy people who want a quick indicator they are getting in their daily exercise.
5. Highly Active: Individuals who take more than 12,500 steps/day are likely to be classified as highly active.
5 -
It actually doesn't matter what you set your level at if you are using a fitbit and it's sync'd to MFP.
If that is the case however you really should set yourself to sedentary and let the fitbit do it's job of tracking and adjusting for you.
However if you choose not to do that remember that if you set yourself as light active to active your adjustment will come much later and be a lot less because you already have accounted for those calories.
for the rest who don't use a tracker
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18562971
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)Adult public health guidelines promote > or =30 min of at least moderate-intensity daily PA, and this translates to 3000-4000 steps if they are: 1) at least moderate intensity (i.e., > or =100 steps.min); 2) accumulated in at least 10-min bouts; and 3) taken over and above some minimal level of PA (i.e., number of daily steps) below which individuals might be classified as sedentary.
PA=physical acitivty
I know with my fitbit it matches this quote from this study.
For a walk to be classed as "exercise" it has to be at least 10mins in length etc.4 -
I have a Fitbit and I usually average between 13,000-15,000 steps a daydeannalfisher wrote: »I believe the activity level is correlated to the number of steps you take a day (excluding exercise). I'd probably start sedentary and get yourself a pedometer or something like that, track for a couple of weeks and adjust as appropriate (I aim for 10-11k steps a day which puts me solidity in the active range (IIRC)
The way I see it, you have three choices:- Set yourself to "active" and don't log any additional exercise. (I'm assuming your 13,000-15,000 steps includes steps taken when working out. If not, you're likely "very active" if you don't log any additional exercise.)
- Calculate the number of steps you take when you're *not* working out, choose an activity level based on that (sedentary if less than 5,000 steps; lightly active if less than 10,000 steps; active if over 10,000 steps), and log your exercise as well for a calorie increase on workout days.
- Sync your FitBit, enable "negative adjustments" and let FitBit do all the work for you.
Whichever option you choose, after a month, compare your observed weight loss with your predicted weight loss and adjust accordingly. I'd go with Option 3 because it's the easiest (and makes it mostly irrelevant which activity level you choose).2 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »I have a Fitbit and I usually average between 13,000-15,000 steps a daydeannalfisher wrote: »I believe the activity level is correlated to the number of steps you take a day (excluding exercise). I'd probably start sedentary and get yourself a pedometer or something like that, track for a couple of weeks and adjust as appropriate (I aim for 10-11k steps a day which puts me solidity in the active range (IIRC)
The way I see it, you have three choices:- Set yourself to "active" and don't log any additional exercise. (I'm assuming your 13,000-15,000 steps includes steps taken when working out. If not, you're likely "very active" if you don't log any additional exercise.)
- Calculate the number of steps you take when you're *not* working out, choose an activity level based on that (sedentary if less than 5,000 steps; lightly active if less than 10,000 steps; active if over 10,000 steps), and log your exercise as well for a calorie increase on workout days.
- Sync your FitBit, enable "negative adjustments" and let FitBit do all the work for you.
Whichever option you choose, after a month, compare your observed weight loss with your predicted weight loss and adjust accordingly. I'd go with Option 3 because it's the easiest (and makes it mostly irrelevant which activity level you choose).
For number 3 it is suggested to set level to sedentary as well.1 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »I have a Fitbit and I usually average between 13,000-15,000 steps a daydeannalfisher wrote: »I believe the activity level is correlated to the number of steps you take a day (excluding exercise). I'd probably start sedentary and get yourself a pedometer or something like that, track for a couple of weeks and adjust as appropriate (I aim for 10-11k steps a day which puts me solidity in the active range (IIRC)
The way I see it, you have three choices:- Set yourself to "active" and don't log any additional exercise. (I'm assuming your 13,000-15,000 steps includes steps taken when working out. If not, you're likely "very active" if you don't log any additional exercise.)
- Calculate the number of steps you take when you're *not* working out, choose an activity level based on that (sedentary if less than 5,000 steps; lightly active if less than 10,000 steps; active if over 10,000 steps), and log your exercise as well for a calorie increase on workout days.
- Sync your FitBit, enable "negative adjustments" and let FitBit do all the work for you.
Whichever option you choose, after a month, compare your observed weight loss with your predicted weight loss and adjust accordingly. I'd go with Option 3 because it's the easiest (and makes it mostly irrelevant which activity level you choose).
For number 3 it is suggested to set level to sedentary as well.
I see that suggestion a lot and I think it depends a lot on the person. Personally, I find it easier and more logical to choose the activity setting that most closely matches my typical day (or a slight underestimate of my typical day). For me, seeing the tiny calorie target that "sedentary" gives would make me less motivated to move. "Chasing" the point at which I switch from negative to positive adjustments is highly motivating for me. And because I go to bed fairly late, I don't suffer from the "calories taken back for inactivity late in the day" issue that posters who go to bed early experience.
"Sedentary" would be the best choice for people whose activity level is inconsistent enough that they have days where they truly are sedentary, for people who would react poorly to seeing negative adjustments and for people who go to bed early. Probably a few other scenarios too.
At midnight, the calorie total will be the same no matter which activity level is chosen and after a few weeks, you know what sort of numbers result from your typical days, so the choice should be made based on what will work best psychologically for the individual. IMO, of course.3 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »
I see that suggestion a lot and I think it depends a lot on the person. Personally, I find it easier and more logical to choose the activity setting that most closely matches my typical day (or a slight underestimate of my typical day). For me, seeing the tiny calorie target that "sedentary" gives would make me less motivated to move. "Chasing" the point at which I switch from negative to positive adjustments is highly motivating for me. And because I go to bed fairly late, I don't suffer from the "calories taken back for inactivity late in the day" issue that posters who go to bed early experience.
"Sedentary" would be the best choice for people whose activity level is inconsistent enough that they have days where they truly are sedentary, for people who would react poorly to seeing negative adjustments and for people who go to bed early. Probably a few other scenarios too.
At midnight, the calorie total will be the same no matter which activity level is chosen and after a few weeks, you know what sort of numbers result from your typical days, so the choice should be made based on what will work best psychologically for the individual. IMO, of course.[/quote]
QFT: use the setting closest to your true activity when negative adjustments are enabled. it avoids unexpected large positive adjustments. And it provides a more graphical warning <a large negative adjustment vs the absence of a positive adjustment> as to what happens when you sit on your **kitten** all day!0 -
I see that suggestion a lot and I think it depends a lot on the person. Personally, I find it easier and more logical to choose the activity setting that most closely matches my typical day (or a slight underestimate of my typical day). For me, seeing the tiny calorie target that "sedentary" gives would make me less motivated to move. "Chasing" the point at which I switch from negative to positive adjustments is highly motivating for me. And because I go to bed fairly late, I don't suffer from the "calories taken back for inactivity late in the day" issue that posters who go to bed early experience.
"Sedentary" would be the best choice for people whose activity level is inconsistent enough that they have days where they truly are sedentary, for people who would react poorly to seeing negative adjustments and for people who go to bed early. Probably a few other scenarios too.
At midnight, the calorie total will be the same no matter which activity level is chosen and after a few weeks, you know what sort of numbers result from your typical days, so the choice should be made based on what will work best psychologically for the individual. IMO, of course.QFT: use the setting closest to your true activity when negative adjustments are enabled. it avoids unexpected large positive adjustments. And it provides a more graphical warning <a large negative adjustment vs the absence of a positive adjustment> as to what happens when you sit on your **kitten** all day!
and that is fine but if you look at the study I linked in you see that to be something other than sedentary (over 5k steps) would not be the norm for most people....otherwise they wouldn't be here to lose weight.
Esp since MFP activity level SHOULD NOT include exercise....so without purposeful movement what I say stands...
Yes it depends on the person...I am a desk jokey but do purposeful extra steps (not walks) and I get about 7-8k on a normal day...then I exercise...I am not sedentary...but lightly active.
And by saying it depends it confuses the topic as the OP indicated that they had a desk job and their activity was from purposeful exercise...so in this case they need to set it to sedentary PER THE QUESTION.0 -
and that is fine but if you look at the study I linked in you see that to be something other than sedentary (over 5k steps) would not be the norm for most people....otherwise they wouldn't be here to lose weight.
Esp since MFP activity level SHOULD NOT include exercise....so without purposeful movement what I say stands...
Yes it depends on the person...I am a desk jokey but do purposeful extra steps (not walks) and I get about 7-8k on a normal day...then I exercise...I am not sedentary...but lightly active.
And by saying it depends it confuses the topic as the OP indicated that they had a desk job and their activity was from purposeful exercise...so in this case they need to set it to sedentary PER THE QUESTION.
I am confused a bit Stef because specifically the study you linked to is one of the first ones that I read that clued me in that indeed my initial MFP setting of sedentary was incorrect and that I shouldn't have been scared to change it.
You are correct that there is some topic drift here and that the advice to the OP (who did not indicate she was using an activity tracker) ought to be to set to sedentary or lightly active and count exercise separately and adjust as per trend of weight level results over a period of 4-6 weeks.
However both Susan and I were addressing a subject that you too discussed. Namely the settings that should be used WITH an activity tracker. And on those settings we will have to agree to disagree as you seem to believe that the correct setting is sedentary + large positive adjustments, while I believe that both Susan and I feel that the best setting is one that generates smaller adjustments.
0 -
It actually doesn't matter what you set your level at if you are using a fitbit and it's sync'd to MFP.
If that is the case however you really should set yourself to sedentary and let the fitbit do it's job of tracking and adjusting for you.
However if you choose not to do that remember that if you set yourself as light active to active your adjustment will come much later and be a lot less because you already have accounted for those calories.
for the rest who don't use a tracker
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18562971
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)Adult public health guidelines promote > or =30 min of at least moderate-intensity daily PA, and this translates to 3000-4000 steps if they are: 1) at least moderate intensity (i.e., > or =100 steps.min); 2) accumulated in at least 10-min bouts; and 3) taken over and above some minimal level of PA (i.e., number of daily steps) below which individuals might be classified as sedentary.
PA=physical acitivty
I know with my fitbit it matches this quote from this study.
For a walk to be classed as "exercise" it has to be at least 10mins in length etc.
This is confusing me, they say 1 mile is ~2000 steps, so if you took 12,000 steps during the day (6 miles) and that was the only exercise you did and the rest of the time you lay on the couch or at a desk this would have you at "active". But then if you look at the "calories burned while walking" formula from runners world I see posted a lot:
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning
According to Runners World they claim that walking burns barely anything (they claim 0.3 x bodyweight per mile for net calorie burn) so with only walking 6 miles (12000 steps) you can do the math e.g. 150 lb person would only burn 270 (150x0.3x6 = 270) then add that 270 on to their BMR and it would come out much lower than what "active" on MFP would tell you for said person's maintenance. The math just doesn't add up, maybe I'm overthinking it but either runners world formula is way off, or the steps calculation is off, or am I missing something here?
0 -
nosebag1212 wrote: »According to Runners World they claim that walking burns barely anything (they claim 0.3 x bodyweight per mile) so with only walking 6 miles (12000 steps) you can do the math. The math just doesn't add up, maybe I'm overthinking it but either runners world formula is way off, or the steps calculation is off. Am I missing something here?
The runners world "formula" is a piece of unscientific **kitten** woo some idiot pulled out of their **kitten** that people like quoting to prove that walking is not exercise (and it certainly isn't as vigorous as... running, which for some reason makes people on runningworld... happy)
The "formula" does not take into account a few things such as weight, height, age, body fat % or physical condition, terrain, incline...
so yeah...6 -
This is just the way I do it which may or may not be helpful for you, but here goes.
I also use a Fitbit. I have my activity level set at lightly active so I start the day with more calories. I have negative calorie adjustments disabled.
I do this because it gives me a few extra calories regardless of whether it's a workout day for me or not. I've been doing this for 4 months now and have figured out that I'm less hungry on days I workout really hard but much more hungry the next day esp. if I workout in the evening.
It was stressing me out to go over my calories on my rest days even though I had "banked" plenty of extra calories the day before.
For most people weight loss/getting healthier is as much a mind game as a physical one. That's definitely true in my case. I find that this helps me keep my head in a positive place as I go through this process.
Maybe start by experimenting with the settings. Sometimes it's simply a matter of taking your best guess. You can always make adjustments as you go. After you're at it for a while you can start to look for patterns that work best for you.
All the best!2 -
nosebag1212 wrote: »This is confusing me, they say 1 mile is ~2000 steps, so if you took 12,000 steps during the day (6 miles) and that was the only exercise you did and the rest of the time you lay on the couch or at a desk this would have you at "active". But then if you look at the "calories burned while walking" formula from runners world I see posted a lot:
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning
According to Runners World they claim that walking burns barely anything (they claim 0.3 x bodyweight per mile for net calorie burn) so with only walking 6 miles (12000 steps) you can do the math e.g. 150 lb person would only burn 270 (150x0.3x6 = 270) then add that 270 on to their BMR and it would come out much lower than what "active" on MFP would tell you for said person's maintenance. The math just doesn't add up, maybe I'm overthinking it but either runners world formula is way off, or the steps calculation is off, or am I missing something here?
The only exercise I have been able to fit into my life since about March has been walking (unless you count standing when teaching, playing with toddlers and carrying toddlers when they're too tired to walk or don't want to go where I want them to go). I've been averaging just under 20,000 steps/day. That's 10 miles. The Runner's World formula would calculate that to be a burn of 450 calories.
According to calculators, my BMR is 1409 cals/day. Multiply by 1.25 to get my sedentary burn of 1761 cals/day. Add the 450 cals from the Runners World formula to give me a total daily burn of 2211 cals/day. My average intake is 2350 cals/day, and I lose half a pound per week, making my actual average daily burn 2600 cals/day. So, I burn almost twice as many calories walking as they claim.
Either I am a special snowflake or their formula is way off. Since they have a vested interest in convincing people that walking doesn't count as exercise, I lean toward their formula being way off.6 -
nosebag1212 wrote: »According to Runners World they claim that walking burns barely anything (they claim 0.3 x bodyweight per mile) so with only walking 6 miles (12000 steps) you can do the math. The math just doesn't add up, maybe I'm overthinking it but either runners world formula is way off, or the steps calculation is off. Am I missing something here?
The runners world "formula" is a piece of unscientific **kitten** woo some idiot pulled out of their **kitten** that people like quoting to prove that walking is not exercise (and it certainly isn't as vigorous as... running, which for some reason makes people on runningworld... happy)
The "formula" does not take into account a few things such as weight, height, age, body fat % or physical condition, terrain, incline...
so yeah...
Yeah, I've never believed that formula for a second either yet I see it referenced all the time, it was just bugging my ocd brain.0 -
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
Has anyone figured out the corresponding activity factors (i.e. 1.25, etc.) for these step numbers?2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 945 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions