2016 Resolvers: Fitness Support

[19 cats and counting]

3 hours ago, Maggie Mae said:

I think the reason that fitbit is winning the wearable entry level tracking market is a couple of things: timing, ease of use, cost and the social aspect. Pebble came out about the same time and it's not doing so well. Garmin has the vivofit which does the same thing as fitbit, but it's not as stylish. Garmin Connect also isn't as easy and friendly to use as a website and most of their products do a lot more than fitbit (until fitbit introduced the Surge). 

I love fitbit. I like their customer service, the social aspect, the styling of the product. I just don't need it. Which makes me sad.  

I had a Striiv before a fitbit.  I only bought it because it was on super clearance ($100 marked down to $12.99) and I realized that the app had a game on it where your steps got you in game rewards.   Great concept on paper.  However the thing was a piece of shit, very inaccurate, and would not sync at all.  I finally just gave up on the thing (but their customer service was great as they responded to my troubleshooting emails very promptly.)

[Destiny]

5 hours ago, keen23 said:

Boom. 14000 steps yesterday!

And we all cheer for you (and hate you a little too.). It's been a shitty asthma day for me so I may not do much more than I have.

[Firiel]

Yeah!  I love fitness threads!

Weight goals: Stay between 58 and 62 kgs (I'm American, but my scale got switched to kilograms and I can't get it to go back to pounds!)

Big scary goal: Ironman in August!

I've been blogging about my training, but the community here is better for me than I've found in the blogging world, so it will be fun to follow along with everyone else.

[Maggie Mae]

15 minutes ago, Firiel said:

Yeah!  I love fitness threads!

Weight goals: Stay between 58 and 62 kgs (I'm American, but my scale got switched to kilograms and I can't get it to go back to pounds!)

Big scary goal: Ironman in August!

I've been blogging about my training, but the community here is better for me than I've found in the blogging world, so it will be fun to follow along with everyone else.

Coeur d'Alene? I'm so jealous. 

I'm training for a 70.3 in September & an Oly in April. 

I tried blogging, it sucks. I might use the blog here for training updates, not that anyone cares. 

[Firiel]

Just now, Maggie Mae said:

Coeur d'Alene? I'm so jealous. 

I'm training for a 70.3 in September & an Oly in April. 

I tried blogging, it sucks. I might use the blog here for training updates, not that anyone cares. 

I care!  I'd totally read your training updates.  I am weirdly obsessed with training updates.

And yep, I'm doing Coeur d'Alene.  Very excited until I start to think about it, at which point I freak out.

Which 70.3 are you doing, if you don't mind my asking?

[Maggie Mae]

1 minute ago, Firiel said:

I care!  I'd totally read your training updates.  I am weirdly obsessed with training updates.

And yep, I'm doing Coeur d'Alene.  Very excited until I start to think about it, at which point I freak out.

Which 70.3 are you doing, if you don't mind my asking?

Rev 3 Cedar Point. 

In a fit of angst against "branding" I decided to try to avoid IM events until they buy all the races up. 

[church_of_dog]

On January 12, 2016 at 7:31 AM, Destiny said:

Karma, most major apps will sync with the Fitbit app if you wanna look into that and possibly join our challenges. Good luck!

OK I don't have a smartphone and I'm an idjit when it comes to words like "app" and "sync" -- but I have a friend who doesn't have a fitbit but does have a smartphone that has all kinds of built in fitness tracking functions.  Are you saying that she could download the fitbit software (or something like that) and I could have her listed as a fitbit friend and she could see my data too?  If that is possible, please tell me how!  Or tell me how to find out how?  That would be so cool -- she and I are supporting each other IRL but I would love to include her electronically as well.

[Firiel]

1 minute ago, Maggie Mae said:

Rev 3 Cedar Point. 

In a fit of angst against "branding" I decided to try to avoid IM events until they buy all the races up. 

I approve.  I'm a total sell-out and wanted to do an "official" one (okay, okay, I wanted to hear Mike Reilly or whoever is there for CDA tell me I'm an Ironman). There's actually a non-branded Iron-distance race within three hours of where I live, but I paid sooooo much more money for the brand.  I'm kind of ashamed, but not really.

[Maggie Mae]

1 minute ago, Firiel said:

I approve.  I'm a total sell-out and wanted to do an "official" one (okay, okay, I wanted to hear Mike Reilly or whoever is there for CDA tell me I'm an Ironman). There's actually a non-branded Iron-distance race within three hours of where I live, but I paid sooooo much more money for the brand.  I'm kind of ashamed, but not really.

I'll break down eventually. 

Did you see the video of the deaf finisher? What's his name stopped everything to find his translator. Sometimes, when I want to break down in tears, I watch IM finishing videos. I'm that pathetic. 

[Firiel]

Just now, Maggie Mae said:

I'll break down eventually. 

Did you see the video of the deaf finisher? What's his name stopped everything to find his translator. Sometimes, when I want to break down in tears, I watch IM finishing videos. I'm that pathetic. 

I didn't, but I'm going to look it up now!  That's really cool! (And I get teary watching IM finish videos too.  Also, sometimes while reading race reports.)

[Destiny]

Assuming her phone supports it, yes, the Fitbit software will use your built in GPS and altimeter to count steps.

She would have to look at the Fitbit documentation to see if her phone is supported.

[Destiny]

Mister Destiny starts his big diet tomorrow, and gym festivities will probably start then as well. I'm excited for him!

[church_of_dog]

5 hours ago, Destiny said:

Assuming her phone supports it, yes, the Fitbit software will use your built in GPS and altimeter to count steps.

She would have to look at the Fitbit documentation to see if her phone is supported.

Thank you!  My friend is very tech savvy so I'm sure she will be able to figure out if she can play using her phone.

 

Now I have a fitbit question for whoever knows the answer.  And I'll preface it with the caveat that I have seen many comments here to the effect that fitbit is bad with the food tracking and that lots of you use MyFitnessPal for that.  I'm keeping that in mind as I have food-related issues with fitbit.  But for now I'm still trying to play with just one program.

So, the question is, when I look at my fitbit dashboard, I see two food related tiles.  The first one shows a gauge that says "over" or "under" or "in the zone" and it shows one number "vs" another number.  I understand what both numbers are -- one is the calories I ate, the other is calories I burned.  I've also set a goal to have X difference between those two, and if I'm roughly near my goal, the arrow points to "in the zone".  If I didn't burn enough calories to have the desired difference between them, it shows me as "over", and if I have a considerably bigger difference between them compared to my goal, then it says "under."  No problem there.

The other food related tile shows whether I have calories "left to eat" or whether I ate X calories "over" -- and when I hover over that tile it shows a ratio:  the first number is the calories I have eaten.  But I can't figure out what the second number is.

So for example, today I have eaten 1174 calories and burned (so far) 1715 calories.  My goal is to have a 750 calorie difference each day and I don't have that (yet) so the gauge shows me as "over".  (But since I will burn calories all the way until midnight, even resting, I think I will end up very close to my goal for the dayl.)  But the other tile says I have 115 calories left to eat, and the ratio shown is 1174/1289.  Where is it getting 1289 as how many calories it thinks I should eat?

Sorry for the mega-text question and thanks in advance to whoever knows the answer!

[lovemygsp]

Oh I'd love to join.

I used to be a runner. Was even a NCAA DI athlete ...but then I had a baby.... Almost 2 years ago now. She only stopped nursing a few months ago and before then I had major joint issues from the hormones that made me miserable so I wasn't active. I'm finally feeling better and tired of being overweight. I'm currently 160lbs but want to get back to my prebaby 140lbs. Here goes nothing. 

[pnwgypsy]

5 hours ago, Destiny said: Assuming her phone supports it, yes, the Fitbit software will use your built in GPS and altimeter to count steps.

She would have to look at the Fitbit documentation to see if her phone is supported.

Thank you!  My friend is very tech savvy so I'm sure she will be able to figure out if she can play using her phone.

 

Now I have a fitbit question for whoever knows the answer.  And I'll preface it with the caveat that I have seen many comments here to the effect that fitbit is bad with the food tracking and that lots of you use MyFitnessPal for that.  I'm keeping that in mind as I have food-related issues with fitbit.  But for now I'm still trying to play with just one program.

So, the question is, when I look at my fitbit dashboard, I see two food related tiles.  The first one shows a gauge that says "over" or "under" or "in the zone" and it shows one number "vs" another number.  I understand what both numbers are -- one is the calories I ate, the other is calories I burned.  I've also set a goal to have X difference between those two, and if I'm roughly near my goal, the arrow points to "in the zone".  If I didn't burn enough calories to have the desired difference between them, it shows me as "over", and if I have a considerably bigger difference between them compared to my goal, then it says "under."  No problem there.

The other food related tile shows whether I have calories "left to eat" or whether I ate X calories "over" -- and when I hover over that tile it shows a ratio:  the first number is the calories I have eaten.  But I can't figure out what the second number is.

So for example, today I have eaten 1174 calories and burned (so far) 1715 calories.  My goal is to have a 750 calorie difference each day and I don't have that (yet) so the gauge shows me as "over".  (But since I will burn calories all the way until midnight, even resting, I think I will end up very close to my goal for the dayl.)  But the other tile says I have 115 calories left to eat, and the ratio shown is 1174/1289.  Where is it getting 1289 as how many calories it thinks I should eat?

Sorry for the mega-text question and thanks in advance to whoever knows the answer!

I really hope you're eating more than 1200-1300 cal a day.

[church_of_dog]

7 hours ago, pnwgypsy said:

I really hope you're eating more than 1200-1300 cal a day.

I think I usually eat more than that number of calories.  It's also possible that I'm not counting them properly (I don't usually eat outside meals, so if I do have a snack I could see that I might forget to log it) or that fitbit's food and calorie lists are not correct.

Yesterday I admit I ate poorly, let's just get that out of the way to start.  I skipped breakfast, which is a no-no, I know.  I have circumstances and considerations and I'm working on it.  I went off to a morning work appointment carpooling with a friend, and on our way back around 12:30 we stopped at the diner for lunch.  I ordered the BLT, which is huge, so I ate half and saved the other half for dinner.  I ate two (!) of her french fries.  I also had a cappuccino with whipped cream on it, which I forgot to log, so there's some extra calories I will add to the log.  Then for dinner I had the other half of the BLT plus two pieces of candy.  When I logged my food, I actually counted it as two full BLTs since they are so large.  But I let fitbit estimate for me how many calories are in a BLT, rather than trying to figure out how much of each ingredient was in a restaurant dish (I can estimate how much bacon, and how much bread, but it's hard to know how much mayonnaise they put on, for example).

Anyway, serious question, if I'm only burning under 2000 cals per day, is 1200-1300 really so horribly low to take in, for someone trying to lose weight?  As I said, I'm usually above this amount, but am curious if it's considered so far out of the realm for days that I'm fairly sedentary?

Note:  I haven't lost any weight in weeks, plus or minus my normal daily fluctuations.

[Firiel]

1 hour ago, church_of_dog said:

I think I usually eat more than that number of calories.  It's also possible that I'm not counting them properly (I don't usually eat outside meals, so if I do have a snack I could see that I might forget to log it) or that fitbit's food and calorie lists are not correct.

Yesterday I admit I ate poorly, let's just get that out of the way to start.  I skipped breakfast, which is a no-no, I know.  I have circumstances and considerations and I'm working on it.  I went off to a morning work appointment carpooling with a friend, and on our way back around 12:30 we stopped at the diner for lunch.  I ordered the BLT, which is huge, so I ate half and saved the other half for dinner.  I ate two (!) of her french fries.  I also had a cappuccino with whipped cream on it, which I forgot to log, so there's some extra calories I will add to the log.  Then for dinner I had the other half of the BLT plus two pieces of candy.  When I logged my food, I actually counted it as two full BLTs since they are so large.  But I let fitbit estimate for me how many calories are in a BLT, rather than trying to figure out how much of each ingredient was in a restaurant dish (I can estimate how much bacon, and how much bread, but it's hard to know how much mayonnaise they put on, for example).

Anyway, serious question, if I'm only burning under 2000 cals per day, is 1200-1300 really so horribly low to take in, for someone trying to lose weight?  As I said, I'm usually above this amount, but am curious if it's considered so far out of the realm for days that I'm fairly sedentary?

Note:  I haven't lost any weight in weeks, plus or minus my normal daily fluctuations.

So, you can use this calculator to give an estimate of your Basal Metabolic Rate: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/tools/bmr-calculator

Keep in mind that your BMR isn't the amount of calories you burn in a day.  It's the amount of calories that you would burn in a day if you did absolutely nothing but lie in bed.  It's how many calories you burn simply keeping your body alive.  IM(extremely nonprofessional)O, you should be eating more calories than your BMR, and shouldn't ever try for a 1,000 calorie deficit unless you are very overweight.  I would typically think that 1200-1300 would be too little, but I know age makes a big difference, so if you are older it could be fine. And not everyone is the same, so there's that too.  Also, people do tend to underestimate their caloric intake, so that plays into the equation as well.

[singsingsing]

There's nothing wrong at all with eating 1200-1300 a day, as long as you're eating mostly healthy/nutritional foods and not potato chips and candy. Smaller women especially often don't need to eat more than this. I'm 5'8" so I usually aim for more, but I can eat 1300 without issue.

I will say this, do not pay attention to the calories your fitbit is telling you you've burned. It vastly overestimates. Don't eat back your calories. If you find you're really hungry or weak, just add an extra 100 or 200 calories to your day, and make sure you're getting enough protein and so on. But don't trust fitbit.

[church_of_dog]

1 minute ago, Firiel said:

So, you can use this calculator to give an estimate of your Basal Metabolic Rate: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/tools/bmr-calculator

Keep in mind that your BMR isn't the amount of calories you burn in a day.  It's the amount of calories that you would burn in a day if you did absolutely nothing but lie in bed.  It's how many calories you burn simply keeping your body alive.  IM(extremely nonprofessional)O, you should be eating more calories than your BMR, and shouldn't ever try for a 1,000 calorie deficit unless you are very overweight.  I would typically think that 1200-1300 would be too little, but I know age makes a big difference, so if you are older it could be fine. And not everyone is the same, so there's that too.  Also, people do tend to underestimate their caloric intake, so that plays into the equation as well.

Hi @Firiel, welcome back!

Thanks for this comment -- I'm pretty sure fitbit incorporates my BMR into its expectations but it's great to have a way for me to look at it on my own.  I just input my data into that site and got around 1350 as my BMR.  I agree that a person shouldn't regularly eat less than that except for extreme circumstances.  I do not have extreme circumstances -- I need to lose around 15 pounds.  I'm also aware that I mostly eat pretty well (yesterday notwithstanding) and my primary path to losing the weight is more exercise rather than dramatic food reduction.  I'm mostly just trying here to understand the fitbit dashboard numbers so that I can put them in context.

9 minutes ago, singsingsing said:

There's nothing wrong at all with eating 1200-1300 a day, as long as you're eating mostly healthy/nutritional foods and not potato chips and candy. Smaller women especially often don't need to eat more than this. I'm 5'8" so I usually aim for more, but I can eat 1300 without issue.

I will say this, do not pay attention to the calories your fitbit is telling you you've burned. It vastly overestimates. Don't eat back your calories. If you find you're really hungry or weak, just add an extra 100 or 200 calories to your day, and make sure you're getting enough protein and so on. But don't trust fitbit.

Ugh, @singsingsing, I'm bummed to hear this.  I guess this is part of what people meant when they said fitbit isn't good with food tracking?  Argh.  OK, appreciate all the input.  I'm somewhat of a data geek and while the numbers themselves aren't crucial, I really want to be able to play with them to keep myself motivated. Knowing that they're not accurate just kinda ruins it for me.  I guess I need to look into MyFitnessPal after all.

PS -- I'm 5'6" and while not quite chubby, no one would ever call me petite.  I could definitely eat more like 2000 calories in a day, even healthy-ish calories, but since yesterday was a sedentary day (under 7000 steps, under 3 miles total all day, and only 10 "active minutes" of snow shoveling) I figured less was better.  On a day that I burn 2500 cals I think I would have no trouble eating 2000!

[pnwgypsy]

There's nothing wrong at all with eating 1200-1300 a day, as long as you're eating mostly healthy/nutritional foods and not potato chips and candy. Smaller women especially often don't need to eat more than this. I'm 5'8" so I usually aim for more, but I can eat 1300 without issue.

I will say this, do not pay attention to the calories your fitbit is telling you you've burned. It vastly overestimates. Don't eat back your calories. If you find you're really hungry or weak, just add an extra 100 or 200 calories to your day, and make sure you're getting enough protein and so on. But don't trust fitbit.

I very strongly disagree with this. Unless you're very very petite, 1200-1300 calories per day is not enough to function in a healthy way. You risk your body going into a starvation mode. Highly recommend calculating BMR. Also recommend not going for such a large calorie deficit. Check out fitnessblender.com, they have tons of free full length workout videos, plus some inexpensive paid programs requiring no or limited equipment. Also see their blog. There's been recent posts about how Kelly ate 3000k per day & did strength training/hiit yet lost 40 lbs, vs eating low cals & doing 2 hrs of cardio/day.

[Maggie Mae]

4 minutes ago, pnwgypsy said:

I very strongly disagree with this. Unless you're very very petite, 1200-1300 calories per day is not enough to function in a healthy way. You risk your body going into a starvation mode. Highly recommend calculating BMR. Also recommend not going for such a large calorie deficit. Check out fitnessblender.com, they have tons of free full length workout videos, plus some inexpensive paid programs requiring no or limited equipment. Also see their blog. There's been recent posts about how Kelly ate 3000k per day & did strength training/hiit yet lost 40 lbs, vs eating low cals & doing 2 hrs of cardio/day.

I strongly disagree with you. 

1200 calories a day is enough. "starvation mode" is a myth. 

I agree that you the OP should calculate her TDEE and BMR. 

A large deficit is OK but a 500 calorie deficit per day is more recommended. 

 

[singsingsing]

11 minutes ago, pnwgypsy said:

I very strongly disagree with this. Unless you're very very petite, 1200-1300 calories per day is not enough to function in a healthy way. You risk your body going into a starvation mode. Highly recommend calculating BMR. Also recommend not going for such a large calorie deficit. Check out fitnessblender.com, they have tons of free full length workout videos, plus some inexpensive paid programs requiring no or limited equipment. Also see their blog. There's been recent posts about how Kelly ate 3000k per day & did strength training/hiit yet lost 40 lbs, vs eating low cals & doing 2 hrs of cardio/day.

I don't mean to be rude, but this is absolutely false. There's usually no need to limit yourself to 1200 calories a day unless you are petite and trying to lose weight, but it's not going to put you into starvation mode (mainly because starvation mode is not a real thing). You should definitely calculate your TDEE and BMR and choose a calorie deficit appropriate for your current weight, height, age, activity level, weight loss goals, and any medical conditions. But if you're eating 3000 calories a day and trying to lose weight, you'd better be damn sure that you're burning more than that, because that really is what it comes down to: burning more calories than you take in.

And seriously, I am 5'8" and I can eat 1200-1300 calories a day and function in a completely healthy manner, because I'm sedentary. If I exercise, I eat more. But not that much more. Based on my height and current weight, my activity level, and my exercise goals, to lose one pound per week, MyFitnessPal gives me a 1390 calorie limit. That's really not extraordinary.

[pnwgypsy]

Agree to disagree or whatever, but I cannot support such limited calorie intake.

Edit to add: https://www.fitnessblender.com/blog/cardio-and-dieting-versus-fitness-blender-and-clean-eating-

Cardio & dieting vs fitness blender(weights & hiit) & clean eating [altho I don't subscribe to clean eating]

& https://www.fitnessblender.com/articles/why-you-arent-losing-weight-when-cutting-calories-and-exercising-is-not-working

[Whoosh]

I was once short and petite and healthy and ACTIVE and I don't think I ever could have survived on 1,200 to 1,500 calories a day back then.  I have been having some health issues and while I am still short, I would no longer be classified as "petite" and certainly not as active.  I am in the care of numerous doctors (including a nutritionist) and I currently aim for 1,200 to 1,500 calories a day.  Sometimes I struggle to get that many calories in in a day, but I do my dangdest as that is what my current medical professionals recommend.

ETA - I think I am using "petite" wrong.  I just don't wanna bash myself LOL.  I am still under 5'4"

[Maggie Mae]

If you are 5'2 and at a healthy BMI, your BMR will be around 1200 calories. That's not "very very petite" -- that's a healthy weight at a short height. Also, way the fuck to be insulting to those of us who are short.

1200 calories is fine. Stop spreading lies and contributing to the obesity crisis.