If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
I believe the s'mores are 3 points ... gonna go run and check it out for you. Ok,
actually came out to 2.68 US Points ... 150calories/1g fat/2g fiber. These are currently my favorite. Joyce On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:42:17 -0800, Fred wrote: They are the Skinny Cow Sandwich. They are 2-3 points, I believe. It is not listed on their site - new flavor. On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:10:49 GMT, "Laura" wrote: How many points? I have 1 fudge bar left so I might just try these Smores if they are any good. Bulk or indiv wrapped? "Fred" wrote in message . .. Great, oh, I mean wonderful, er, terrific, ahem - get well soon. But my WW's-leader-secretary introduced me to the Skinny Cow Smores today. I really liked the graham cracker cookie and the filling was not bad either (G) On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:15:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: Ha, not to worry, the antibiotic is making me want to graze all day. "Fred" wrote in message .. . You know killing yourself is not a permissable way to beat me in this weight game. Take care of yourself. On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:07:29 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: yeah, I know. This morning I am resorting to a dose of antibiotics, first time in years that I have gotten sick enough to do that. "Prairie Roots" wrote in message .. . Can't fool me, Lesanne. Your getting sick has nothing to do with your weight loss. I'm in agreement with some others that your caregiving responsibilities are taking their toll. Not that you can change the fact... I worry about you. On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:52:48 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: You know, I am the original healthy girl too, or I was. Back when I was school nurse to 800 middle school viral bombs I went 4 years with perfect attendance. And here I am falling apart. I am the only person I know who got sicker when they lost weight.... "Prairie Roots" wrote in message .. . You were recovering from a cold not too long ago and here you are again. Take care of yourself girl. On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce Linda P 232/157.2/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 Linda P 232/157.2/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset
everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
I was hanging about at 160is early in the week, then began to inexplicably
drop despite eating a lot, then had a couple of days when I ate at the low end just from feeling YUCK, and I am all back down this morning. Go figure. My total calories this past week averaged around 2000 a day. "Joyce" wrote in message ... I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
Thanks for checking. I still have not found them at a convenient
location where they would not melt on a longer drive home with them. On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:28:54 -0600, Joyce wrote: I believe the s'mores are 3 points ... gonna go run and check it out for you. Ok, actually came out to 2.68 US Points ... 150calories/1g fat/2g fiber. These are currently my favorite. Joyce On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:42:17 -0800, Fred wrote: They are the Skinny Cow Sandwich. They are 2-3 points, I believe. It is not listed on their site - new flavor. On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:10:49 GMT, "Laura" wrote: How many points? I have 1 fudge bar left so I might just try these Smores if they are any good. Bulk or indiv wrapped? "Fred" wrote in message ... Great, oh, I mean wonderful, er, terrific, ahem - get well soon. But my WW's-leader-secretary introduced me to the Skinny Cow Smores today. I really liked the graham cracker cookie and the filling was not bad either (G) On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:15:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: Ha, not to worry, the antibiotic is making me want to graze all day. "Fred" wrote in message .. . You know killing yourself is not a permissable way to beat me in this weight game. Take care of yourself. On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:07:29 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: yeah, I know. This morning I am resorting to a dose of antibiotics, first time in years that I have gotten sick enough to do that. "Prairie Roots" wrote in message .. . Can't fool me, Lesanne. Your getting sick has nothing to do with your weight loss. I'm in agreement with some others that your caregiving responsibilities are taking their toll. Not that you can change the fact... I worry about you. On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:52:48 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: You know, I am the original healthy girl too, or I was. Back when I was school nurse to 800 middle school viral bombs I went 4 years with perfect attendance. And here I am falling apart. I am the only person I know who got sicker when they lost weight.... "Prairie Roots" wrote in message .. . You were recovering from a cold not too long ago and here you are again. Take care of yourself girl. On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce Linda P 232/157.2/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 Linda P 232/157.2/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
Hmmmmm, can we blame it on the weather again? G I have hanging in the
132/133/134 zone all week ... back and forth no matter what I ate. Things started dropping slowly over the weekend, with a big jump this morning as well as a lot of water (excess?) leaving. Interestingly to me, the humidity today was also much lower ... scale threw me to 130 again. So I must really be hanging somewhere in there. I don't know what I have been eating calorie wise as an average - probably should take a peek at that. g I feel like I've been eating rather well though. I've really been into playing with that NQ number - love seeing those A's. LOL Joyce On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:36:09 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I was hanging about at 160is early in the week, then began to inexplicably drop despite eating a lot, then had a couple of days when I ate at the low end just from feeling YUCK, and I am all back down this morning. Go figure. My total calories this past week averaged around 2000 a day. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
Maybe you biked in the snow, too. I think it may have worked well! (G)
On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 02:59:46 -0600, Joyce wrote: Hmmmmm, can we blame it on the weather again? G I have hanging in the 132/133/134 zone all week ... back and forth no matter what I ate. Things started dropping slowly over the weekend, with a big jump this morning as well as a lot of water (excess?) leaving. Interestingly to me, the humidity today was also much lower ... scale threw me to 130 again. So I must really be hanging somewhere in there. I don't know what I have been eating calorie wise as an average - probably should take a peek at that. g I feel like I've been eating rather well though. I've really been into playing with that NQ number - love seeing those A's. LOL Joyce On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:36:09 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I was hanging about at 160is early in the week, then began to inexplicably drop despite eating a lot, then had a couple of days when I ate at the low end just from feeling YUCK, and I am all back down this morning. Go figure. My total calories this past week averaged around 2000 a day. "Joyce" wrote in message . .. I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
LOL! Heck, I haven't even biked in my basement let alone in the snow. But my
darling grandson just popped over to show me that he has just today learned how to pedal his tricycle - he is in seventh heaven and all smiles. So at least someone around here is out pedaling in the cold. G And today the scale held steady, all is well. Joyce On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 06:53:02 -0800, Fred wrote: Maybe you biked in the snow, too. I think it may have worked well! (G) On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 02:59:46 -0600, Joyce wrote: Hmmmmm, can we blame it on the weather again? G I have hanging in the 132/133/134 zone all week ... back and forth no matter what I ate. Things started dropping slowly over the weekend, with a big jump this morning as well as a lot of water (excess?) leaving. Interestingly to me, the humidity today was also much lower ... scale threw me to 130 again. So I must really be hanging somewhere in there. I don't know what I have been eating calorie wise as an average - probably should take a peek at that. g I feel like I've been eating rather well though. I've really been into playing with that NQ number - love seeing those A's. LOL Joyce On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:36:09 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I was hanging about at 160is early in the week, then began to inexplicably drop despite eating a lot, then had a couple of days when I ate at the low end just from feeling YUCK, and I am all back down this morning. Go figure. My total calories this past week averaged around 2000 a day. "Joyce" wrote in message ... I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
Like I'm going to take advice from someone crazy enough to bike in snow!
-- Wendy http://griffinsflight.com/Quilting/quilt1.htm de-fang email address to reply "Fred" wrote in message ... Well, like Frood, you will have to start doing it to keep up with the kids (G) Good for the scale, oh, I mean you! (G) On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:12:13 -0600, Joyce wrote: LOL! Heck, I haven't even biked in my basement let alone in the snow. But my darling grandson just popped over to show me that he has just today learned how to pedal his tricycle - he is in seventh heaven and all smiles. So at least someone around here is out pedaling in the cold. G And today the scale held steady, all is well. Joyce On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 06:53:02 -0800, Fred wrote: Maybe you biked in the snow, too. I think it may have worked well! (G) On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 02:59:46 -0600, Joyce wrote: Hmmmmm, can we blame it on the weather again? G I have hanging in the 132/133/134 zone all week ... back and forth no matter what I ate. Things started dropping slowly over the weekend, with a big jump this morning as well as a lot of water (excess?) leaving. Interestingly to me, the humidity today was also much lower ... scale threw me to 130 again. So I must really be hanging somewhere in there. I don't know what I have been eating calorie wise as an average - probably should take a peek at that. g I feel like I've been eating rather well though. I've really been into playing with that NQ number - love seeing those A's. LOL Joyce On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:36:09 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I was hanging about at 160is early in the week, then began to inexplicably drop despite eating a lot, then had a couple of days when I ate at the low end just from feeling YUCK, and I am all back down this morning. Go figure. My total calories this past week averaged around 2000 a day. "Joyce" wrote in message m... I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes .... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
That's cutting a rather fine edge on the distinction. Besides the
outcome is the same. G On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 16:57:48 -0800, Fred wrote: Besides I did not really start crazy enough to bike in snow it kind of happened. Linda P 232/155.6/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
A really idiotic caloric burn rate question
And he does love being chased, is his favorite game this week. He has been chased
around the yard, around the garage, around the house - leaving him in fits of giggles ... and sleeping very well these days. g Joyce On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 07:20:00 -0800, Fred wrote: Neither state will last long. Get ready to chase (g) On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 01:11:26 -0600, Joyce wrote: Nahhhhh, his legs are too short, will be awhile before he can pedal faster than I can walk. He's still at the stage where you have to remind him to turn the bike around and go the other way. G Joyce On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 14:39:32 -0800, Fred wrote: Well, like Frood, you will have to start doing it to keep up with the kids (G) Good for the scale, oh, I mean you! (G) On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:12:13 -0600, Joyce wrote: LOL! Heck, I haven't even biked in my basement let alone in the snow. But my darling grandson just popped over to show me that he has just today learned how to pedal his tricycle - he is in seventh heaven and all smiles. So at least someone around here is out pedaling in the cold. G And today the scale held steady, all is well. Joyce On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 06:53:02 -0800, Fred wrote: Maybe you biked in the snow, too. I think it may have worked well! (G) On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 02:59:46 -0600, Joyce wrote: Hmmmmm, can we blame it on the weather again? G I have hanging in the 132/133/134 zone all week ... back and forth no matter what I ate. Things started dropping slowly over the weekend, with a big jump this morning as well as a lot of water (excess?) leaving. Interestingly to me, the humidity today was also much lower ... scale threw me to 130 again. So I must really be hanging somewhere in there. I don't know what I have been eating calorie wise as an average - probably should take a peek at that. g I feel like I've been eating rather well though. I've really been into playing with that NQ number - love seeing those A's. LOL Joyce On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 13:36:09 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I was hanging about at 160is early in the week, then began to inexplicably drop despite eating a lot, then had a couple of days when I ate at the low end just from feeling YUCK, and I am all back down this morning. Go figure. My total calories this past week averaged around 2000 a day. "Joyce" wrote in message news:r9fa6055to4s4b7vcc0s7tci5ococ3esoa@4ax .com... I somehow managed to hit a button while playing around and it totally reset everything. My metabollic rate dropped immediately from 2100 to 1400 ... even put me at 500 for the early days (which I know isn't even possible). LOL! And eating at or near that 1400 calories this week, found my weight to be up 2 pounds today - go figure. It's all a complete mystery to me. g Hope you are feeling better soon. Colds are nasty and seem to hang on forever. Joyce On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:35:55 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am eating what it suggests in calories, and up a bit this week, but I have a really rotten cold and have actually not exercised for 4 out of the last 5 days. So not me. But I am really sick here. And Hungry. Go figure. I am still okay (within two pounds of goal) though. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Today was really interesting. I ate an incredible amount of calories - based on me totally guessing on quantities and using generic food choices available in the data base as opposed to actual more accurate counts as I am used to. Yet it was the lowest NQ rating I have ever had at the end of the day (think I ended at a B). Obviously, the foods I ate were not of much nutritional value. G It does open your eyes quite a bit. Interesting point #2: Last week I figured I could use the average for my official weigh in, since I did have readings for every day. My average for the week was exactly to the ounce what the scale said on Friday. Ok, figured it was just a total fluke. Today was official weigh-in day again. I hit the scale bright and early, disappointed a teeny bit as the weight has gone up the past few days ... but average for the week again was exactly to the ounce what the scale told me this morning ... 130.9. Go figure! Probably a fluke again, but it is pretty neat to see it turn out this way two weeks in a row. G This last week I have gone back and entered my points into the note section, is pretty interesting also. The points are pretty close to what I *thought* I should be at - all that good fiber and 0 point veggies/salads tend to balance things out calorie wise. Joyce On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:18:34 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I have used it for years, but go months sometimes without logging, then I erase myself and start over in there. I am being reinspired by it now too. I just upgraded it this year to the newest version and am loving it. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhh, don't know why but I had the impression you had been logging with diet power all the way through. I agree, it really is fun - but also has opened my eyes a little more. I find I am eating better, not sure why. Maybe because I am logging everything, so am thinking more about my choices? You know, do I REALLY want that one teeny finger cookie that accounts for a quarter of a point which I usually don't log ... but have logged it in dietpower. g I also had felt that for the past 3 weeks I had really been struggling. Nothing major, but my weight has been swinging greatly. For some reason (probably the choices I'm making, could also be TOM finally gave way) looking at the calories has helped a lot the past 2 weeks, and the weight has been steadily declining ... back to 130 today ... finally. Now what I find really interesting, and maybe things are starting to balance out and will continue to do so, is that my budgeted calories totalled 26726 since I've started dietpower ... and I've eaten 26185 ... which is pretty dang close. Granted, I've logged 3317 exercise calories, but heaven only knows if those are logged correctly. LOL! Regardless, something appears to be correct if the weight has come back down. I still have a tough time believing that my metabolic rate is 2200 and I'm not willing to eat that high yet. I'm giving it more time to continue adjusting. And that NQ is really neat! What is funny is if you log your daily vitamin in ... you go right up to *A* status. G It is motivating though, learning what the body needs, what you are getting too much of, etc. It really does have me rethinking many of my food choices. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:37:19 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I had stopped logging at diet power and was just writing a WW journal. I started again with diet power this last week for fun, and it is improving the general quality of my diet in a big way. For some reason seeing that NQ is very motivating to me. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . My email went through, and I did receive the standard automated *you'll hear from us within 24 hours* reply. I probably sent it to the wrong place though - went for the support option. Tech support is probably shaking their heads and whooping it up right about now. I'm with you, will remain anal and diligent. I was happily surprised to see my weight creeping down again this week .. all the way right back to 130 this morning. Journaling, weighing, whatever ... it all seems to work correctly if I do the work. When I get lazy, I have problems. Joyce On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:21:40 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I am getting an error message from my e mail to them, I probably sent it to the wrong addy or something. I don't give a hoot if I am anal about this, I am NOT going back up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Did you get any kind of answer from them? I emailed them this evening (just a few minutes ago), had some other questions regarding the exercise log ... such as how the heck do I know what incline on the treadmill is equivalent to a light, moderate or steep hill grade. I'm sure they're gonna shake their heads and figure I'm over complicating things ... but I wanna know, and want to have a better idea of what I am doing! I tried using the polar monitor while on the treadmill, so far it hasn't worked at all. At the end of 40 minutes it tells me I've burned a whopping total of 9 or 15 calories. I'm reasonably sure it has something to do with the possibility of interference from the treadmill monitors, but no way I can turn them off. I might try again this week, am thinking about hanging the watch around my neck (on a string) instead of on my wrist - might get it a bit further from the treadmill's electronic devices. If it still doesn't work, then I guess I'm back to punting. I'm also a stickler on the food entires, had added most of my own to even the ww website - as I found many of theirs to not be accurate. Like you, I either put the calories, or weight into the description to make it easy for me to know which item I actually want to log. We might be overly anal on much of this, but I figure I've worked too dang hard to get here - I want to make sure I get everything right to give me a better chance of staying here. Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:17:57 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I e mailed em already. I use my polar monitor also when I have a doubt about what they are getting, and then I Add an exercise, and in the description I put "walk/jog, 250 calories" so I know what I am dealing with then I add enough details in the actual entry to be sure I have the time, etc. the same. I do a lot of that for food additions too. I found that there are slight differences for instance in the counts on soy cheeses, so I put the calories into the Name of the food. Ex Yves cheese 30, or Yves cheese 35. Then it is easy for me to get it right. Like you say.. Anal. "Joyce" wrote in message .. . Ahhhh, so this is a real problem then? I looked in the help section, then got sidetracked ... never got as far as the FAQ's. Thanks for checking for me! What is really odd, is that when I enter the exercise as treadmill, it does compute the calories burned to within just a few of what the treadmill says I have burned - so I just made the assumption that it was correct. AND wierder ... in the dietpower program I can enter walking on an incline (hill) for 3.5MPH but it doesn't give me that option for 4MPH ... which probably would compute to the same caloric expenditure as what I am logging as treadmill walking. And I can't get a good reading on the polar monitor to verify anything. The damn thing seems to get interference from the monitors on the treadmill, which can't be turned off. sigh Oh well, I guess even if things are logged wrong, it still will balance out eventually because the weight and food are correct (although I did have to somewhat guess at tonites dinner buffet). I went back and changed all those exercise logs, will have to now have to decide how I want to log things ... as a flat 4MPH walk, or as a mild hill at 3.5 (even though I walk that constant incline at 4MPH). Like I said, it should balance out. Maybe I should email them and ask that when they fix it to also factor in the incline for treadmills? Or hill walking at a faster pace? G I bet anal people like me drive then nuts! Joyce On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:37:50 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote: I went into the help screens and read the FAQ and lo and behold they have a note that it is Wrong, and to log it as regular walking until they get it fixed.... "Lesanne" wrote in message ... ooo ooo ooo gotta go look at diet power and see.... I think there is a mistake in the program there. Gonna send em mail about it from here.... that is too strange "Joyce" wrote in message news Ok, one for you gurus ... if there even is an explanation. And if there is, please give it to me in terms I can understand. g I'm using the diet program Lesanne has spoken about and noticed what I think is a *quirk* ... maybe it is, maybe it isn't, I don't have a clue. But since this is automatically calculated based on my weight and height along with the info I add (miles/time), I'm making an assumption that there must be some kind of a difference in these activities. So here goes ... I work out on the treadmill, which is a speed factored activity (so this program tells me). This program says that someone my weight and height will burn 0.0874 calories/minute if walking at roughly 4MPH. BUT ... if going for a non speed factored brisk walk at 4MPH (15 miles per minute) it says I will burn at a rate of 0.03174/minute. Can anyone explain to me why the difference rate of caloric expenditure between the two activities? Or is it solely because on a treadmill it is a constant, automated speed? I am sooooooooooo confused! g Joyce |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Heart Rate Question 1-7-04 | Janice Kennish | Weightwatchers | 18 | January 15th, 2004 06:17 AM |
Question for those who know about heart rate | Janice Kennish | Weightwatchers | 3 | January 11th, 2004 05:55 AM |
Question about heart rate 1-7-04 | Janice Kennish | Weightwatchers | 0 | January 7th, 2004 08:48 PM |
Newbie here. Heart Rate Question. | Shaunus | General Discussion | 3 | January 4th, 2004 05:29 PM |
Heart rate during exercise question | Helen Larkin | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 5 | November 4th, 2003 12:40 AM |