Am I sedentary or lightly active?

(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #1

I’ve just started using Cronometer and I’m interested in watching both macros and calories in vs calories out. (Don’t judge; already today I’ve learned that I can be full all day on just 1000 calories. Don’t worry, I’m about to eat dinner now!)

I’d like to have Cronometer be as accurate as possible. I’m wondering whether I’m sedentary or lightly active for the purposes of the app. It regards sedentary as BMR0.2 and lightly active as BMR0.375. Moderately active is BMR*0.5. My BMR was measured last year at 1715 on one of those impedance machines that bariatric surgeons have. I’m 37 years old, 83.5kg, 174cm tall, shooting for a goal weight of 74kg.

I had an injury a couple of months ago so I do zero cardio; just walking around the city, taking the train, and 1 session of slow burn resistance training (McGuff protocol) per week.

I live in NYC so presumably I walk more than others. But here’s my last two weeks — what would you guys consider me?

image
935BF812-BA01-4239-8375-BAAB314BFB8C.jpg750×1334 183 KB
image
145AF01C-B6B6-4B35-AB8E-73E261123FC0.jpg750×1334 169 KB

(Ron) #2

Definitely not sedentary IMO.

(Empress of the Unexpected) #3

Can’t find the thread, but I walk/hike two hours a day and I was pronounced sedentary, or possibly lightly active. I can’t believe that either one of us are “sedentary.” To me that is someone that gets almost no activity at all.

(Karen) #4

A description i read on a keto calculator said breaking into a sweat 2-3 times a week exercising for 1/2 hour makes you lightly active. I’m sedentary.:confused:

K

(Empress of the Unexpected) #5

There has to be some accurate baseline for activity levels. Also, I manage a mobile home park and do a fair amount of landscaping (stretching, carrying, pulling) aside from my regular activity. So it all has to add up.

(Empress of the Unexpected) #6
(Empress of the Unexpected) #7
(Empress of the Unexpected) #8

The 9 floors count for a lot!

(Robert C) #9

I cannot address your question directly but I thought I would impart a strategy I use for these sorts of calculators. It is pretty simple - I would calculate using both sedentary and lightly active and then see what the difference is.

If the difference is around 100 calories then you talking an extra 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) of walking. If this is the case, you know you can just do a little extra walking above required walking and call yourself “lightly active” for the calculations.

If, instead, it was around 300 calories - more like a full hour of walking - then to call yourself lightly active, you’d really need something like a longer dedicated walk each day.

According to this page - you are just breaking above sedentary into “low active” territory:

(LeeAnn Brooks) #10

I’d go lightly active. I know a lot of people who do much less. If you are sedentary, there isn’t a category for them. Couch potato isn’t a option, but I’d say that’s sedentary.

(Consensus is Politics) #11

Well, unfortunately I fit right in the potato category. But I prefer computato. I figure I’m burning most of my calories with my brain. Fortunately, keto has transformed me from looking potato like. A bit more carrot looking I guess. :sunglasses:

(Gabe “No Dogma, Only Science Please!” ) #12

Great answers – thank you so much! I will take these into account and let you know how I go.

Cronometer is really helping me figure out what to eat. I think it mostly helps focus my attention on what I’m eating and whether I’m satiated, especially when I’m close to hitting my macro limits for the day. I guess the reason why the activity thing matters is that it’s a 300 or so calorie difference, which is really substantial. I’ll have to run the experiment for a few weeks.

(Empress of the Unexpected) #13

Keep us posted!

(LeeAnn Brooks) #14

I’m trying Cronometer too after so many people here we’re singing it’s praises over MFP.

Maybe it’s just because I’m used to MFP, but I don’t find it as user friendly as everyone is saying. And the ads that keep popping up on the free version are as annoying as hell.

I am doing them both to see differences, and I did find one entry that MFP was off on the Cronometer was correct (though it wasn’t a huge difference), but I’ve also had 2 entries that weren’t in Cronometer’s database that were in MFP.

So as of now I’m still not sold on switching completely. I’m going to give it another week of comparison before I make up my mind.

(LeeAnn Brooks) #15

Oh, and I really think MFP’s recipie entering is way easier. It allows more options to switch units of measurement. In Cronometer I had to keep jumping over to Google to do conversions because it would only give me a couple options for units and neither were what I wanted.

#16

If you really want to know your BMR, you can get it tested for about $100.

(less is more, more or less) #17

I’ve switched complete to cronometer. I agree on the recipe feature of MFP, but, while inputting recipes IS slower, it’s more methodical, which is consistent with cronometer in general. Far more accurate and helpful. I don’t miss MFP at all.

As for “activity level” I presume they use this to calculate a target total daily allowable calorie consumption. When I was CICO, despite walking and jogging 5+ miles MFP was always far too generous on what it calculated I needed. Even if I set the value to “sedentary,” I would still compensate by being under by 1000 calories to maintain my obesity.

OR, (more likely) the whole CICO model is worthless, which is where bias now. I like that calories are a tertiary factor now.