1200 calorie meal plan for road trip?
Replies
-
snowbunny711 wrote: »Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »I can't get on board with someone deciding that her priorities and objectives and choices are the best ones for everyone, end of story.
Some people prefer to lose faster; they'd rather have fewer daily calories and see faster results.
Not everyone is miserable on fewer calories per day.
And some people prefer to do less exercise and eat less. So many people act like getting more food is worth any exercise sacrifice. Some people don't have the goal to be in optimum health, they just want to fit into a certain size clothing.
Just for fair disclosure, I personally could not sustain 1200 calories a day over time (I'm find going under during the few days a month I lose my appetite), and I enjoy my exercise and getting stronger. So I'm not defending myself so much as people's right to choose what works for them without being told they are WRONG, all WRONG, you know?
So let's say someone is doing 1200 calories, they stop losing, so they dropped their calories even more, let's say 1000 calories, then it happens again, so drop it again to 700 calories, do you see the problem. If they were eating more calories they would have some wiggle room when they need to drop their calories down, especially down near their goal weight. Just to add, how about hair loss, muscle, you know that your heart is a muscle right? Just saying...
Wait what!?? So if I want to maintain it'll have to be at 1200?
well this sucks.
Op, can you please provide your height, weight, goal weight, and activity level.
Because it's very highly unlikely, unless you have some medical condition, that you would maintain at 1200 calories. Your profile says you have 5lbs to go so 1200 cals is probably too low anyway.
0 -
Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Is there any evidence that the majority of people on 1200 calorie diets lose hair, feel weak, etc.? I would find that surprising, but am totally open to finding out I'm wrong. Better to be factually correct than to keep on wrongly thinking you are.
I know a long time ago I heard about a study saying that the government had determined that sedentary people needed 800 calories or so a day to maintain minimum health standards, but that was a long time ago and the research could be out of date.
Concentration camp prisoners ate around 900-1000 calories day. Unless you are less then 5 feet tall, no one should be doing 1200 calories, except medical issues.
Yes, but they were doing 10 hours or more of hard, hard physical labor, correct? Wouldn't the better number be what they were netting?0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »
I took it to mean that he is, like me, a person who does not want to spend one more minute on the road than necessary. Hurry up, pee, get back on the road, fast-fast-fast, we are losing time!Why does the husband get to decide the parameters of the trip? Make some changes. No, we aren't stopping to see the World's Biggest Horse Statue. No, you can eat in the car. No, we aren't stopping to ride a rollercoaster...or buy your cheap cigarettes...or see if Pepsi gives tours of the plant..or to see an antebellum home. No, no, no. Hurry, move, let's go!
We are the people who turn three day trips into two day trips. We turn 23 hours into 18.
We cannot be argued with.
We also do most of, if not all, of the driving.
Meh. Adults treating other adults like children should expect the incoming tantrum or an unpleasant reminder of the other being an adult too. (Not aimed directly at you, but unless I'm part of a tour bus, there's room for compromise. I don't need to be herded.)
I can see some compromise, but it needs to be planned out now and not on the fly. Personally, this is why I do road trips solo. And I can do road trips. My first one this year was about 6k miles in 10 days. During that trip, I hiked 63 miles, spent time seeing historical sites, stopped for an oil change, and even spent a night camping out in the backcountry.
My 2nd one this year (which was about a month ago) was about 5k miles in 10 days, included hiking, historical sites, and a relative's wedding half-way accross the country on Sat. night (I had to be back at work more than 1,200 miles away by Mon. morning).
With that said, I plan my trips to the minute. There is some flexibility that if something goes wrong and takes too much time, I can cut down on time elsewhere. But I do all of my own driving and I like to maximize my time, so that is what happens.
With that said, there can be some compromise, but it really needs to be planned now rather than later. That compromise may be that you bring snacks and then eat only 1 meal of fast food (go to Subway, get a salad for low calories). Honestly, 20 hours is not terribly long and if you bring low calorie-density snacks (pickles, celery, carrots), water, and something to keep you occupied (book, electronic game, etc.); then you will be alright.
The thing that will probably cause the biggest time loss, IMO, is having to stop to pee. I don't know about you, but my car can go further on a tank than my bladder can (5 hours on a tank of gas, based on average speed of 65 mph). If you have time, consider a Stadium Buddy. Otherwise, you will be stopping more than you realize so keep those stops short and pack snacks.
You're a dude so your pee breaks are waaaaaaaaaaay easier than mine are. I'm envious but please don't suggest one of those weird pee funnels or a training potty (I've heard of people putting them in the back of their cars for long trips with kids, EW)0 -
0
-
A lot of gas stations will have wraps which usually run at about 500 calories.0
-
-
I don't know what a stadium buddy is. I don't think I want to and am not googling, lol. I hope that people are not...
No, not going into it. Another case of wishing to remain blissfully ignorant. 0 -
I don't know what a stadium buddy is. I don't think I want to and am not googling, lol. I hope that people are not...
No, not going into it. Another case of wishing to remain blissfully ignorant.
Lol http://www.stadiumpal.com/0 -
I don't know what a stadium buddy is. I don't think I want to and am not googling, lol. I hope that people are not...
No, not going into it. Another case of wishing to remain blissfully ignorant.
Lol http://www.stadiumpal.com/
I'm curious but I don't wanna click it.
I'm at work
0 -
Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Is there any evidence that the majority of people on 1200 calorie diets lose hair, feel weak, etc.? I would find that surprising, but am totally open to finding out I'm wrong. Better to be factually correct than to keep on wrongly thinking you are.
I know a long time ago I heard about a study saying that the government had determined that sedentary people needed 800 calories or so a day to maintain minimum health standards, but that was a long time ago and the research could be out of date.
Concentration camp prisoners ate around 900-1000 calories day. Unless you are less then 5 feet tall, no one should be doing 1200 calories, except medical issues.
Yes, but they were doing 10 hours or more of hard, hard physical labor, correct? Wouldn't the better number be what they were netting?
Are you serious right now? Really?
0 -
Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Is there any evidence that the majority of people on 1200 calorie diets lose hair, feel weak, etc.? I would find that surprising, but am totally open to finding out I'm wrong. Better to be factually correct than to keep on wrongly thinking you are.
I know a long time ago I heard about a study saying that the government had determined that sedentary people needed 800 calories or so a day to maintain minimum health standards, but that was a long time ago and the research could be out of date.
Concentration camp prisoners ate around 900-1000 calories day. Unless you are less then 5 feet tall, no one should be doing 1200 calories, except medical issues.
Yes, but they were doing 10 hours or more of hard, hard physical labor, correct? Wouldn't the better number be what they were netting?
No, just no. :noway:0 -
bring the meals you want to eat, get a car power inverter and a mini-microwave. Drive safe!0
-
WalkingAlong wrote: »But 1200 isn't dangerous. No one considers that 'knowledge' besides some forumites.
Agree, hair and muscles are just not that important. LOL /sarcasm
When I did 1200 calories, I lost a lot of hair, cranky, fatigued, dizzy spells, probably lost a lot muscles and who knows what damages I did then and in the past, also try getting the nutrition you need in 1200 calories, you can't. I am 5'2, 45 yrs old and so glad I listen/read what the "mean people" had to say about eating more.
How tall are you? I'm 5'8", and haven't been morbidly obese (BMI over 35) since 264 lbs. Or, are you going by the 100 pounds over ideal weight definition?
I'm averaging just under 1200 (gross) calories (I have to be under on no-exercise days to keep the numbers from going red) a day, and I feel great. I mean, I was a little demotivated last week, but that was PMS. I'm also finding I have more energy during my workouts. I used to watch the clock during karate, wondering if I would make it to the end. Now I just feel lighted buzzed, as I look around at my classmates panting around me...My last jog was my best so far (although I worry that my speed is (gradually) increasing only because my weight is decreasing...)
I'm getting stronger, and have better endurance. The only pitfall, is I'm losing a little quicker (3-4 pounds a week), but, as my deficit will shrink with me (right now 800 calories/day), that will naturally slow down with time. And, losing faster when 30+ BMI is not as risky. I guess part of me is nervous and wants to "practice" for when 1200 is my calorie range to lose .5 pounds a week, when I will absolutely have to be at 1200 to lose weight.
With me it is partially laziness. I can't be bothered to figure out more healthy snacks (if I eat more it tends to be junk). By 9 - 10 pm, I'm not hungry and don't want to eat anymore. Sometimes I've gone under 1000 calories because I was too busy to eat during the day, and too exhausted to eat at night.
I don't get all my nutrition from my food, but I never did, as I am a picky eater. So I take vitamins/minerals.
Everyone's needs are different. My mom is petite and in menopause, and she maintains at 1200 calories a day. Someone as athletic as you needs a lot more of everything just to get by (congrats on all your success, by the way). The journey looks different for us all, I guess...
If you are losing 3-4 lbs per week, your deficit is greater than 800 calories. And you misunderstand what happens the closer you get to goal. When your deficit shrinks, you eat more calories, and still lose weight, just less of it each week. I'm 5'7" and I've never had a calorie goal before exercise of less than 1400. I can eat between 1800-2000 and lose 0.5 lb per week.
I think you would benefit from recalculating your numbers, because it sounds like something is way off and you run the risk of doing some pretty serious damage to your body. No one at 5'8" should absolutely have be at 1200 calories to lose weight at any point in their weight loss.
I'm not too worried about damaging myself. I get in about 80 grams of protein a day, which is above what the nutritionist recommended for my weight (.8/kg = 71g a day). The protein keeps my body from eating up it's own muscles. My Dr. is aware of my weight loss (or her locum is, at least), I've passed my blood tests, and I've talked to 3 dietitians about my diet, 2 of which have actually looked what I've been eating (MFP is great - I can print off my meals for the week and bring them to my appointments). The last dietitian actually said she wished she could give some of my motivation to her other clients. I may be a little low on fat (about 25 grams/day when I'm not eating any junk food), and may bring some coconut oil into my diet in the new year...
Part of me just needs to push myself a little. I dropped WW once because I was convinced I couldn't eat at 24 points (approx 1200 calories). Figuring out how to be satisfied and functional at 1200 is a challenge I wanted to see if I could meet. And, it's satisfying in it's own way when I have 0 net calories for the day (only 1-2 times a week, but still). And yes, I know that is only because MFP overestimates calories burned...
Thank you for expressing your concern in a respectful way. I do appreciate it...
1. 25g of fat daily? Egads. Surely none of the health professionals you consulted said this was a good thing.
2.And, it's satisfying in it's own way when I have 0 net calories for the day (only 1-2 times a week, but still).
This is not a good thing either. You are potentially on a very dangerous path. When you showed your dietary logs to the medical professionals, did you include these days? Or did you show them a day in which you ate more and led them to believe it was representative of your usual intake?0 -
jofjltncb6 wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »But 1200 isn't dangerous. No one considers that 'knowledge' besides some forumites.
Agree, hair and muscles are just not that important. LOL /sarcasm
When I did 1200 calories, I lost a lot of hair, cranky, fatigued, dizzy spells, probably lost a lot muscles and who knows what damages I did then and in the past, also try getting the nutrition you need in 1200 calories, you can't. I am 5'2, 45 yrs old and so glad I listen/read what the "mean people" had to say about eating more.
How tall are you? I'm 5'8", and haven't been morbidly obese (BMI over 35) since 264 lbs. Or, are you going by the 100 pounds over ideal weight definition?
I'm averaging just under 1200 (gross) calories (I have to be under on no-exercise days to keep the numbers from going red) a day, and I feel great. I mean, I was a little demotivated last week, but that was PMS. I'm also finding I have more energy during my workouts. I used to watch the clock during karate, wondering if I would make it to the end. Now I just feel lighted buzzed, as I look around at my classmates panting around me...My last jog was my best so far (although I worry that my speed is (gradually) increasing only because my weight is decreasing...)
I'm getting stronger, and have better endurance. The only pitfall, is I'm losing a little quicker (3-4 pounds a week), but, as my deficit will shrink with me (right now 800 calories/day), that will naturally slow down with time. And, losing faster when 30+ BMI is not as risky. I guess part of me is nervous and wants to "practice" for when 1200 is my calorie range to lose .5 pounds a week, when I will absolutely have to be at 1200 to lose weight.
With me it is partially laziness. I can't be bothered to figure out more healthy snacks (if I eat more it tends to be junk). By 9 - 10 pm, I'm not hungry and don't want to eat anymore. Sometimes I've gone under 1000 calories because I was too busy to eat during the day, and too exhausted to eat at night.
I don't get all my nutrition from my food, but I never did, as I am a picky eater. So I take vitamins/minerals.
Everyone's needs are different. My mom is petite and in menopause, and she maintains at 1200 calories a day. Someone as athletic as you needs a lot more of everything just to get by (congrats on all your success, by the way). The journey looks different for us all, I guess...
If you are losing 3-4 lbs per week, your deficit is greater than 800 calories. And you misunderstand what happens the closer you get to goal. When your deficit shrinks, you eat more calories, and still lose weight, just less of it each week. I'm 5'7" and I've never had a calorie goal before exercise of less than 1400. I can eat between 1800-2000 and lose 0.5 lb per week.
I think you would benefit from recalculating your numbers, because it sounds like something is way off and you run the risk of doing some pretty serious damage to your body. No one at 5'8" should absolutely have be at 1200 calories to lose weight at any point in their weight loss.
I'm not too worried about damaging myself. I get in about 80 grams of protein a day, which is above what the nutritionist recommended for my weight (.8/kg = 71g a day). The protein keeps my body from eating up it's own muscles. My Dr. is aware of my weight loss (or her locum is, at least), I've passed my blood tests, and I've talked to 3 dietitians about my diet, 2 of which have actually looked what I've been eating (MFP is great - I can print off my meals for the week and bring them to my appointments). The last dietitian actually said she wished she could give some of my motivation to her other clients. I may be a little low on fat (about 25 grams/day when I'm not eating any junk food), and may bring some coconut oil into my diet in the new year...
Part of me just needs to push myself a little. I dropped WW once because I was convinced I couldn't eat at 24 points (approx 1200 calories). Figuring out how to be satisfied and functional at 1200 is a challenge I wanted to see if I could meet. And, it's satisfying in it's own way when I have 0 net calories for the day (only 1-2 times a week, but still). And yes, I know that is only because MFP overestimates calories burned...
Thank you for expressing your concern in a respectful way. I do appreciate it...
1. 25g of fat daily? Egads. Surely none of the health professionals you consulted said this was a good thing.
2.And, it's satisfying in it's own way when I have 0 net calories for the day (only 1-2 times a week, but still).
This is not a good thing either. You are potentially on a very dangerous path. When you showed your dietary logs to the medical professionals, did you include these days? Or did you show them a day in which you ate more and led them to believe it was representative of your usual intake?
The logs I brought in showed the last week of meals. I didn't pick out "good" days, what I eat tends to be fairly consistent. One of them included a "bad" day, where I ate less than 900 calories. The first nutritionist scanned them and suggested I sub out fruit for juice. The second one made some suggestions for more fiber (I get about 25 grams).
Like I said, I get about 1 - 2 0 net calories days a week, so yes, it was in the logs. I ate almost 1200 calories on those days, MFP just calculate that I burned more. The general consensus is that MFP's calculations are off for activity, and many recommend that you don't eat back your calories burned. Going under isn't really hard to do. At my current weight, I'm given about 850 calories for an hour of Karate. On Wednesdays I have a 2 hour class. I would have to eat over 1700 calories that day to have net calories. 2 days a week I have a one hour class. If I do an hour of blogilates (250 calories) and 20 minutes circuit training (100 calories) on one of those days, I can eat up to 1200 calories and have no net. My 0 calorie days are mostly Wednesdays, however.
Also, I don't weigh most of my food, so according to most posters, I'm eating at least 100 more calories a day than what I log, probably more.
I didn't ask specifically about the fat, but it is in the logs. I've only noticed recently, and I will be doing something about it. I eat chia seeds in the morning, so I'm getting omega 3s...
As my Dr is ok with what I'm doing and I'm feeling well, I'm going to continue at this time. Thanks 0 -
PikaKnight wrote: »Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Turning_Hopes_to_Habits wrote: »Is there any evidence that the majority of people on 1200 calorie diets lose hair, feel weak, etc.? I would find that surprising, but am totally open to finding out I'm wrong. Better to be factually correct than to keep on wrongly thinking you are.
I know a long time ago I heard about a study saying that the government had determined that sedentary people needed 800 calories or so a day to maintain minimum health standards, but that was a long time ago and the research could be out of date.
Concentration camp prisoners ate around 900-1000 calories day. Unless you are less then 5 feet tall, no one should be doing 1200 calories, except medical issues.
Yes, but they were doing 10 hours or more of hard, hard physical labor, correct? Wouldn't the better number be what they were netting?
Are you serious right now? Really?
You're right, continuing with the concentration camp example was distasteful and insensitive. I should have said, let's assume those same calories for a healthy (at least initially), active man who did hard physical labor for 10 hours a day.0 -
0 -
snowbunny711 wrote: »
No I have never had another account. And I am so sorry for the individual who has an eating disorder, but I do not have one. Also this is not something to talk about lightly. Eating disorders are scary and are the main causes for suicide so please don't be talking about this. Road trips= Fun, exciting, and adventurous
eating disorders= trauma, depression, anxiety, illness that should never be ignored.
Soooo. eating disorders shouldn't be ignored, but we should definitely stop talking about them?
What the what?0 -
0somuchbetter0 wrote: »Lap band surgery is a bariatric procedure.
You are altered. You have a medical device that was surgically placed inside you, that is restricting what you can intake. Due to this device, you have different nutritional rules than the rest of us. What work for you may not work others who are not altered.
With all due respect, unless you're a bariatric surgeon, I think I know the difference between my nutritional and caloric needs as a lap band patient versus those of a gastric bypass patient or gastric sleeve patient, etc. better than you do. I researched the different procedures for a year before I made my decision. The only restriction I have is physical - my physiology is no different than before the surgery. I'm not going to discuss this further.
Back to my point: regardless of whether someone has had lap band surgery or not, 1200 calories is not too low for many many people.
You are right. There are "many many people" who are under 5 feet tall and have very low calorie needs. But not most. A resounding MOST people need significantly more than that.
0 -
Hi snowbunny...I just went on a weekend vacation...along with the 1200 calories a day..I am also sugar free and gluten free...I really had no problem finding things I could eat at gas stations/fast food....I did take my own salad dressing... buns/bread....xylitol...and packed all the food I could think of and fit into the cooler that fit into my plan...also if you do splurge just watch the portion size...the most important thing is not worrying and have a great time
0 -
...snowbunny711 wrote: »I'm about to go on a 20 hour road trip and was wondering what I can eat during that 20 hours. Fast food or gas stations are the only stops we will be making my husband made that very clear lol any suggestions? Meal plans?
HHMM...I don't see anywhere in this post that says...hey people why don't you take a gander at my profile and then lecture me..just sayin'
0 -
lolz. but exercising testicles is important. but the headband looks a little difficult to put on.0
-
Wronkletoad wrote: »lolz. but exercising testicles is important. but the headband looks a little difficult to put on.
It's actually a blob of fat...BUT.. if testicles is what your brain forms then...oh well..funny
0 -
0 -
If you could find a source from the medical or weight loss or any authoritative field that agrees with you, I will gladly gift you the internet.AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »0somuchbetter0 wrote: »Lap band surgery is a bariatric procedure.
You are altered. You have a medical device that was surgically placed inside you, that is restricting what you can intake. Due to this device, you have different nutritional rules than the rest of us. What work for you may not work others who are not altered.
With all due respect, unless you're a bariatric surgeon, I think I know the difference between my nutritional and caloric needs as a lap band patient versus those of a gastric bypass patient or gastric sleeve patient, etc. better than you do. I researched the different procedures for a year before I made my decision. The only restriction I have is physical - my physiology is no different than before the surgery. I'm not going to discuss this further.
Back to my point: regardless of whether someone has had lap band surgery or not, 1200 calories is not too low for many many people.
You are right. There are "many many people" who are under 5 feet tall and have very low calorie needs. But not most. A resounding MOST people need significantly more than that.
People with excess body fat do not need significantly more than that, which is why MFP uses it as a floor value.
0 -
Wronkletoad wrote: »lolz. but exercising testicles is important. but the headband looks a little difficult to put on.
:laugh: It does look like that, doesn't it :laugh:
0 -
Wronkletoad wrote: »lolz. but exercising testicles is important. but the headband looks a little difficult to put on.
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
If you could find a source from the medical or weight loss or any authoritative field that agrees with you, I will gladly gift you the internet.AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »0somuchbetter0 wrote: »Lap band surgery is a bariatric procedure.
You are altered. You have a medical device that was surgically placed inside you, that is restricting what you can intake. Due to this device, you have different nutritional rules than the rest of us. What work for you may not work others who are not altered.
With all due respect, unless you're a bariatric surgeon, I think I know the difference between my nutritional and caloric needs as a lap band patient versus those of a gastric bypass patient or gastric sleeve patient, etc. better than you do. I researched the different procedures for a year before I made my decision. The only restriction I have is physical - my physiology is no different than before the surgery. I'm not going to discuss this further.
Back to my point: regardless of whether someone has had lap band surgery or not, 1200 calories is not too low for many many people.
You are right. There are "many many people" who are under 5 feet tall and have very low calorie needs. But not most. A resounding MOST people need significantly more than that.
People with excess body fat do not need significantly more than that, which is why MFP uses it as a floor value.
OP is trying to lose 5lbs. That's not a lot of excess
0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
If you could find a source from the medical or weight loss or any authoritative field that agrees with you, I will gladly gift you the internet.AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »0somuchbetter0 wrote: »Lap band surgery is a bariatric procedure.
You are altered. You have a medical device that was surgically placed inside you, that is restricting what you can intake. Due to this device, you have different nutritional rules than the rest of us. What work for you may not work others who are not altered.
With all due respect, unless you're a bariatric surgeon, I think I know the difference between my nutritional and caloric needs as a lap band patient versus those of a gastric bypass patient or gastric sleeve patient, etc. better than you do. I researched the different procedures for a year before I made my decision. The only restriction I have is physical - my physiology is no different than before the surgery. I'm not going to discuss this further.
Back to my point: regardless of whether someone has had lap band surgery or not, 1200 calories is not too low for many many people.
You are right. There are "many many people" who are under 5 feet tall and have very low calorie needs. But not most. A resounding MOST people need significantly more than that.
People with excess body fat do not need significantly more than that, which is why MFP uses it as a floor value.
OP is trying to lose 5lbs. That's not a lot of excess
Shhh!
You're ruining her narrative.0 -
It's not POW level, either.
OP is trying to lose 5lbs. That's not a lot of excessWalkingAlong wrote: »
If you could find a source from the medical or weight loss or any authoritative field that agrees with you, I will gladly gift you the internet.AllOutof_Bubblegum wrote: »0somuchbetter0 wrote: »Lap band surgery is a bariatric procedure.
You are altered. You have a medical device that was surgically placed inside you, that is restricting what you can intake. Due to this device, you have different nutritional rules than the rest of us. What work for you may not work others who are not altered.
With all due respect, unless you're a bariatric surgeon, I think I know the difference between my nutritional and caloric needs as a lap band patient versus those of a gastric bypass patient or gastric sleeve patient, etc. better than you do. I researched the different procedures for a year before I made my decision. The only restriction I have is physical - my physiology is no different than before the surgery. I'm not going to discuss this further.
Back to my point: regardless of whether someone has had lap band surgery or not, 1200 calories is not too low for many many people.
You are right. There are "many many people" who are under 5 feet tall and have very low calorie needs. But not most. A resounding MOST people need significantly more than that.
People with excess body fat do not need significantly more than that, which is why MFP uses it as a floor value.
Look at it this way... if she's only eating 1200, she's going to lose her 5 lbs. in a month or so and go back to maintenance level eating.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions