Eating back exercised calories VS not: Which worked for you?
Replies
-
My 2 cents..... Eat back ~75% of them. I look at it this way, you exercise burn is an estimate. Most likely you over report what you burn. So I don't eat back 100%. I calculate the burn based on HR and cross ref with the machine, if I was using one. I've lost 46lbs in 5 months. I'm 25 lbs from a very lean goal weight. I exercise at least 12 hrs a week, cardio and weights. When I started I was on 1200cal and ate back only 1/2. It worked at first then my metabolism slowed, I lost muscle, and I plateaued. I increased my calories and ate back more. After 10 days I was losing again. Up your calories by 200 and eat back at least 50%. I'm at 1850cal, 6' 1" slim build, goal weight is 190. Good luck
This is a very good (and non-sciency) approach. It might not be exactly 75% for everybody, but that's a number you can tweak to best suit you.0 -
@ Smithkulaga - congratulations on your accomplishments so far!!!
When I first started out I was doing aqua aerobics and estimated that I was burning about 300 - 400 calories a class. After several months of aqua aerobics, I was able to do more and started doing 2 classes in a row a few times a week which was aqua aerobics and zumba. I estimated (based on what I found on different websites) that Zumba was burning about 500 - 600 calories. From there I started doing weights and spinning.
A few months ago I purchased a heart rate monitor (at the advice of my trainer and several instructors i know) and discovered that I was overestimating my burned calories with Zumba especially. I really only burn about 350 - 400 calories a class. My heart rate monitor has been the best investment in my weight loss journey. It is like a personal trainer on your wrist. It calculates your calories based on your personal height, weight and heart rate. Now I know when I burn 1000 calories, I really am. I don't work out w/out it.0 -
My trainer also told me not to eat them back...............until I explained how MFP worked. Then he said, "Oh, I get it....then hell yeah eat them back!"So I'm getting conflicting advice. MFP wants me to eat back my calories I burn from exercise, but my personal trainer is telling me to stick to 1200 calories per day regardless of exercise. He said if I'm hungry after a workout, the only thing extra I should eat is a protein bar.
I've been seeing my trainer for a year and I've been following this for the most part. In a year, I've lost 20 pounds (170-150) but I constantly see people who have been following MFP for the same amount of time as me and have lost SO MUCH MORE. I can't help but wonder, has my weight loss been slow because I've been sticking to 1200?
At the same time, I have read that some people have claimed not eating back their workout calories, like I've been doing, has worked well for them.
So everyone! What has worked best for you? To eat, or not to eat?
I've done both (MFP's way and the TDEE-% way) and I've lost weight both ways. I'm currently back to doing MFP's way, since getting to eat more is a great motivator for me to work out.
If you aren't eating yours back, make sure you understand the difference between MFP's method and the TDEE-% method. You've got some good info here and some good links to read through to understand it better.0 -
When it comes to me...
I knew that the introduction of an additional deficit would create a need for additional fuel, but I chose to take a kind of 'scientist'-like 'approach', initially, out of curiosity, to see what my body would 'dictate', when it came to eating back calories, and specifically, how much it 'wanted', and whether there was a remaining deficit, and if so, how much, and whether any kind of 'pattern' might possibly 'emerge'.
So... I simply 'listened' to my body -- and while I tracked and was aware of how much was being 'eaten back', I was mindful of the fact that I considered it a learning experience, when it came to my body, and couldn't help wondering what my body would seemingly 'deem necessary', so to speak, when it came to this.
What I learned, is that my body seems to 'know' that it needs more fuel, and 'lets me know', accordingly -- and that the most it seems 'comfortable' in 'allowing', when it comes to any net deficit, relative to the exercise calories burned, is no more than a few hundred calories (and even that much was only on days when I'd burned over 2000 calories). On the various days when I burned over 2000 calories, I experienced a new 'issue' -- eating as much fuel as my body let me know it wanted, but not spending forever engaged in the act of eating (what a luxurious problem to suddenly have! lol ) -- and given the constraint of not wanting to take in more than ~600-700 calories at a shot (on such exercise calorie-deficit days (I otherwise don't want to take in more than ~350-450 calories in a 'meal')), I embraced the bang-for-the-buck calorie content and nutrition profile of nut butters, and went for nut butters on whole grain bread, and also discovered guilt-free ingestion of chocolate milk and ice cream...
Bottom line -- I'll give my body 'back' what it deems necessary, in the wake of exercise calorie deficits (and I know that it will want almost all of those calories back (and I understand why that is))... and am especially aware of the higher calorie intake that will be required on days when I burn a previously-atypical-for-me multiple of such a deficit (and am learning to 'prep' for such days, by having things onhand (or otherwise knowing that I'll be able to give myself a 'green light'), when it comes to things I normally would restrict myself to on limited occasions, knowing that on high-calorie deficit days, I can experience an added joy of eating various things for which the otherwise-cause-for-concern calorie content is actually providing a 'benefit', so to speak).0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
The link is too complicated for a beginner.
OP: There are 2 methods.
1.You eat back your calories(MFP)
2. You don't eat them back(you calculated your own TDEE and deficit)
More than likely you didn't do step 2, so stick to step 1 (eat back your calories).
The link is too complicated for a beginner or for you...? :huh:
Basic reading comprehension is all that is required to understand that link.
For a beginner, I have been doing this for a long time, that's newbie stuff to me... Below in bold are excerpts from the link... below that is possible questions that... a beginner might have.
EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): Caloric requirements of training, or training expenditure.
Whats the difference from calorie requirement of training, or training expenditure? What training expenditure, is this calories burned or exercises performed? What is being expended?
"If you are using most other online calculation tools to determine an intake estimate, that estimate is going to already include EAT as part of the suggested intake"
Wait, what is EAT again???
Why would some ask what EAT is again when they can refer back up to the top of the post where the (oh hai) list of definitions is? Also, you took sentences from a paragraph. Context. Matters.
Your blatant problem with any links other than yours (namely anything that comes from the Eat, Train, Progess group) is really appalling and quite sad.
In response to all of this:
I'm taking nutritional advice from my trainer because he's also a nutritionist. He also has had so many clients lose weight successfully so naturally, I want to follow his lead. A few years ago I was following MFP as I should (eating back the cals) but not for long enough to see any major results.
I also don't consider myself a beginner. My question sounds basic because I've been following this plan with my trainer for a year and I lost sight of the common sense of it all. I wanted to see if there was any merit to his plan, or if from this point I should start ignoring his advice and eating back those lost cals.
Guys, don't argue. Different methods clearly work for different people. I appreciate both of your input and I think I will go the route of eating back most of the calories. I eat so healthy right now that it's hard to even hit 1200, so I'll be restructuring my food with my new workout routine.
0 -
I've done both, and both work.
The approaches are different, but the ultimate goal should be the same - a healthy, sustainable calorie and macro intake.
I agree with you, but I want to clear up what you said so there is no confusion. I am pretty sure you're saying, you have done the MFP method (eating back your calories) and you have also calculated your own calorie deficit and determined the calories to eat with out eating exercise calories back.
What you said could easily be confused with "don't eat back your exercise calories following the MFP method." Which would put someone to low.
Yes, it might. But it might also put some people right where they need to be because they suck at estimating, which is why I added the last line about the end games being the same.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter how you estimate, what you log, or how much you eat back as long as you end up with a reasonably healthy calorie and macro intake.0 -
@ Smithkulaga - congratulations on your accomplishments so far!!!
When I first started out I was doing aqua aerobics and estimated that I was burning about 300 - 400 calories a class. After several months of aqua aerobics, I was able to do more and started doing 2 classes in a row a few times a week which was aqua aerobics and zumba. I estimated (based on what I found on different websites) that Zumba was burning about 500 - 600 calories. From there I started doing weights and spinning.
A few months ago I purchased a heart rate monitor (at the advice of my trainer and several instructors i know) and discovered that I was overestimating my burned calories with Zumba especially. I really only burn about 350 - 400 calories a class. My heart rate monitor has been the best investment in my weight loss journey. It is like a personal trainer on your wrist. It calculates your calories based on your personal height, weight and heart rate. Now I know when I burn 1000 calories, I really am. I don't work out w/out it.
Any suggestions on a heart rate monitor brand? I'd love to get one that is super accurate!0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
The link is too complicated for a beginner.
OP: There are 2 methods.
1.You eat back your calories(MFP)
2. You don't eat them back(you calculated your own TDEE and deficit)
More than likely you didn't do step 2, so stick to step 1 (eat back your calories).
The link is too complicated for a beginner or for you...? :huh:
Basic reading comprehension is all that is required to understand that link.
For a beginner, I have been doing this for a long time, that's newbie stuff to me... Below in bold are excerpts from the link... below that is possible questions that... a beginner might have.
EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): Caloric requirements of training, or training expenditure.
Whats the difference from calorie requirement of training, or training expenditure? What training expenditure, is this calories burned or exercises performed? What is being expended?
"If you are using most other online calculation tools to determine an intake estimate, that estimate is going to already include EAT as part of the suggested intake"
Wait, what is EAT again???
Why would some ask what EAT is again when they can refer back up to the top of the post where the (oh hai) list of definitions is? Also, you took sentences from a paragraph. Context. Matters.
Your blatant problem with any links other than yours (namely anything that comes from the Eat, Train, Progess group) is really appalling and quite sad.
Go show it to any beginner. They won't get it much. The reason they would need to refer back to it is that they don't fully understand it. If it was for a more advanced member, i wouldn't have a problem with it. I don't have a problem with that group...
I link it to beginners all the time and they've gotten it.
The reason that they would need to refer back to what? The definition of EAT? It's at the top of the post. They just have to look up a few lines to re-read that definition that you apparently think they would forget within two seconds of reading. I think that you're seriously underestimating that average intelligence of people on this site.0 -
Gee, who to listen to here?
If I do a little investigation, sometimes easy here and sometimes not but I conclude that:
The eater backers more often than not have a profile with some of their pics, either before, after or current. I hardly see any of the 1200 calorie group with them despite some being on this site for 1-3 years.
Another trend I have noticed is that many of the huge calorie restricters make an "I'm back" announcement which tells me .............. they gained the weight back. They are largely still proponents of the 1200 calorie regimen because "it worked last time" which is false because IF IT HAD worked they wouldn't be back.
Simple observations.0 -
@ Smithkulaga - congratulations on your accomplishments so far!!!
When I first started out I was doing aqua aerobics and estimated that I was burning about 300 - 400 calories a class. After several months of aqua aerobics, I was able to do more and started doing 2 classes in a row a few times a week which was aqua aerobics and zumba. I estimated (based on what I found on different websites) that Zumba was burning about 500 - 600 calories. From there I started doing weights and spinning.
A few months ago I purchased a heart rate monitor (at the advice of my trainer and several instructors i know) and discovered that I was overestimating my burned calories with Zumba especially. I really only burn about 350 - 400 calories a class. My heart rate monitor has been the best investment in my weight loss journey. It is like a personal trainer on your wrist. It calculates your calories based on your personal height, weight and heart rate. Now I know when I burn 1000 calories, I really am. I don't work out w/out it.
Any suggestions on a heart rate monitor brand? I'd love to get one that is super accurate!
They are all just estimates, and there is no way to guarantee that any one is going to be more or less accurate than any other. If you believe the hype, the new Garmins are using a pretty advanced formula, so in theory it'll be more accurate more often. But ultimately even that is an estimate.
Anything from Garmin, Suunto or Polar will be good quality. Then it just comes down to finding the one with the features you want.0 -
1200 is too low for just about everyone... I'm not sure where that "magical" number came from.
I eat about half my exercise back just to account for food miscalculation and exercise tracking differences.
I wear a Polar FT60 so I think the calorie burn is pretty accurate but I would never go by the numbers programmed in MFP.0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
The link is too complicated for a beginner.
OP: There are 2 methods.
1.You eat back your calories(MFP)
2. You don't eat them back(you calculated your own TDEE and deficit)
More than likely you didn't do step 2, so stick to step 1 (eat back your calories).
The link is too complicated for a beginner or for you...? :huh:
Basic reading comprehension is all that is required to understand that link.
For a beginner, I have been doing this for a long time, that's newbie stuff to me... Below in bold are excerpts from the link... below that is possible questions that... a beginner might have.
EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): Caloric requirements of training, or training expenditure.
Whats the difference from calorie requirement of training, or training expenditure? What training expenditure, is this calories burned or exercises performed? What is being expended?
"If you are using most other online calculation tools to determine an intake estimate, that estimate is going to already include EAT as part of the suggested intake"
Wait, what is EAT again???
Why would some ask what EAT is again when they can refer back up to the top of the post where the (oh hai) list of definitions is? Also, you took sentences from a paragraph. Context. Matters.
Your blatant problem with any links other than yours (namely anything that comes from the Eat, Train, Progess group) is really appalling and quite sad.
In response to all of this:
I'm taking nutritional advice from my trainer because he's also a nutritionist. He also has had so many clients lose weight successfully so naturally, I want to follow his lead. A few years ago I was following MFP as I should (eating back the cals) but not for long enough to see any major results.
I also don't consider myself a beginner. My question sounds basic because I've been following this plan with my trainer for a year and I lost sight of the common sense of it all. I wanted to see if there was any merit to his plan, or if from this point I should start ignoring his advice and eating back those lost cals.
Guys, don't argue.Different methods clearly work for different people. I appreciate both of your input and I think I will go the route of eating back most of the calories. I eat so healthy right now that it's hard to even hit 1200, so I'll be restructuring my food with my new workout routine.
Oh look, PU.
I'll wait.0 -
Gee, who to listen to here?
If I do a little investigation, sometimes easy here and sometimes not but I conclude that:
The eater backers more often than not have a profile with some of their pics, either before, after or current. I hardly see any of the 1200 calorie group with them despite some being on this site for 1-3 years.
Another trend I have noticed is that many of the huge calorie restricters make an "I'm back" announcement which tells me .............. they gained the weight back. They are largely still proponents of the 1200 calorie regimen because "it worked last time" which is false because IF IT HAD worked they wouldn't be back.
Simple observations.
ding ding ding ding ding0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
+10 -
Both. At the same time. Sometimes I eat them back, sometimes I don't. I don't eat a consistent amount of calories each day, but I keep the average in check.0
-
I have experimented with both and find my body responds better (weight loss wise) to not eating them back. I may go over at time by 100 cals but really try to stay around the 1200. Everyone is different and different things work for different people, so you have to really listen to what your body is telling you, and perhaps getting nutrition advice from a registered dietician rather than a personal trainer may help. Good luck.0
-
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
One would hope that a personal trainer would at least have rudimentary knowledge of how nutrition and exercise work. But if you listen to the MFP forums you should listen to no one but those on the MFP forums for nutritional advice. Doctors have no nutrition education. Nutritionists no nothing and usually aren't certified. MFP gives you too few calories. ...0 -
Each person's body responds different.. I recommend trial and error you have already done the 1200 cal for almost a year add 300 to 400 more cals for 3 weeks see what happens.0
-
I eat back some but not all, since a lot of my exercise-related calorie tracking is guesswork.0
-
I would watch out with eating back all of the workout calories. MFP was telling me that I was burning 1000 calories doing an hour of elliptical, so I would naturally eat those calories back. Just recently compared the data from MFP to a more accurate PolarFT4 Heart Rate Monitor's estimate of the calories burned. It was 425. Less than half of what MFP had told me. That means that I was eating way over what I had burned and working against my weight loss goal.0
-
I would watch out with eating back all of the workout calories. MFP was telling me that I was burning 1000 calories doing an hour of elliptical, so I would naturally eat those calories back. Just recently compared the data from MFP to a more accurate PolarFT4 Heart Rate Monitor's estimate of the calories burned. It was 425. Less than half of what MFP had told me. That means that I was eating way over what I had burned and working against my weight loss goal.
That's a very legitimate concern.
But just to clarify... the problem then is with the estimation, not with the method (eating back cals). The approach is fine, it's how some people do it that screws things up.0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
The link is too complicated for a beginner.
OP: There are 2 methods.
1.You eat back your calories(MFP)
2. You don't eat them back(you calculated your own TDEE and deficit)
More than likely you didn't do step 2, so stick to step 1 (eat back your calories).
The link is too complicated for a beginner or for you...? :huh:
Basic reading comprehension is all that is required to understand that link.
For a beginner, I have been doing this for a long time, that's newbie stuff to me... Below in bold are excerpts from the link... below that is possible questions that... a beginner might have.
EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): Caloric requirements of training, or training expenditure.
Whats the difference from calorie requirement of training, or training expenditure? What training expenditure, is this calories burned or exercises performed? What is being expended?
"If you are using most other online calculation tools to determine an intake estimate, that estimate is going to already include EAT as part of the suggested intake"
Wait, what is EAT again???
Why would some ask what EAT is again when they can refer back up to the top of the post where the (oh hai) list of definitions is? Also, you took sentences from a paragraph. Context. Matters.
Your blatant problem with any links other than yours (namely anything that comes from the Eat, Train, Progess group) is really appalling and quite sad.
Go show it to any beginner. They won't get it much. The reason they would need to refer back to it is that they don't fully understand it. If it was for a more advanced member, i wouldn't have a problem with it. I don't have a problem with that group...
There are a number of beginners who have PM'd me to thank me for writing that link and I have not yet heard ANYONE ask me additional questions or ask for additional clarifications for anything in that link.
Having said that, my experience tells me that your assumptions are wrong.0 -
I would watch out with eating back all of the workout calories. MFP was telling me that I was burning 1000 calories doing an hour of elliptical, so I would naturally eat those calories back. Just recently compared the data from MFP to a more accurate PolarFT4 Heart Rate Monitor's estimate of the calories burned. It was 425. Less than half of what MFP had told me. That means that I was eating way over what I had burned and working against my weight loss goal.
That's a very legitimate concern.
But just to clarify... the problem then is with the estimation, not with the method (eating back cals). The approach is fine, it's how some people do it that screws things up.
This is why I have been looking for a good heart rate monitor. As I'm closing in on my goal (and summer) I really want to go all-out with my fitness/food. I would like to be accurate and do the very best by my body.0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
Agreed. .Use a HRM to get a decent estimate of calories burned and maybe increase your calorie intake when working out.
0 -
One of my best friends is schooling to become a personal fitness, and I had the same conversation with me; mind you, he is in shape, if that matters.
The only thing I could truly come to an understand is this (and its fairly straight forward)...
If you don't eat, you wont have energy. If you don't have energy, you wont work as hard at the gym. If you don't work as hard at the gym, you wont lose weight -as fast- as you might want to.
I just think of myself as a machine, in that respect. I need fuel so that I keep trekking. Of course, you need to be feeding yourself at least 'decent' to 'ok' food. Putting dirty fuel in your machine wont let the gears run smoothly either.
Hard cash for Hard Work!
I think this is great advice and well explained in laymans terms!0 -
You should eat more on training days. Period. Not necessarily all of your calories should be eaten that you have earned but some. How else is your body going to build that muscle mass or shred that fat without the energy provided by food? You need food for all body function - including shredding fat.0
-
You should eat more on training days. Period. Not necessarily all of your calories should be eaten that you have earned but some. How else is your body going to build that muscle mass or shred that fat without the energy provided by food? You need food for all body function - including shredding fat.
Ah, more absolutes. Probably the easiest way to know who to ignore is when people talk in definites and absolutes.0 -
Why are you listening to a fitness trainer for nutritional advice?
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/818082-exercise-calories-again-wtf
Edit: Since it's been made quite apparent that people can't be bothered to actually go to a link that is posted I'll give a simple answer here.
MFP assumes you're not going to do any exercise so it gives you a calorie goal with a deficit already built in. So you'll lose weight even without exercise. When you exercise, you further increase that deficit to a possibly unhealthy level. Fuel your body.
The link is too complicated for a beginner.
OP: There are 2 methods.
1.You eat back your calories(MFP)
2. You don't eat them back(you calculated your own TDEE and deficit)
More than likely you didn't do step 2, so stick to step 1 (eat back your calories).
The link is too complicated for a beginner or for you...? :huh:
Basic reading comprehension is all that is required to understand that link.
For a beginner, I have been doing this for a long time, that's newbie stuff to me... Below in bold are excerpts from the link... below that is possible questions that... a beginner might have.
EAT (Exercise Associated Thermogenesis): Caloric requirements of training, or training expenditure.
Whats the difference from calorie requirement of training, or training expenditure? What training expenditure, is this calories burned or exercises performed? What is being expended?
"If you are using most other online calculation tools to determine an intake estimate, that estimate is going to already include EAT as part of the suggested intake"
Wait, what is EAT again???
Why would some ask what EAT is again when they can refer back up to the top of the post where the (oh hai) list of definitions is? Also, you took sentences from a paragraph. Context. Matters.
Your blatant problem with any links other than yours (namely anything that comes from the Eat, Train, Progess group) is really appalling and quite sad.
Go show it to any beginner. They won't get it much. The reason they would need to refer back to it is that they don't fully understand it. If it was for a more advanced member, i wouldn't have a problem with it. I don't have a problem with that group...
What we really need is some kind of graph with arbitrary #'s that will decide if you should or should not eat your calories back. 0 -
You should eat more on training days. Period. Not necessarily all of your calories should be eaten that you have earned but some. How else is your body going to build that muscle mass or shred that fat without the energy provided by food? You need food for all body function - including shredding fat.
Ah, more absolutes. Probably the easiest way to know who to ignore is when people talk in definites and absolutes.
I absolutely agree with you0 -
You should eat more on training days. Period. Not necessarily all of your calories should be eaten that you have earned but some. How else is your body going to build that muscle mass or shred that fat without the energy provided by food? You need food for all body function - including shredding fat.
Ah, more absolutes. Probably the easiest way to know who to ignore is when people talk in definites and absolutes.
I absolutely agree with you
You...I like you
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions