A really idiotic caloric burn rate question

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

Now that would be way too easy! I don't know why, but I totally forgot about that
site - used to use it all the time. Thanks for reminding me, I will definitely do
some playing around there and see what I can come up with.

Joyce

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:17:22 -0500, Connie wrote:

I don't know if this site will help you or not, but here it is anyway:

www.caloriesperhour.com

Connie

Joyce wrote:
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
news91750lpbpmc4mrur4ucnhfkvmi99ekgqr@4ax. com...

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

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

I forgot about that site, too.

Here's what I just calculated:


Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Hiking - climbing hills, 10-20 lb load
1,089 Calories in 2 hr

Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Skiing - cross-country, uphill (maximum)
3,592 Calories in 3 hr

Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Bicycling - 12-13.9 mph (moderate)
1,742 Calories in 3 hr



On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 02:00:36 -0600, Joyce wrote:

Now that would be way too easy! I don't know why, but I totally forgot about that
site - used to use it all the time. Thanks for reminding me, I will definitely do
some playing around there and see what I can come up with.

Joyce

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:17:22 -0500, Connie wrote:

I don't know if this site will help you or not, but here it is anyway:

www.caloriesperhour.com

Connie

Joyce wrote:
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
m...

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
news91750lpbpmc4mrur4ucnhfkvmi99ekgqr@4ax .com...

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

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

Wow! That is an incredible amount of exercise you are getting! That website does
appear to be fairly accurate - as far as I can tell anyway, with my limited amount
of knowledge. G It might be something for you to keep in mind on those days
when you are definitely overdoing things. Bet you could easily eat that entire
pastrami sandwich .. and still come out just fine for the week. G

Joyce

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:58:52 -0800, Fred wrote:

I forgot about that site, too.

Here's what I just calculated:


Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Hiking - climbing hills, 10-20 lb load
1,089 Calories in 2 hr

Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Skiing - cross-country, uphill (maximum)
3,592 Calories in 3 hr

Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Bicycling - 12-13.9 mph (moderate)
1,742 Calories in 3 hr



On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 02:00:36 -0600, Joyce wrote:

Now that would be way too easy! I don't know why, but I totally forgot about that
site - used to use it all the time. Thanks for reminding me, I will definitely do
some playing around there and see what I can come up with.

Joyce

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:17:22 -0500, Connie wrote:

I don't know if this site will help you or not, but here it is anyway:

www.caloriesperhour.com

Connie

Joyce wrote:
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
om...

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
news91750lpbpmc4mrur4ucnhfkvmi99ekgqr@4a x.com...

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

This says to me that you are finding a good balance, Lee
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

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

Feel better from the land of eternal sun (for the next day and a half
anyway!). Getting ready for a ski trip. Going to take two
peanutbutter/jelly sandwiches and a bit of Costco fruitcake from the
freezer.

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

Today I plan on a bunch on a ski trip.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 02:15:59 -0600, Joyce wrote:

Wow! That is an incredible amount of exercise you are getting! That website does
appear to be fairly accurate - as far as I can tell anyway, with my limited amount
of knowledge. G It might be something for you to keep in mind on those days
when you are definitely overdoing things. Bet you could easily eat that entire
pastrami sandwich .. and still come out just fine for the week. G

Joyce

On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 07:58:52 -0800, Fred wrote:

I forgot about that site, too.

Here's what I just calculated:


Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Hiking - climbing hills, 10-20 lb load
1,089 Calories in 2 hr

Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Skiing - cross-country, uphill (maximum)
3,592 Calories in 3 hr

Male 57, 5' 8", 160 lb BMI=24.3 BMR=1,544
Bicycling - 12-13.9 mph (moderate)
1,742 Calories in 3 hr



On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 02:00:36 -0600, Joyce wrote:

Now that would be way too easy! I don't know why, but I totally forgot about that
site - used to use it all the time. Thanks for reminding me, I will definitely do
some playing around there and see what I can come up with.

Joyce

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:17:22 -0500, Connie wrote:

I don't know if this site will help you or not, but here it is anyway:

www.caloriesperhour.com

Connie

Joyce wrote:
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
news:ca7850lrjjl9ad79ku7o9mg7cfoiqnse1k@4ax. com...

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
news91750lpbpmc4mrur4ucnhfkvmi99ekgqr@4 ax.com...

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