Determine activity level

Options
Hello! I was wondering if there is a clearer picture of how to determine my activity level. I’d like to know if I am fuelling myself properly but it seems like the spectrum for activity is wide.

My daily activity (as it has been for the last few months) is:

- usually 30 minutes to 1 hour body weight exercises using the Nike training club app.

- I walk 10-15,000 steps a day (unless it’s pouring rain or I’m sick or something) which I’ve been doing for a long time, either intentionally or due to my job. I get restless and like to move!

- I ride my bike on average 1 and a half hours 5-6 days a week (I’ve been doing this for about a month) pre-coronavirus I was going to the gym 5 days a week, mainly lifting moderate weights and doing 20 minutes of cardio.

To calculate my fitness goals, would lightly active or moderately active be more appropriate?

Replies

  • KrissFlavored
    KrissFlavored Posts: 327 Member
    Options
    I'd go with active
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 33,958 Member
    Options
    Are you using a tracking device like Fitbit?

    If not, then yeah - Active.
  • sesvania13
    sesvania13 Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    Slightly Active
  • KrissFlavored
    KrissFlavored Posts: 327 Member
    Options
    sesvania13 wrote: »
    Slightly Active

    So what would one have to do to be considered active in your opinion?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    edited May 2020
    Options
    Active and then add your purposeful exercise - unless you are using your tracker to set your goal.

    You know if your calorie goal is appropriate mostly by your long term weight trend, think of it as a start point from which you may have to adjust based on actual results (also take energy and hunger levels into account).
  • Lillymoo01
    Lillymoo01 Posts: 2,865 Member
    Options
    I am another that would say active due to your step count.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,634 Member
    Options
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)
  • navillus3
    navillus3 Posts: 14 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)

    What do you mean by doing things for a long time will not reduce calories?
  • errollmaclean
    errollmaclean Posts: 562 Member
    Options
    You can calibrate by seeing what your weight does over time.

    If you're losing faster than three rate of loss you selected, then change it to active. If your weight loss slows down, then lower the activity level. You can also change your calorie goal manually of MFP isn't giving you accurate calories.

    Assuming your calorie counting is accurate (using a digital for scale/selecting accurate entries/not overestimating calorie burns from exercise)

  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 6,114 Member
    Options
    navillus3 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)

    What do you mean by doing things for a long time will not reduce calories?

    Some people think that because their exercise feels easier (because they've become more fit from repeatedly doing it), they burn (significantly) less calories doing it. Aside from perhaps some slight increase in efficiency of movement, this isn't the case.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,634 Member
    Options
    Lietchi wrote: »
    navillus3 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)

    What do you mean by doing things for a long time will not reduce calories?

    Some people think that because their exercise feels easier (because they've become more fit from repeatedly doing it), they burn (significantly) less calories doing it. Aside from perhaps some slight increase in efficiency of movement, this isn't the case.

    Exactly.

    In the OP it was mentioned that something was done "for a month" and something else "for a long time"

    .... and @Lietchi :kissing_heart:
  • NovusDies
    NovusDies Posts: 8,940 Member
    Options
    Lietchi wrote: »
    navillus3 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)

    What do you mean by doing things for a long time will not reduce calories?

    Some people think that because their exercise feels easier (because they've become more fit from repeatedly doing it), they burn (significantly) less calories doing it. Aside from perhaps some slight increase in efficiency of movement, this isn't the case.


    I went through some of this after my surgery and subsequent recovery. It felt so easy it was hard to qualify my activity as high as it turned out to be. That and I am stubborn.
  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    Options
    Lietchi wrote: »
    navillus3 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)

    What do you mean by doing things for a long time will not reduce calories?

    Some people think that because their exercise feels easier (because they've become more fit from repeatedly doing it), they burn (significantly) less calories doing it. Aside from perhaps some slight increase in efficiency of movement, this isn't the case.

    But is that really true?

    When I first started exercising a year ago, my HR while using my exercise bike was 115. If I use that same lowest resistance setting now, it's in the 88 - 94 range. Sure, I can increase the intensity (and have) but the question is, does doing the same exercise which now seems so much easier burn as many calories (after adjusting for reduced calories per minute due to lower weight/TDEE)? Hard to believe with my heart working so much less hard I'm getting anywhere near the same caloric burn. Not saying I have an answer to this question. I have been wondering about it, though. Sometimes I don't feel like pushing myself and just want to go through the motions at the low resistance level but I wonder how much good its really doing for weight loss.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    lgfrie wrote: »
    Lietchi wrote: »
    navillus3 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    You're active to very active solely on the basis of your step count and not including any of the activity that is not included in the 10 to 15 k steps you take.

    The additional activity should be logged as exercise.

    Overall you describe an activity level that exceeds an activity factor of 2.0

    MFP tops at 1.8

    Doing things for a long time may make them feel easier to do, but it would not substantially reduce the calories you spend doing them (slightly more efficient? sure)

    What do you mean by doing things for a long time will not reduce calories?

    Some people think that because their exercise feels easier (because they've become more fit from repeatedly doing it), they burn (significantly) less calories doing it. Aside from perhaps some slight increase in efficiency of movement, this isn't the case.

    But is that really true?

    When I first started exercising a year ago, my HR while using my exercise bike was 115. If I use that same lowest resistance setting now, it's in the 88 - 94 range. Sure, I can increase the intensity (and have) but the question is, does doing the same exercise which now seems so much easier burn as many calories (after adjusting for reduced calories per minute due to lower weight/TDEE)? Hard to believe with my heart working so much less hard I'm getting anywhere near the same caloric burn. Not saying I have an answer to this question. I have been wondering about it, though. Sometimes I don't feel like pushing myself and just want to go through the motions at the low resistance level but I wonder how much good its really doing for weight loss.

    If the effort, intensity, pace, speed, ect is the same, and weight - you are burning the same calories even if it feels easier - like easier breathing and not hard on the muscles.

    That just means you are burning more fat as fuel source to accomplish it rather than carbs, because you can get the oxygen around easier with better lungs & heart for the effort.

    What many discover though is their very weight dependent exercise (walking or some aerobics classes) are done at a very specific intensity level that doesn't increase (like movements to music don't go faster), and after they lose weight they of course burn less doing it.

    It would be like squatting the exact same weight on the bar over the course of many months while you lost 50 lbs off the body - now you are doing less of a workout.

    If you had wattage available on that bike - you'd discover that despite the HR going down you are expending the same energy pushing the pedals. Calorie burn therefore the same - just easier.
  • nooshi713
    nooshi713 Posts: 4,877 Member
    Options
    Active plus you will have a lot of exercise calories but make sure the burn you log is accurate.