After doing research on my own (as I too was given an unrealistic range) I just manually changed it to a range that was better. When I eat in my range, I tend to lose, when I eat in the provided range I didb't lose at all. For the most part it doesn't matter if you choose you own range on the site, but if you use items like the healthy scale it will say that you are less healthy if you are eating out of your calorie range.
UNIDENT 6/27/08 3:55 A
Your idea of variable modifiers for more or less active people is great.
But on the nutrition front, I'd add that Spark does not ever change one day based on your workout that day. The Spark concept is about overall averages, not specific nett calories on set days. So the nutritional range is a range specifically so that YOU have the freedom to go up and down as necessary with your exercise, but meanwhile to keep the average within a range which should meet your goals.
Hope this helps. :)
DENISE_SP 6/26/08 2:05 P
I'll pass along your feedback.
Thanks!
Denise
PROPHET224 6/25/08 1:52 P
Interesting. Thank you for your response. The article did help, but I'm thinking that it indicates a possible need here, and I will endeavour to explain below:
I noticed that Spark uses '1.2' as the sedentary multiplier (from the calculations article). I have seen other places suggest varying multipliers for varying activity levels. Comparing to other places I have looked, it appears that Spark's calculation uses the absolute bare minimum activity (sitting and breathing, basically) and even that is lower than other sedentary calculations (1.3 vs Spark's 1.2).
Now I understand that Spark is supposed to lay your calories burned on top of that, but when I look at my nutrition for Monday, as an example, it appears the same as today or yesterday. I added in that I burn about 2000 calories a week exercising(probably very low) and Spark upped my calories a bit, so on the high end I show 2200kcal/day now. Monday I also entered 60 minutes of Tae Kwan Do, for 900 calories burned, with no change in caloric requirement. That means that I would have effectively eaten 1300 calories towards my BMR, which alone is 2129.5 using Spark's calculations. In other words, if I were to listen to this, I am in trouble and significantly undereating.
Is there any possibility to maybe get a setting that would modify the overall calculation? For instance, provide "activity level" as a setting somewhere, with something like the following as settings:
Very Light/Sedentary (sitting or standing all day) e.g. lab/computer work, typing, painting
Light (walking and some movement throughout day) e.g. student, teacher, homemaker, child care worker
Moderate (job with some physical work or moderate intensity exercise 4-5 x/wk. for about one hour) e.g. gardening, carrying loads, most recreational exercisers
etc. Then attach a different multiplier to each one, so Spark can account for an individual's actual activity level. This is particularly important since Spark doesn't really account for weight lifting calories either, which is pretty significant (especially if you count afterburn). It's also more and more important as users do more exercise and get in shape.
DENISE_SP 6/25/08 12:04 P
Those numbers are based off of your goals that you entered into your account (weight & fitness). If you have set an aggressive weight loss goal for 2 pounds a week, your calories tend to be on the lower end. If you change the goal date to further out to give you more time to lose weight, your calorie intake m) be higher. Also, make sure you have your fitness goals set up for the actual amount of activity you are actually doing. You can adjust those goals by going to your start page and clicking on the "change" link next to each of those goals. Make sure to save your changes on those for them to be taken into account.
To learn more about the calculation, you can click on the Healthy Lifestyle tab and select the Nutrition tab. On that page, there is an article called Calorie Calculation 101 which may help you.
Hope this helps!
Denise
PROPHET224 6/25/08 11:36 A
So I have a daily goal of 1670 - 2020 calories intake according to Spark People. Where does this come from? I ask because that is very unrealistic. I am 6 ft tall, 220lbs and fairly active. If my daily caloric intake were, say 1670, I would be slowing my metabolism, having my body eat my muscle, and just in generally bad health.
Please see my Sparkpage blog today for more info (sources, calculations, etc.), but basically, my RMR calculation, without ANY activity at all, is 2420. Spark tells me to eat as low as 1670 calories, and this is not safe.
