Determine activity level
navillus3
Posts: 14 Member
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?
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?
0
Replies
-
I'd go with active1
-
Are you using a tracking device like Fitbit?
If not, then yeah - Active.2 -
Slightly Active0
-
sesvania13 wrote: »Slightly Active
So what would one have to do to be considered active in your opinion?1 -
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).0 -
I am another that would say active due to your step count.1
-
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)1 -
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?
0 -
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)
2 -
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.4 -
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
3 -
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.
1 -
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.0 -
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.2 -
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.
Two examples of feeling of intensity versus calorie burns, both where bodyweight isn't a factor just so it's a pure function of fitness levels / capability.
When I started out back on the road to fitness my maximum bench press was 140lbs. After a period of time I was up to 220lbs. Think most people would instinctively see that extra 80lbs more takes more energy to lift (mass moved over distance requires energy) but exactly the same feelings of maximal effort. Maybe some technique gains in there but for a relatively simple lift it's really down to power.
For a CV example of indoor cycling 175 watts was about the maximum I could sustain for 20mins.
Now it's about 230 watts. That's 210 versus 276 net cals. Feels the same, heartrate broadly the same.
If you imagine lightbulbs being powered it's clear higher wattage equals more energy being burned yet still feels the same (hateful) intensity to me.
Using a power meter strips away all the subjective nature of training by feelings of exertion or the imprecise nature of training by heartrate. By the way the gains in power are replicated throughout the entire range of my exercise heartrate not just at the top of my HR and I bet your gains are the same.
"Hard to believe with my heart working so much less hard I'm getting anywhere near the same caloric burn."
That's why calorie burns based on HR aren't at all reliable. As my "pump" got stronger it simply needs to beat less often to pump the same amount of blood. Pumping xx pints of blood per minute still takes broadly the same energy but not the same number of beats as each contraction is more powerful. Think of a 200watt electric pump working at full capacity or a 400watt electric pump working at half capacity perhaps?5 -
Active plus you will have a lot of exercise calories but make sure the burn you log is accurate.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions