Sedentary vs. Lightly Active
ChickenKillerPuppy
Posts: 297 Member
I am new to MFP and selected "Lightly Active" as my activity level. Although I do sit at a desk for work, I don't have a car so I walk to and from work (although it's just a 15 minute walk each way), I travel a lot for work so aside from flights I'm often on the go, and even at my desk I have to get up and move a moderate amount (to go to the printer, see someone in their office down the hall, etc.). I also have a dog that I walk every day.
Can someone help me understand how my choice of "Lightly Active" factors in to my weight loss goals set by MFP? I have seen a lot of posts that urge people not to chose "Sedentary" just to chose it, so I really tried to be accurate. Ideally, if you reply, please try to use minimal acronyms (or at least explain what they are) as I am still really trying to learn this stuff (and yes, I have seen the link that is very helpful).
FWIW, I am 46 years old, 5'4", 158 pounds with a goal weight of 130. I am currently supposed to eat 1200 calories and walking/exercise has been giving me an additional 600-700 calories a day to eat (I have been eating back about 200-300 of those). Aside from the activity built into my daily life, I try to run about 4 times a week for about 40 minutes a pop. I wear a fitbit and don't record my runs as activity because my fitbit counts those steps and I don't want them to count twice.
Thanks in advance! I am really enjoying getting into the weeds of MFP. I did WW for years with success but went off it and gained weight and it just wasn't exciting me anymore so MFP and the forums have been terrific.
Can someone help me understand how my choice of "Lightly Active" factors in to my weight loss goals set by MFP? I have seen a lot of posts that urge people not to chose "Sedentary" just to chose it, so I really tried to be accurate. Ideally, if you reply, please try to use minimal acronyms (or at least explain what they are) as I am still really trying to learn this stuff (and yes, I have seen the link that is very helpful).
FWIW, I am 46 years old, 5'4", 158 pounds with a goal weight of 130. I am currently supposed to eat 1200 calories and walking/exercise has been giving me an additional 600-700 calories a day to eat (I have been eating back about 200-300 of those). Aside from the activity built into my daily life, I try to run about 4 times a week for about 40 minutes a pop. I wear a fitbit and don't record my runs as activity because my fitbit counts those steps and I don't want them to count twice.
Thanks in advance! I am really enjoying getting into the weeds of MFP. I did WW for years with success but went off it and gained weight and it just wasn't exciting me anymore so MFP and the forums have been terrific.
5
Replies
-
The activity level in used to estimate total calorie burn (not including intentional exercise) throughout the day. Based on your description, it sounds like lightly active is an accurate setting for you.
Do you have an activity tracker connected (such as a fitbit or smart watch)? If that is the case, either of those would account for an increased activity level. Meaning if you were more active in your daily movements than MFP predicted, you will get extra exercise calories back. If you are less active, it will only account if you have negative calories enabled.
However, a calorie goal of 1200 is usually indicative that you have set too aggressive of a weight loss goal. I'm guess you chose 2 lb/week as a rate of loss. Since you only have 28 lbs to lose, I would recommend 0.5-1 lb/week rate of loss. No higher than 1 lb/week.7 -
Have you selected more than 1 pound per week? I don't think you are supposed to be at the min calorie level.
The difference between sedentary and lightly active for you is about 200 calories. Since you are eating back only a portion of your exercise calories you should stay with lightly active for about 6 weeks and then determine your rate of loss and then adjust your calories if needed. You need to be losing no more than 1 pound per week.1 -
I think lightly active for you will be fine. But i cannot fathom youre burning 600-700 calories in a workout at your body weight. Thatd be like sprinting for 2 hours.
Whats ur typical workout look like?1 -
robthephotog wrote: »I think lightly active for you will be fine. But i cannot fathom youre burning 600-700 calories in a workout at your body weight. Thatd be like sprinting for 2 hours.
Whats ur typical workout look like?
False. This would be running at about an 10-11 min/mile pace for an hour at that height/weight.6 -
I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.0
-
robthephotog wrote: »I think lightly active for you will be fine. But i cannot fathom youre burning 600-700 calories in a workout at your body weight. Thatd be like sprinting for 2 hours.
Whats ur typical workout look like?
Holy exaggeration Batman!4 -
I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.
If you select 2 pounds per week it deducts 1000 calories from your maintenance calories unless it hits the minimum. The calculation is correct. The requested rate of loss is not.5 -
robthephotog wrote: »I think lightly active for you will be fine. But i cannot fathom youre burning 600-700 calories in a workout at your body weight. Thatd be like sprinting for 2 hours.
Whats ur typical workout look like?
Holy exaggeration Batman!
People over estimate calories burned. With a basic calories burned calculator, 5 miles in an hour at 150lb is around 550 calories. Are we running 8-9 minute miles for an hour consistantly every day? Thats not even the estimated 700 lol.
Just eat healthy, watch the cals in, and get 30 to an hr of cardio couple times and week and youll see results1 -
robthephotog wrote: »robthephotog wrote: »I think lightly active for you will be fine. But i cannot fathom youre burning 600-700 calories in a workout at your body weight. Thatd be like sprinting for 2 hours.
Whats ur typical workout look like?
Holy exaggeration Batman!
People over estimate calories burned. With a basic calories burned calculator, 5 miles in an hour at 150lb is around 550 calories. Are we running 8-9 minute miles for an hour consistantly every day? Thats not even the estimated 700 lol.
Just eat healthy, watch the cals in, and get 30 to an hr of cardio couple times and week and youll see results
So absolutely nothing like "sprinting for 2 hours" then?
LOL indeed.
(PS - suggest you go back and read the OP as you've missed significant information.)
5 -
I lost 50lbs &was down to 148, gained when I quit smoking to 157 & now mfp gives me 1200/day to lose 1 lbs/wk. I set mine to .5/week. I am also 5'4"I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.
0 -
Also want to add I'm at lightly active & only record actual workouts, like at the gym & have always eaten back 90% calories & lost weight0
-
I lost 50lbs &was down to 148, gained when I quit smoking to 157 & now mfp gives me 1200/day to lose 1 lbs/wk. I set mine to .5/week. I am also 5'4"I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.
That is strange since at 5'4" and 148, MFP gives me 1220 for 1 lb/week and sedentary.1 -
I lost 50lbs &was down to 148, gained when I quit smoking to 157 & now mfp gives me 1200/day to lose 1 lbs/wk. I set mine to .5/week. I am also 5'4"I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.
Wow! Very interesting- thank you for sharing! When comparing to my own stats 1200 just seems low but I'm glad it works for you! FWIW I'm at 160, 5'5'', and sedentary. MFP gives me 1320 for -1lb/week. I also decided to do -.5lbs/week.
0 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »
I lost 50lbs &was down to 148, gained when I quit smoking to 157 & now mfp gives me 1200/day to lose 1 lbs/wk. I set mine to .5/week. I am also 5'4"I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.
That is strange since at 5'4" and 148, MFP gives me 1220 for 1 lb/week and sedentary.
OK, so I'm not crazy?
0 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »
I lost 50lbs &was down to 148, gained when I quit smoking to 157 & now mfp gives me 1200/day to lose 1 lbs/wk. I set mine to .5/week. I am also 5'4"I'm confused about how it gave you 1200 cals for lightly active with your stats. Even if you selected loss of 2lbs/week that still seems a little low. If that is the case (you selected -2lbs/week), I as well as many others here will suggest to lower that to 1 since you only have 25 lbs to lose. The higher loss rates are intended for people with much much more to lose.
That is strange since at 5'4" and 148, MFP gives me 1220 for 1 lb/week and sedentary.
OK, so I'm not crazy?
Not at all! Once my goal got below 1400 was when it became too difficult for me to stay at that deficit and I switched to 0.5 lb/week. Which for me, that is 1470.1 -
Thank you all for your replies! I actually set it at 1.5 per week and it gave me 1200. I switched it to 2lbs/week to see if it would change and obviously it didn’t.
So I feel like 600-700 exercise calories a day is A LOT and it feels inaccurate, but I don’t even enter my exercise, that is literally just what it gives me for synching with my Fitbit. I worry if I separately log my excercise it will give me “double” calories, but considering my Fitbit records all my normal non-workout movement, now I am worried it is giving me “double” calories anyway.
My Fitbit usually records 15,000-20,000 steps a day, which will include running on the treadmill for the days I go to the gym. I try to run about 3.5-4 miles on the treadmill 4x a week. Plus because no car, I walk everywhere and live in a big city. On days I don’t go to the gym I try to compensate with extra walking.
So does it sound like I’m getting more exercise calories than I should? I could, instead, not have it sync with my Fitbit and just record when I work out. I think that would be more like 400 extra calories a day.
Thoughts?0 -
A Fitbit is usually quite capable of capturing exercise activity that is step based.
A Fitbit adjustment does not refer to a particular exercise but is a full day TDEE adjustment.
In mfp speak a person who moves for 15000 to 20000 steps in a day exceeds the MFP very active level. At 20k steps by a full category (i.e. would be "very very" active if such existed)
Just because a goal can be selected does not make it the right call for every person.
How would your day look if you were set up as very active end and trying to lose 1 pound a week?1 -
Here is how MFP calculates your calorie goal, and how Sedentary vs. Lightly active changes it. MFP takes your BMR (basil metabolic rate, basically what you would burn in a coma), and then multiplies it by an activity multiplier to get your maintenance calories. Your BMR according to MFP is 1342. If you put sedentary, it would use a multiplier of 1.25 to calculate your maintenance calories (before exercise). That is 1678. With lightly active, it multiples your BMR by 1.4. So your maintenance calories are 1879.
MFP then deducts your desired deficit from your maintenance calories, to get your goal calories. But it caps it at 1200. Because of this, you don't see any different between sedentary and lightly active based on the goal you chose. Since a 1.5 pound a week loss calculates out to a 750 calorie per day deficit, it winds up at less than 1200 whether you choose sedentary or lightly active, so it sets it to 1200. However if you choose 1 pound a week (which at your stats I think is probably a better weight of loss), you would get a goal of 1380 by choosing lightly active (1879-500 and rounded), but would still get a goal of 1200 if you had chosen sedentary.
I think 1380 would be a good goal for you, plus eating back calories from extra exercise (at least half to start). Extra exercise would be when you run, or any walking you do in excess of 10,000 steps (generally considered the top of the lightly active range).4 -
Here is how MFP calculates your calorie goal, and how Sedentary vs. Lightly active changes it. MFP takes your BMR (basil metabolic rate, basically what you would burn in a coma), and then multiplies it by an activity multiplier to get your maintenance calories. Your BMR according to MFP is 1342. If you put sedentary, it would use a multiplier of 1.25 to calculate your maintenance calories (before exercise). That is 1678. With lightly active, it multiples your BMR by 1.4. So your maintenance calories are 1879.
MFP then deducts your desired deficit from your maintenance calories, to get your goal calories. But it caps it at 1200. Because of this, you don't see any different between sedentary and lightly active based on the goal you chose. Since a 1.5 pound a week loss calculates out to a 750 calorie per day deficit, it winds up at less than 1200 whether you choose sedentary or lightly active, so it sets it to 1200. However if you choose 1 pound a week (which at your stats I think is probably a better weight of loss), you would get a goal of 1380 by choosing lightly active (1879-500 and rounded), but would still get a goal of 1200 if you had chosen sedentary.
I think 1380 would be a good goal for you, plus eating back calories from extra exercise (at least half to start). Extra exercise would be when you run, or any walking you do in excess of 10,000 steps (generally considered the top of the lightly active range).
All in. Except: 10k is smack dab in the middle of active esp when Active is defined at an AF = 1.6 as MFP does.
3 -
Here is how MFP calculates your calorie goal, and how Sedentary vs. Lightly active changes it. MFP takes your BMR (basil metabolic rate, basically what you would burn in a coma), and then multiplies it by an activity multiplier to get your maintenance calories. Your BMR according to MFP is 1342. If you put sedentary, it would use a multiplier of 1.25 to calculate your maintenance calories (before exercise). That is 1678. With lightly active, it multiples your BMR by 1.4. So your maintenance calories are 1879.
MFP then deducts your desired deficit from your maintenance calories, to get your goal calories. But it caps it at 1200. Because of this, you don't see any different between sedentary and lightly active based on the goal you chose. Since a 1.5 pound a week loss calculates out to a 750 calorie per day deficit, it winds up at less than 1200 whether you choose sedentary or lightly active, so it sets it to 1200. However if you choose 1 pound a week (which at your stats I think is probably a better weight of loss), you would get a goal of 1380 by choosing lightly active (1879-500 and rounded), but would still get a goal of 1200 if you had chosen sedentary.
I think 1380 would be a good goal for you, plus eating back calories from extra exercise (at least half to start). Extra exercise would be when you run, or any walking you do in excess of 10,000 steps (generally considered the top of the lightly active range).
All in. Except: 10k is smack dab in the middle of active esp when Active is defined at an AF = 1.6 as MFP does
What would you define as the cut off between lightly active and active for steps?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions