Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

CICO at maintenance

2

Replies

  • TolstolobikTolstolobik Posts: 78Member Member Posts: 78Member Member
    @ Phirrgus
    I am so glad you linked to this calculator. I just recently came across it and was wondering if it's accurate. Have you tested the numbers it gives? If so, do you find them to be close at calculating TDEE?
    edited July 5
  • LivingtheLeanDreamLivingtheLeanDream Posts: 12,462Member Member Posts: 12,462Member Member
    1) 5' 2"
    2) range 125-130 lbs
    3) 50 years old
    4) Female
    5) Approx 26% bf
    6) 6 yrs at maintenance
    7) 1900 calories
    8) 350
    9) Walking/cycling/strength training
    10) 30 mins
  • PhirrgusPhirrgus Posts: 1,904Member Member Posts: 1,904Member Member
    @ Phirrgus
    I am so glad you linked to this calculator. I just recently came across it and was wondering if it's accurate. Have you tested the numbers it gives? If so, do you find them to be close at calculating TDEE?
    @Tolstolobik It seems to be "safely" accurate for me, if that makes sense. For example, under the MET values it has "calisthenics, home exercise, light or moderate effort" which I do a lot of. My watch will give me about ~380 calories burned for 30 minutes at 180lbs. My guesstimate, I usually halve that, so 190 calories burned. That calculator shows 150 calories burned. I would bet the calculator is a bit closer to actual than mine.

    Where it gets iffy is, what is considered light or moderate effort for me at 59 years old may be light to no effort for you :) The converse may also be true.

    That's where keeping an accurate log of all foods/oils/butters/beverages etc comes in. If your calorie log is accurate and you are eating back exactly the amount of exercise calories you burn, per that calculator, but are maintaining or gaining weight, then you would look at entering a lower calorie burn as you are not at a deficit.

    If you do the above and find yourself losing .5lb per week, then you're right on the money with a 250 (I think) per day deficit. If you're losing 1lb per week then you have a 500 calorie per day deficit. The tracking is important as everyone is different in how we each perceive our workout intensity, but the actual numbers over time won't lie to you.

    I hope that helps :)
  • TolstolobikTolstolobik Posts: 78Member Member Posts: 78Member Member
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    @ Phirrgus
    I am so glad you linked to this calculator. I just recently came across it and was wondering if it's accurate. Have you tested the numbers it gives? If so, do you find them to be close at calculating TDEE?
    @Tolstolobik It seems to be "safely" accurate for me, if that makes sense. For example, under the MET values it has "calisthenics, home exercise, light or moderate effort" which I do a lot of. My watch will give me about ~380 calories burned for 30 minutes at 180lbs. My guesstimate, I usually halve that, so 190 calories burned. That calculator shows 150 calories burned. I would bet the calculator is a bit closer to actual than mine.

    Where it gets iffy is, what is considered light or moderate effort for me at 59 years old may be light to no effort for you :) The converse may also be true.

    That's where keeping an accurate log of all foods/oils/butters/beverages etc comes in. If your calorie log is accurate and you are eating back exactly the amount of exercise calories you burn, per that calculator, but are maintaining or gaining weight, then you would look at entering a lower calorie burn as you are not at a deficit.

    If you do the above and find yourself losing .5lb per week, then you're right on the money with a 250 (I think) per day deficit. If you're losing 1lb per week then you have a 500 calorie per day deficit. The tracking is important as everyone is different in how we each perceive our workout intensity, but the actual numbers over time won't lie to you.

    I hope that helps :)

    Absolutely helps! Thank you for your reply! :)
  • PhirrgusPhirrgus Posts: 1,904Member Member Posts: 1,904Member Member
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    @ Phirrgus
    I am so glad you linked to this calculator. I just recently came across it and was wondering if it's accurate. Have you tested the numbers it gives? If so, do you find them to be close at calculating TDEE?
    @Tolstolobik It seems to be "safely" accurate for me, if that makes sense. For example, under the MET values it has "calisthenics, home exercise, light or moderate effort" which I do a lot of. My watch will give me about ~380 calories burned for 30 minutes at 180lbs. My guesstimate, I usually halve that, so 190 calories burned. That calculator shows 150 calories burned. I would bet the calculator is a bit closer to actual than mine.

    Where it gets iffy is, what is considered light or moderate effort for me at 59 years old may be light to no effort for you :) The converse may also be true.

    That's where keeping an accurate log of all foods/oils/butters/beverages etc comes in. If your calorie log is accurate and you are eating back exactly the amount of exercise calories you burn, per that calculator, but are maintaining or gaining weight, then you would look at entering a lower calorie burn as you are not at a deficit.

    If you do the above and find yourself losing .5lb per week, then you're right on the money with a 250 (I think) per day deficit. If you're losing 1lb per week then you have a 500 calorie per day deficit. The tracking is important as everyone is different in how we each perceive our workout intensity, but the actual numbers over time won't lie to you.

    I hope that helps :)

    Absolutely helps! Thank you for your reply! :)

    Any time :) Just don't do what I used to do and over think it lol. Drove myself crazy for nothing :)
  • umbramirrorumbramirror Posts: 201Member Member Posts: 201Member Member
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    There is no dead accurate way to track burns. 600 cals for 90 minutes looks a little high given your height and current weight.

    I agree. Though, without MFP I have no other way to track. I typically do 70 minutes of moderate-high intensity calisthenics in the morning 6 days a week, 1-2 days per week I add a HIIT session, and 3-4 days per week I also weight lift in the afternoon. I have no idea how much I truly burn each day so this makes it difficult to figure out how much I should eat back. Any advice?

    You're burning a decent amount for sure. Without a tracker or HRM I would use this or something similar.
    http://lamb.cc/calories-burned-calculator/

    Personally, I count about half what the tracker shows, then eat back about half of that. That's what works for me at my weight/intensity etc.... @mmapags may have a different/better idea , but I think after tracking data points for a while you'll find exactly where yours falls.

    Thanks for mentioning Libra! I entered in all of my stats beginning with when I started tracking my weight up until today. It has my trend as 126.4 as of right now, with a loss of -2.4 lbs this month, at a rate of 0.1 lbs/week (56 kcal/day). What exactly is "Rate" showing?

    Also, thanks for the tracker. It estimates just about the same amount of calories as MFP does. I guess eating back around 250 would be reasonable, since both gave me around 550 calories burned. For the days I do HIIT as well, I could add another 100-150 because around 350-400 are estimated for 28-30 minutes. And when I add lifting for 65-70 minutes, another 50-100 maybe. This leaves me at around 2250 on calisthenics days, 2350-2400 on calisthenics + HIIT days, 2300-2350 on calisthenics + lifting days, and 2400-2500 calories on calisthenics, HIIT, and lifting days.

    This is so complicated. :s I'll just keep messing around with it. I wish I could just keep a flat rate of calories on training days, instead of raising and lowering daily. What I do know is, right now my caloric intake is too low.
  • PhirrgusPhirrgus Posts: 1,904Member Member Posts: 1,904Member Member
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    There is no dead accurate way to track burns. 600 cals for 90 minutes looks a little high given your height and current weight.

    I agree. Though, without MFP I have no other way to track. I typically do 70 minutes of moderate-high intensity calisthenics in the morning 6 days a week, 1-2 days per week I add a HIIT session, and 3-4 days per week I also weight lift in the afternoon. I have no idea how much I truly burn each day so this makes it difficult to figure out how much I should eat back. Any advice?

    You're burning a decent amount for sure. Without a tracker or HRM I would use this or something similar.
    http://lamb.cc/calories-burned-calculator/

    Personally, I count about half what the tracker shows, then eat back about half of that. That's what works for me at my weight/intensity etc.... @mmapags may have a different/better idea , but I think after tracking data points for a while you'll find exactly where yours falls.

    Thanks for mentioning Libra! I entered in all of my stats beginning with when I started tracking my weight up until today. It has my trend as 126.4 as of right now, with a loss of -2.4 lbs this month, at a rate of 0.1 lbs/week (56 kcal/day). What exactly is "Rate" showing?

    Also, thanks for the tracker. It estimates just about the same amount of calories as MFP does. I guess eating back around 250 would be reasonable, since both gave me around 550 calories burned. For the days I do HIIT as well, I could add another 100-150 because around 350-400 are estimated for 28-30 minutes. And when I add lifting for 65-70 minutes, another 50-100 maybe. This leaves me at around 2250 on calisthenics days, 2350-2400 on calisthenics + HIIT days, 2300-2350 on calisthenics + lifting days, and 2400-2500 calories on calisthenics, HIIT, and lifting days.

    This is so complicated. :s I'll just keep messing around with it. I wish I could just keep a flat rate of calories on training days, instead of raising and lowering daily. What I do know is, right now my caloric intake is too low.
    If you're not cutting/training for an event under the strict direction of a coach etc...I think it's ok to ease up just a bit. There are so many variables that can affect your caloric burn each day, your NEAT...it would be difficult to really nail an exact number, which could lead to frustration and disillusionment and just plain being unhappy with the process.

    I'm fairly comfortable with a 'fudge factor' on my numbers anywhere from ~150 calories to ~500 if I know I'm going to splurge. What matters is that at the end of a week let's say, you've burned slightly more than you've eaten.

    Experiment, track the data, adjust as needed, and give yourself some room to breath. That's really important. It lets you not be bothered by daily fluctuations, not feel guilty or obsessed...

    Know what I mean? :)


    edit: @mmapags - you're really good with this amigo. Any other insights to help OP and others out?
    edited July 5
  • mmapagsmmapags Posts: 8,234Member Member Posts: 8,234Member Member
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    There is no dead accurate way to track burns. 600 cals for 90 minutes looks a little high given your height and current weight.

    I agree. Though, without MFP I have no other way to track. I typically do 70 minutes of moderate-high intensity calisthenics in the morning 6 days a week, 1-2 days per week I add a HIIT session, and 3-4 days per week I also weight lift in the afternoon. I have no idea how much I truly burn each day so this makes it difficult to figure out how much I should eat back. Any advice?

    You're burning a decent amount for sure. Without a tracker or HRM I would use this or something similar.
    http://lamb.cc/calories-burned-calculator/

    Personally, I count about half what the tracker shows, then eat back about half of that. That's what works for me at my weight/intensity etc.... @mmapags may have a different/better idea , but I think after tracking data points for a while you'll find exactly where yours falls.

    Thanks for mentioning Libra! I entered in all of my stats beginning with when I started tracking my weight up until today. It has my trend as 126.4 as of right now, with a loss of -2.4 lbs this month, at a rate of 0.1 lbs/week (56 kcal/day). What exactly is "Rate" showing?

    Also, thanks for the tracker. It estimates just about the same amount of calories as MFP does. I guess eating back around 250 would be reasonable, since both gave me around 550 calories burned. For the days I do HIIT as well, I could add another 100-150 because around 350-400 are estimated for 28-30 minutes. And when I add lifting for 65-70 minutes, another 50-100 maybe. This leaves me at around 2250 on calisthenics days, 2350-2400 on calisthenics + HIIT days, 2300-2350 on calisthenics + lifting days, and 2400-2500 calories on calisthenics, HIIT, and lifting days.

    This is so complicated. :s I'll just keep messing around with it. I wish I could just keep a flat rate of calories on training days, instead of raising and lowering daily. What I do know is, right now my caloric intake is too low.
    If you're not cutting/training for an event under the strict direction of a coach etc...I think it's ok to ease up just a bit. There are so many variables that can affect your caloric burn each day, your NEAT...it would be difficult to really nail an exact number, which could lead to frustration and disillusionment and just plain being unhappy with the process.

    I'm fairly comfortable with a 'fudge factor' on my numbers anywhere from ~150 calories to ~500 if I know I'm going to splurge. What matters is that at the end of a week let's say, you've burned slightly more than you've eaten.

    Experiment, track the data, adjust as needed, and give yourself some room to breath. That's really important. It lets you not be bothered by daily fluctuations, not feel guilty or obsessed...

    Know what I mean? :)


    edit: @mmapags - you're really good with this amigo. Any other insights to help OP and others out?

    Not really. I think you have it pretty well nailed. The thing is your real world results/ data are going to tell you more than any estimates. if it were me, I'm going to pick my best guesses for the activity burns and run with that for 6 to 8 weeks (enough time to get past water weight fluctuations. Then, I'm going to look and my trending loss and see if it matches what I thought my daily burn/ deficit was. Then adjust on real world results.

    I think when you try to nail the burn on each individual activity too tightly, it is too tedious (for me) and too time consuming. I'm going to try more of a TDEE method if I have so many varying types of activity with different burn rate estimates. That method would accomplish one of your desires, to eat a level amount each day. Take your best estimate of total weekly activity and divide by 7. Add that on to your MFP calorie level and run with that for a bit. (this is what I would do)

    Alternately, put your numbers into a TDEE calculator and use that number daily. Then, don't log exercise. Or log it and 0 out the calories if you want to track what you did.

    Honestly, in an effort to be precise, I think you (umbramirror) are making it a little too complicated. You can't get that precise and accurate with estimates. Your best bet is your own real world data over time. that isn't really using MFP as it was designed, N.E.A.T. + Intentional Exercise added. But with the different kinds of activity and burns rates you are doing, I don't think the MFP method is best for you.
  • PhirrgusPhirrgus Posts: 1,904Member Member Posts: 1,904Member Member
    mmapags wrote: »
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    There is no dead accurate way to track burns. 600 cals for 90 minutes looks a little high given your height and current weight.

    I agree. Though, without MFP I have no other way to track. I typically do 70 minutes of moderate-high intensity calisthenics in the morning 6 days a week, 1-2 days per week I add a HIIT session, and 3-4 days per week I also weight lift in the afternoon. I have no idea how much I truly burn each day so this makes it difficult to figure out how much I should eat back. Any advice?

    You're burning a decent amount for sure. Without a tracker or HRM I would use this or something similar.
    http://lamb.cc/calories-burned-calculator/

    Personally, I count about half what the tracker shows, then eat back about half of that. That's what works for me at my weight/intensity etc.... @mmapags may have a different/better idea , but I think after tracking data points for a while you'll find exactly where yours falls.

    Thanks for mentioning Libra! I entered in all of my stats beginning with when I started tracking my weight up until today. It has my trend as 126.4 as of right now, with a loss of -2.4 lbs this month, at a rate of 0.1 lbs/week (56 kcal/day). What exactly is "Rate" showing?

    Also, thanks for the tracker. It estimates just about the same amount of calories as MFP does. I guess eating back around 250 would be reasonable, since both gave me around 550 calories burned. For the days I do HIIT as well, I could add another 100-150 because around 350-400 are estimated for 28-30 minutes. And when I add lifting for 65-70 minutes, another 50-100 maybe. This leaves me at around 2250 on calisthenics days, 2350-2400 on calisthenics + HIIT days, 2300-2350 on calisthenics + lifting days, and 2400-2500 calories on calisthenics, HIIT, and lifting days.

    This is so complicated. :s I'll just keep messing around with it. I wish I could just keep a flat rate of calories on training days, instead of raising and lowering daily. What I do know is, right now my caloric intake is too low.
    If you're not cutting/training for an event under the strict direction of a coach etc...I think it's ok to ease up just a bit. There are so many variables that can affect your caloric burn each day, your NEAT...it would be difficult to really nail an exact number, which could lead to frustration and disillusionment and just plain being unhappy with the process.

    I'm fairly comfortable with a 'fudge factor' on my numbers anywhere from ~150 calories to ~500 if I know I'm going to splurge. What matters is that at the end of a week let's say, you've burned slightly more than you've eaten.

    Experiment, track the data, adjust as needed, and give yourself some room to breath. That's really important. It lets you not be bothered by daily fluctuations, not feel guilty or obsessed...

    Know what I mean? :)


    edit: @mmapags - you're really good with this amigo. Any other insights to help OP and others out?

    Not really. I think you have it pretty well nailed. The thing is your real world results/ data are going to tell you more than any estimates. if it were me, I'm going to pick my best guesses for the activity burns and run with that for 6 to 8 weeks (enough time to get past water weight fluctuations. Then, I'm going to look and my trending loss and see if it matches what I thought my daily burn/ deficit was. Then adjust on real world results.

    I think when you try to nail the burn on each individual activity too tightly, it is too tedious (for me) and too time consuming. I'm going to try more of a TDEE method if I have so many varying types of activity with different burn rate estimates. That method would accomplish one of your desires, to eat a level amount each day. Take your best estimate of total weekly activity and divide by 7. Add that on to your MFP calorie level and run with that for a bit. (this is what I would do)

    Alternately, put your numbers into a TDEE calculator and use that number daily. Then, don't log exercise. Or log it and 0 out the calories if you want to track what you did.

    Honestly, in an effort to be precise, I think you (umbramirror) are making it a little too complicated. You can't get that precise and accurate with estimates. Your best bet is your own real world data over time. that isn't really using MFP as it was designed, N.E.A.T. + Intentional Exercise added. But with the different kinds of activity and burns rates you are doing, I don't think the MFP method is best for you.

    Thanks - you break things down much better than I do. :)
  • CSARdiverCSARdiver Posts: 6,187Member Member Posts: 6,187Member Member
    1) 6'4"
    2) 224 lbs
    3) 48 years old
    4) Male
    5) 16.7%
    6) 4 years
    7) ~2800
    8) ~400
    9) Running, Biking, Swimming, weight lifting, calisthenics
    10) 60 mins
  • SummerSkierSummerSkier Posts: 971Member, Premium Member Posts: 971Member, Premium Member
    I find this interesting. I choose to put my "activity" goal for the day at 60 minutes about 18 months ago. It seems like a lot of us maintainers end up with that # vs the doctor/common theory prescribed 30 minutes per day. I definitely feel better when I get my 60 minutes in altho 30 minutes is definitely enough to work up a sweat.
  • umbramirrorumbramirror Posts: 201Member Member Posts: 201Member Member
    @Phirrgus Thanks for the help. :) It is difficult for me to not get too obssessed, because I analyze everything so in depth and attempt to track everything as accurately as possible to maximize results. I really try my best to keep my progress going forward as best as I can within my control. Entering maintenance then has been a new exercise in relaxing my routine, while at the same time experimenting to find stability. I am looking forward to finding stability so I can be even more relaxed. I guess that's why finding these numbers is so important to me. I know that it is going to require patience... it's just tough, man!
    mmapags wrote: »
    Not really. I think you have it pretty well nailed. The thing is your real world results/ data are going to tell you more than any estimates. if it were me, I'm going to pick my best guesses for the activity burns and run with that for 6 to 8 weeks (enough time to get past water weight fluctuations. Then, I'm going to look and my trending loss and see if it matches what I thought my daily burn/ deficit was. Then adjust on real world results.

    I think when you try to nail the burn on each individual activity too tightly, it is too tedious (for me) and too time consuming. I'm going to try more of a TDEE method if I have so many varying types of activity with different burn rate estimates. That method would accomplish one of your desires, to eat a level amount each day. Take your best estimate of total weekly activity and divide by 7. Add that on to your MFP calorie level and run with that for a bit. (this is what I would do)

    Alternately, put your numbers into a TDEE calculator and use that number daily. Then, don't log exercise. Or log it and 0 out the calories if you want to track what you did.

    Honestly, in an effort to be precise, I think you (umbramirror) are making it a little too complicated. You can't get that precise and accurate with estimates. Your best bet is your own real world data over time. that isn't really using MFP as it was designed, N.E.A.T. + Intentional Exercise added. But with the different kinds of activity and burns rates you are doing, I don't think the MFP method is best for you.

    I agree about it being too complicated trying to nail down each activity. I just was kind of curious in a way, what it would look like number wise if I did. I also think that a TDEE approach is the best bet. I really appreciate your help. I'll try a TDEE calculator again, now that I have steadied my approach a bit. I did attempt to calculate TDEE before, which is where I got the number of 2000-2100 before. I guess I need an update.
  • VioletRojoVioletRojo Posts: 569Member, Premium Member Posts: 569Member, Premium Member
    1) 5'4"
    2) 120 +- 2 lbs
    3) 53 years old
    4) Female
    5) no clue
    6) ~2 years
    7) 2200 - 2500
    8) 400 - 700
    9) Running, weight lifting
    10) 60 mins during the work week, long run on the weekend, plus other activities on the weekend.
  • PhirrgusPhirrgus Posts: 1,904Member Member Posts: 1,904Member Member
    @Phirrgus Thanks for the help. :) It is difficult for me to not get too obssessed, because I analyze everything so in depth and attempt to track everything as accurately as possible to maximize results. I really try my best to keep my progress going forward as best as I can within my control. Entering maintenance then has been a new exercise in relaxing my routine, while at the same time experimenting to find stability. I am looking forward to finding stability so I can be even more relaxed. I guess that's why finding these numbers is so important to me. I know that it is going to require patience... it's just tough, man!
    mmapags wrote: »
    Not really. I think you have it pretty well nailed. The thing is your real world results/ data are going to tell you more than any estimates. if it were me, I'm going to pick my best guesses for the activity burns and run with that for 6 to 8 weeks (enough time to get past water weight fluctuations. Then, I'm going to look and my trending loss and see if it matches what I thought my daily burn/ deficit was. Then adjust on real world results.

    I think when you try to nail the burn on each individual activity too tightly, it is too tedious (for me) and too time consuming. I'm going to try more of a TDEE method if I have so many varying types of activity with different burn rate estimates. That method would accomplish one of your desires, to eat a level amount each day. Take your best estimate of total weekly activity and divide by 7. Add that on to your MFP calorie level and run with that for a bit. (this is what I would do)

    Alternately, put your numbers into a TDEE calculator and use that number daily. Then, don't log exercise. Or log it and 0 out the calories if you want to track what you did.

    Honestly, in an effort to be precise, I think you (umbramirror) are making it a little too complicated. You can't get that precise and accurate with estimates. Your best bet is your own real world data over time. that isn't really using MFP as it was designed, N.E.A.T. + Intentional Exercise added. But with the different kinds of activity and burns rates you are doing, I don't think the MFP method is best for you.

    I agree about it being too complicated trying to nail down each activity. I just was kind of curious in a way, what it would look like number wise if I did. I also think that a TDEE approach is the best bet. I really appreciate your help. I'll try a TDEE calculator again, now that I have steadied my approach a bit. I did attempt to calculate TDEE before, which is where I got the number of 2000-2100 before. I guess I need an update.

    @umbramirror - I get it regarding the obsessing. I hit a point where I was actually losing peace over my numbers. It didn't take long as I was close to maintenance when I started, so i didn't have as long a journey to acclimate as some others did. When it clicked though, everything changed and I think it will for you too. In the meantime, you're going to gather a lot of valuable data points for yourself. Just remember to pat yourself on the back at least twice for each time you beat yourself up. :)
  • umbramirrorumbramirror Posts: 201Member Member Posts: 201Member Member
    Phirrgus wrote: »
    @umbramirror - I get it regarding the obsessing. I hit a point where I was actually losing peace over my numbers. It didn't take long as I was close to maintenance when I started, so i didn't have as long a journey to acclimate as some others did. When it clicked though, everything changed and I think it will for you too. In the meantime, you're going to gather a lot of valuable data points for yourself. Just remember to pat yourself on the back at least twice for each time you beat yourself up. :)

    Thanks so much, your comment really hit home today. I happy that you found peace it seems. That's awesome. <3 Most of the time I feel great and actually find this experimentation fun, but other times I just get frustrated. Thanks again... I'm looking forward to learning more and more.
  • nxd10nxd10 Posts: 4,499Member, Premium Member Posts: 4,499Member, Premium Member
    5'10" 60 years old
    158 pounds
    My goal is to net 1230 calories. That doesn't seem like a lot, but I've been doing it six years and I'm never hungry, so if I'm not accurate, I am certainly consistent.
    I burn around 150/day in purposeful exercise, so eat around 1380.
    I use an apple watch to track.
    edited July 5
  • AnnPT77AnnPT77 Posts: 12,537Member Member Posts: 12,537Member Member

    1. 5'5"
    2. Mid-130s pounds
    3. 63
    4. Female
    5. No idea
    6. About 3 years (after almost 1 year losing)
    7. Very uneven. Probably 2200-2400-ish gross on average, maybe a bit more? Wild guess. 1850 net most days, way over occasionally. (Consistent 1850 net would yield slow loss). With the peaks, some stepwise very gradual gain (even post water weight), so sometimes need to cut a bit.
    8. Maybe 250-300 x 6 days a week, usually.
    9. Rowing (boats when I can, machines when I must) and spinning, mostly; occasionally other things.
    10. 45 minutes to an hour.
  • TolstolobikTolstolobik Posts: 78Member Member Posts: 78Member Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    1. 5'5"
    2. Mid-130s pounds
    3. 63
    4. Female
    5. No idea
    6. About 3 years (after almost 1 year losing)
    7. Very uneven. Probably 2200-2400-ish gross on average, maybe a bit more? Wild guess. 1850 net most days, way over occasionally. (Consistent 1850 net would yield slow loss). With the peaks, some stepwise very gradual gain (even post water weight), so sometimes need to cut a bit.
    8. Maybe 250-300 x 6 days a week, usually.
    9. Rowing (boats when I can, machines when I must) and spinning, mostly; occasionally other things.
    10. 45 minutes to an hour.

    What is your daily activity level apart from exercise?
  • AnnPT77AnnPT77 Posts: 12,537Member Member Posts: 12,537Member Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    1. 5'5"
    2. Mid-130s pounds
    3. 63
    4. Female
    5. No idea
    6. About 3 years (after almost 1 year losing)
    7. Very uneven. Probably 2200-2400-ish gross on average, maybe a bit more? Wild guess. 1850 net most days, way over occasionally. (Consistent 1850 net would yield slow loss). With the peaks, some stepwise very gradual gain (even post water weight), so sometimes need to cut a bit.
    8. Maybe 250-300 x 6 days a week, usually.
    9. Rowing (boats when I can, machines when I must) and spinning, mostly; occasionally other things.
    10. 45 minutes to an hour.

    What is your daily activity level apart from exercise?

    Sedentary to lightly active, in MFP terms, I think: The former most of the time in Winter, more in the latter direction in more outdoorsy seasons. My tracker says I've averaged 6,975 steps daily for the last 7 days, which has been on the walk-y side for me. In Winter, there are many weeks where most days are 2,000-3,000-ish.

    I'm retired, mostly sedentary hobbies outside of intentional exercise, but I do more yard and garden stuff in warm weather, as well as having more steps because of my summer exercise. (Not the exercise per se: In warmer seasons, when I row on water, I go to the rowing club, walk around there some before rowing, go out for coffee with my rowing buddies, etc.; and am more likely to do things for fun like visit gardens, to to more farmers markets, etc., so more incidental walking vs. Winter when most rowing is at home. I also work out less in Winter, because rowing machines are way less fun than boats. ;) )
    edited July 7
  • TolstolobikTolstolobik Posts: 78Member Member Posts: 78Member Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    1. 5'5"
    2. Mid-130s pounds
    3. 63
    4. Female
    5. No idea
    6. About 3 years (after almost 1 year losing)
    7. Very uneven. Probably 2200-2400-ish gross on average, maybe a bit more? Wild guess. 1850 net most days, way over occasionally. (Consistent 1850 net would yield slow loss). With the peaks, some stepwise very gradual gain (even post water weight), so sometimes need to cut a bit.
    8. Maybe 250-300 x 6 days a week, usually.
    9. Rowing (boats when I can, machines when I must) and spinning, mostly; occasionally other things.
    10. 45 minutes to an hour.

    What is your daily activity level apart from exercise?

    Sedentary to lightly active, in MFP terms, I think: The former most of the time in Winter, more in the latter direction in more outdoorsy seasons. My tracker says I've averaged 6,975 steps daily for the last 7 days, which has been on the walk-y side for me. In Winter, there are many weeks where most days are 2,000-3,000-ish.

    I'm retired, mostly sedentary hobbies outside of intentional exercise, but I do more yard and garden stuff in warm weather, as well as having more steps because of my summer exercise. (Not the exercise per se: In warmer seasons, when I row on water, I go to the rowing club, walk around there some before rowing, go out for coffee with my rowing buddies, etc.; and am more likely to do things for fun like visit gardens, to to more farmers markets, etc., so more incidental walking vs. Winter when most rowing is at home. I also work out less in Winter, because rowing machines are way less fun than boats. ;) )

    Thank you for your detailed response Ann! You must have a higher than average RMR and a fidgety-NEATy way of living. 😊
    edited July 7
Sign In or Register to comment.