4 ms·

Color me skeptical, but I'm not inclined to believe an anonymous person on the internet, who brings no evidence to the table. What's your TDEE and macro ratio?

Color me skeptical, but I'm not inclined to believe an anonymous person on the internet, who brings no evidence to the table. What's your TDEE and macro ratio? 10k steps a day is a marketing gimmick designed to sell fancy pedometers, rebranded as "fitness trackers". Literally everyone I have ever met who talks about this as a real world metric is terribly out of shape.

toss1 9y ago
Here's another counterpoint for you. Former US Ski Team member, XC running, Cycling, Mtn Bike, and auto racing compeititor, still do some competitions. Used Fitbit extensively for several years until it died and I felt like I'd learned enough from it to not get another one (although I was more interested in its stairs/altitude gain tracking than the steps). Very big on high intensity training as well as overall activity level (really non-stationary level), intermittent fasting, etc. And no, I don't find TDEE and "macro ratio" very useful at all. Yes, there's some examples of what you cite, and yes 10K/day was originally a mktg gimmick, but your generalizations are crap. Also, unnecessarily uncharitable against people who are at lower levels. Better that a couch potato starts to count steps and get out a bit more, and so discover they can do more than they thought, and grow into better fitness, than be ridiculed for not doing enough. I could just as well criticize you for being some kind of idle geek for focusing on numbers I find only marginally relevant compared to HR-Max (186 these days), HR Recovery rate, Jump Height, etc., but I'll go with the hope that what you are doing works for you.
- fortythirteen 9y ago
  You may not find TDEE and macro ratio very useful, but the scientists and nutritionists that work with high end human performance do, very much. Also, why track the metric of your steps, but not the fuel that powers them? I bought and extensively used the top level Fitbit, with GPS, when it first launched. It can be used to effectively track activity, but only by people who already have an understanding of the metrics. The point I was making is that "10k steps" is a Dr. Oz style fitness metric, mainly for people to feel good without actually solving their problem. The problem that 99.9% of people who "get their steps in" have is a complete lack of understanding of diet and fitness. I also have a lot of empathy for people at the beginner level. My statements might seem harsh, but they are about the snake-oil salesmanship that exists in the fitness industry, which I spend an large amount of time in, being a gym rat. Marketing these false, "simple solutions" without educating people on their health is reckless. And yes, every single person I have ever met who got a Fitbit and talked about "getting their steps in", didn't change a single long term thing about their diet. Half the time they jumped on some no-carb fad, and acted like the ground beef, egg and cheese casserole they ate 2k calories of was healthy.

toss1 9y ago

Here's another counterpoint for you. Former US Ski Team member, XC running, Cycling, Mtn Bike, and auto racing compeititor, still do some competitions. Used Fitbit extensively for several years until it died and I felt like I'd learned enough from it to not get another one (although I was more interested in its stairs/altitude gain tracking than the steps). Very big on high intensity training as well as overall activity level (really non-stationary level), intermittent fasting, etc. And no, I don't find TDEE and "macro ratio" very useful at all. Yes, there's some examples of what you cite, and yes 10K/day was originally a mktg gimmick, but your generalizations are crap. Also, unnecessarily uncharitable against people who are at lower levels. Better that a couch potato starts to count steps and get out a bit more, and so discover they can do more than they thought, and grow into better fitness, than be ridiculed for not doing enough. I could just as well criticize you for being some kind of idle geek for focusing on numbers I find only marginally relevant compared to HR-Max (186 these days), HR Recovery rate, Jump Height, etc., but I'll go with the hope that what you are doing works for you.

fortythirteen 9y ago
You may not find TDEE and macro ratio very useful, but the scientists and nutritionists that work with high end human performance do, very much. Also, why track the metric of your steps, but not the fuel that powers them? I bought and extensively used the top level Fitbit, with GPS, when it first launched. It can be used to effectively track activity, but only by people who already have an understanding of the metrics. The point I was making is that "10k steps" is a Dr. Oz style fitness metric, mainly for people to feel good without actually solving their problem. The problem that 99.9% of people who "get their steps in" have is a complete lack of understanding of diet and fitness. I also have a lot of empathy for people at the beginner level. My statements might seem harsh, but they are about the snake-oil salesmanship that exists in the fitness industry, which I spend an large amount of time in, being a gym rat. Marketing these false, "simple solutions" without educating people on their health is reckless. And yes, every single person I have ever met who got a Fitbit and talked about "getting their steps in", didn't change a single long term thing about their diet. Half the time they jumped on some no-carb fad, and acted like the ground beef, egg and cheese casserole they ate 2k calories of was healthy.