Weight loss flow chart... 2.0!
Replies
-
diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
In French we have a term, "enculer les mouches" - to sodomize flies - it means to nitpick.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?0 -
I love this chart. Loved it when it was created and love it now. I have copied and pasted it many times. If it ain't broke don't fix it!0
-
midwesterner85 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?
White knighting the OP since the thread is 6 months old and past the point where it makes sense to give feedback, I suppose. Plus, every comment keeps the thread bumped so more newbies will see it.0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?
White knighting the OP since the thread is 6 months old and past the point where it makes sense to give feedback, I suppose. Plus, every comment keeps the thread bumped so more newbies will see it.
Yes, that is why I saw this thread for the first time today... because of a new comment. Good job on that - I am proof it works.
That the feedback provided has not been considered in 6 months does not make such feedback inappropriate nor incorrect, particularly on an issue that is not time sensitive. That part of your agenda is confusing.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?
Months ago.
That horse ran the race, died, gotten beaten about, made into glue and got used to make a sticky note.
0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »I'm not having a pity party about anything... could you clarify that comment?
Do you disagree about the definition of the word "some"? I'm honestly unclear about your point.
Most people who read flow charts don't just stop at one box. They actually... follow the flow.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?
The idea is clear to you, but not to everyone. I've suggested some ways to make it more clear to everyone.
It may be an old thread, but I saw it for the first time today because someone commented on it today.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?
The idea is clear to you, but not to everyone. I've suggested some ways to make it more clear to everyone.
It may be an old thread, but I saw it for the first time today because someone commented on it today.
Why not create your own.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »
Most people who read flow charts don't just stop at one box. They actually... follow the flow.
Until the end of the flow they followed. There are several possible ends, and the design of this flow chart could lead users who are eating back <25% of their exercise calories and not losing weight to the result that they should eat back more of their exercise calories. One user argued that is a good piece of advice. My suggestion was that it is an issue with reasonable differences in viewpoints (the opposite of that user's view is that an increase in calorie consumption doesn't always help one to lose weight) and is not useful to this flowchart as a result.0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?
The idea is clear to you, but not to everyone. I've suggested some ways to make it more clear to everyone.
It may be an old thread, but I saw it for the first time today because someone commented on it today.
Why not create your own.
It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure I have the graphic design skills or software. I believe this flowchart is mostly good, but it has some areas where it can improve. Rather than starting from scratch, why not improve upon an existing idea that already has a good start?0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?
The idea is clear to you, but not to everyone. I've suggested some ways to make it more clear to everyone.
It may be an old thread, but I saw it for the first time today because someone commented on it today.
Feel free to create your own helpful flow chart and share it. This one has been very helpful for lots of people.
0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?
The idea is clear to you, but not to everyone. I've suggested some ways to make it more clear to everyone.
It may be an old thread, but I saw it for the first time today because someone commented on it today.
Why not create your own.
It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure I have the graphic design skills or software. I believe this flowchart is mostly good, but it has some areas where it can improve. Rather than starting from scratch, why not improve upon an existing idea that already has a good start?
In that case I would recommend taking it up via PM with the OP, since they don't seem to be here anymore.0 -
HappyCampr1 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?
Listen Michael, give it up. Go have your pity party somewhere else.
I'm not having a pity party about anything... could you clarify that comment?
Do you disagree about the definition of the word "some"? I'm honestly unclear about your point.
Most people who read flow charts don't just stop at one box. They actually... follow the flow.
Until the end of the flow they followed. There are several possible ends, and the design of this flow chart could lead users who are eating back <25% of their exercise calories and not losing weight to the result that they should eat back more of their exercise calories. One user argued that is a good piece of advice. My suggestion was that it is an issue with reasonable differences in viewpoints (the opposite of that user's view is that an increase in calorie consumption doesn't always help one to lose weight) and is not useful to this flowchart as a result.
if you're referring to my post, I argued no such thing. I argued that if someone was eating less of their exercise than that, and still not losing weight, then the issue was most likely with their activity level setting, their logging or a medical issue. I did state that if someone takes care of the real cause of the stall then increasing the exercise calorie percent to 25% should be fine. That is not anywhere near advocating increasing calories for a stall.
"25% should be fine" sounds like a suggestion to increase caloric intake if one is currently eating back only 10%.0 -
HappyCampr1 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?
Listen Michael, give it up. Go have your pity party somewhere else.
I'm not having a pity party about anything... could you clarify that comment?
Do you disagree about the definition of the word "some"? I'm honestly unclear about your point.
Most people who read flow charts don't just stop at one box. They actually... follow the flow.
Until the end of the flow they followed. There are several possible ends, and the design of this flow chart could lead users who are eating back <25% of their exercise calories and not losing weight to the result that they should eat back more of their exercise calories. One user argued that is a good piece of advice. My suggestion was that it is an issue with reasonable differences in viewpoints (the opposite of that user's view is that an increase in calorie consumption doesn't always help one to lose weight) and is not useful to this flowchart as a result.
if you're referring to my post, I argued no such thing. I argued that if someone was eating less of their exercise than that, and still not losing weight, then the issue was most likely with their activity level setting, their logging or a medical issue. I did state that if someone takes care of the real cause of the stall then increasing the exercise calorie percent to 25% should be fine. That is not anywhere near advocating increasing calories for a stall.
"25% should be fine" sounds like a suggestion to increase caloric intake if one is currently eating back only 10%.
So now we're skipping all qualifying words and the rest of my sentence....ok. You win, I'm done. Can't discuss things with people who purposefully take things out of context just to argue.
I addressed the point about the medical issue already (the location in the flow chart prevents it from being addressed in that circumstance). If a user has reached this part of the flow chart, they have already dealt with potential food logging issues, so that would not be relevant to this particular opportunity for improvement in the flow chart. I've also suggested that activity level settings be included as it relates to logging exercise.
So I'm skipping the points you made that wouldn't relate to a user who is at this point in the flowchart, and I acknowledged the other issue earlier on. The only remaining issue is the 25% vs. <25% (my earlier hypothetical was 10%).0 -
0 -
YOU MAY BE OVERESTIMATING YOUR CALORIE BURNS kind of precludes the idea that a person is using less than the later mentioned 25% - 50%.
I weep for reading comprehension skills instruction.0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.
The OP asked for feedback and I'm providing requested feedback as well as clarification and discussion about that feedback. What is your agenda?
Months ago.
That horse ran the race, died, gotten beaten about, made into glue and got used to make a sticky note.
0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
I acknowledge nothing, and you're coming across as trolling.
Here's the chart:
The context of the whole thing is HELP, I'm not losing weight!
Read the box again.
"You may be overestimating calorie burns, etc..."
The context is clear to everyone except pot-stirrers. This is an old thread. Are you bored today?
The idea is clear to you, but not to everyone. I've suggested some ways to make it more clear to everyone.
It may be an old thread, but I saw it for the first time today because someone commented on it today.
Why not create your own.
It's an interesting idea, but I'm not sure I have the graphic design skills or software. I believe this flowchart is mostly good, but it has some areas where it can improve. Rather than starting from scratch, why not improve upon an existing idea that already has a good start?
Hello, I'm the OP. I haven't commented in a while, but I'm still on these threads fairly regularly. At this point I'm not willing to revise the flowchart any further, though anyone is more than welcome to use parts of mine to make their own if they feel it would be more helpful to people on these threads. Or, you can post my work and add your own clarifications below. For the record I don't have any graphic skills either, I just downloaded a free flowchart making program for this purpose
0 -
Resurge review proves that Resurge helps to burn fat quickly and improves your deep sleep.Resurge supplement, found by John Barban is the world’s first fat burning supplement that cures the exact cause of overweight and stubborn belly fat, It is much more than just a pill. To know more about
https://consumerscompanion.com/resurge-review/-2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 427 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