geoffreyp's Journal

Member's Journal | Member's Friends' Journals

this is better
Aug 04 2006 16:46

right, am now getting back into the swing of things. i managed to download Calorieking software which i am running alongside Calorie-count. not much to choose 'tween them but i do find the Calorieking easier on the exercise front as it appears! (jury out on this so far) THAT BY NOT GIVING A DAILY CAL BURNT ALLOWANCE, AND HAVING THE CAPACITY TO ENTER STEPS IT MAKES FOR AN EASIER READ, FOR ME ANYWAY. SO, AS IT GOES, MY FIRST THREE DAYS WENT LIKE THIS

2298 OUT OF 2000 ALLOWED TUES

2246 CALS OUT OF A BUDGET OF 2000 WEDS

489 OUT OF 2000 THURS

AND SO FAR TODAY WITH THE EVE TO GO

91 OUT OF MY 2000 ALLOWANCE. BEFORE ANYONE THINKS AM STARVING MYSELF, (SORRY ABOUT UPPER CASE, DIdnt notice) but have had around 1350 so far but they deduct the cals burned thru exercise as your day progresses. have burnt around 1290

Replies

1. flamel
Aug 04 2006 17:11

Yeah, I find that really confusing. Is the 2000 kcal allowance calories consumed or burned. Is it the actual total amount?

2. geoffreyp
join the confused haha
Aug 04 2006 20:16

well, just as on CC i entered in the details as per usual and was told i could reach my target by keeping to 2000cals. i do an early morn cleaning job which is moderately active so i book it as 60 mins which is 475 burned cals. then i have breakfast of say 400 cals and the result is that i still have the 2000 to play with.it keeps you up to date as you keep the exercise details on going. am done for the day and it reads thus

2000 was my max cals to eat

i actually ate 2163 cals and burnt 1266 so technically that means 2163 minus 1266 = 897.

so i have 897 to play with and i suppose that if my late night nibbles total 397 then i will will have ended up burning 500 more than eaten. itsthe same way of working it out i guess

3. geoffreyp
Aug 04 2006 20:26

what does confuse me is this. as i said earlier i ran both programmes side by side and more or less the same calorie intake and burned out were the same. certainly to within 5 %. but the following was how cc saw my burned cals by including normal expenditure of 3188

i reckon if i just go by the actual exercise i entered then its nearer the true reading, in fact it would mean 1350 burnt and 2100 ate so it is the same outcomw

Walking - 3.0 Mph, Level, Moderate Pace, Firm Surface

165 1,148 Cleaning - House or Cabin, General 30 190 Normal Calorie Expenditure (?) 1,245 3,188 Total Burned Calories 4,527

4. flamel
Aug 04 2006 22:58

Now I see how I'm confused. I don't subtract calories burned (in exercise) from what I consume. I add my exercise to my calories burned at a sedentary level to get my total calories burned. Then I subtract calories consumed to get my deficit. If I exercise (45 minutes walking) and eat 1800 calories worth, it goes like this:

2250 (sedentary calories burned) + 200 (exercise calories, rounded down a bit) - 1800 (calories consumed) = 650.

Works for me, I like staying closer to the actual total numbers. I might have called my activity level "light" but I burn slightly less than that so I do it this way.

Add Comment

Join Calorie Count - it's easy and free!

Your Personal Nutritionist

Featured question:

Is jump roping as good an exercise as running?

In terms of calorie burning, moderate jumping is about equal to running a 10-minute mile, although calorie burning is always a function of time... Read more