MFP Premium

Options
2

Replies

  • MorganMoreaux
    MorganMoreaux Posts: 691 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    psulemon wrote: »
    i wonder if you can set up iron goals by numbers and not percentages
    same with calcium
    not sure why MFP does these by percentages - not sure at all

    Vitamin A, C, iron and calcium are all percentages under premium.

    Should offer a trail to market it... I would at least, around January would be ideal ...

    Oh god ...January is coming

    *derpshield*

    Derpshield LMAO!!!
  • PikaKnight
    PikaKnight Posts: 34,971 Member
    Options
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    psulemon wrote: »
    auddii wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    There were discussions that it would sort verified entries differently, but I'm curious how effective the differences are. Like you've noticed, the "verified" means jack and many are just as bad if not worse than other entries.

    There are check marks next to MFP verified correct entries, but I thought everyone had that.

    Everyone does

    But verified means nothing .

    They should be removed

    There are so many bad entries in the database that have the big tick ..it's misleading at best, damaging to people's possible success at worst

    ^I agree. I've run into this issue a lot with "verified" foods being completely incorrect.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    PikaKnight wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    psulemon wrote: »
    auddii wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    There were discussions that it would sort verified entries differently, but I'm curious how effective the differences are. Like you've noticed, the "verified" means jack and many are just as bad if not worse than other entries.

    There are check marks next to MFP verified correct entries, but I thought everyone had that.

    Everyone does

    But verified means nothing .

    They should be removed

    There are so many bad entries in the database that have the big tick ..it's misleading at best, damaging to people's possible success at worst

    ^I agree. I've run into this issue a lot with "verified" foods being completely incorrect.

    What, you don't think "Chinese buffet - 1 plate" should be a verified food? Heathen.
    /sarcasm

    The asterisks/non-asterisks was such a better system than "verified" (I seriously can't even type that without a smirk).
  • purpleflux
    purpleflux Posts: 22 Member
    Options
    "Verified" just makes me think of celebrities on Twitter who really shouldn't be allowed access to the internet without supervision. Interestingly, the quality of their twitter content is often about as good as the accuracy of many verified foods on MFP.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Options
    Do the blogs work in Premium?
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,988 Member
    Options
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.

    Are the verified foods not system generated entries?

    I used to use the same wording as the nutritiondata site and found that those entries had a variety of measurments and all the correct info in it. Now I find they do not.
  • brower47
    brower47 Posts: 16,356 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    Does premium work or are just as many things broken? If just as many things are broken, then it would be a rip off.

    ETA: Ah, it looks like just as many things are broken. Definitely a rip off. "Here, pay for this thing we can't/won't fix." But hey, different things work for different companies. Good luck on selling broken stuff to your users, MFP!
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,988 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.

    Are the verified foods not system generated entries?

    I used to use the same wording as the nutritiondata site and found that those entries had a variety of measurments and all the correct info in it. Now I find they do not.

    Foods show as verified for two reasons:
    1. They are a system entry
    2. They are a user entry that had enough other users click on Nutrition Info and answer Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    Before I answer Yes, I verify every single category, but clearly others do not.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,988 Member
    Options
    I believe that with the exception of the kielbasa, these were all system entries:

    cf8e874d502b6f28ca44bd54f54fd173.png


  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.

    Are the verified foods not system generated entries?

    I used to use the same wording as the nutritiondata site and found that those entries had a variety of measurments and all the correct info in it. Now I find they do not.

    Foods show as verified for two reasons:
    1. They are a system entry
    2. They are a user entry that had enough other users click on Nutrition Info and answer Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    Before I answer Yes, I verify every single category, but clearly others do not.

    It's not user created entries I have an issue with. It's incorrect verified entries. I can't screen shot right now but look up butter, salted. 1 stick is over 8000 calories. There are a few others like that.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,988 Member
    Options
    I get 810 calories/stick.

    6cda52d0468afca8db671a9847e4e730.png
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,988 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.

    Are the verified foods not system generated entries?

    I used to use the same wording as the nutritiondata site and found that those entries had a variety of measurments and all the correct info in it. Now I find they do not.

    Foods show as verified for two reasons:
    1. They are a system entry
    2. They are a user entry that had enough other users click on Nutrition Info and answer Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    Before I answer Yes, I verify every single category, but clearly others do not.

    It's not user created entries I have an issue with. It's incorrect verified entries. I can't screen shot right now but look up butter, salted. 1 stick is over 8000 calories. There are a few others like that.

    User entries can also be Verified - enough other users clicked on Nutrition Info and answered Yes to the question Is this entry correct?
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.

    Are the verified foods not system generated entries?

    I used to use the same wording as the nutritiondata site and found that those entries had a variety of measurments and all the correct info in it. Now I find they do not.

    Foods show as verified for two reasons:
    1. They are a system entry
    2. They are a user entry that had enough other users click on Nutrition Info and answer Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    Before I answer Yes, I verify every single category, but clearly others do not.

    It's not user created entries I have an issue with. It's incorrect verified entries. I can't screen shot right now but look up butter, salted. 1 stick is over 8000 calories. There are a few others like that.

    User entries can also be Verified - enough other users clicked on Nutrition Info and answered Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    0adtrhj8accx.png

  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 17,959 Member
    Options
    A number of ignorant people clicking "yes" should not be enough to get a food immediately verified. It should then be kicked through to an employee checker who confirms. Some of the verified entries are an utter joke.

    For what Premium does (macros by gram, calorie cycling) it's worth a one off payment, certainly not an ongoing subscription fee as high as it is. It's a total rip off. The premium content is a joke, the database and forums are the same as free etc etc.
  • TheBeachgod
    TheBeachgod Posts: 825 Member
    Options
    The free version has worked fine for me so I don't see why I should go premium. What'll it do, make me lose weight faster?
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,988 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    Is the database better on the premium side? I just started logging again. I used to love MFP but the database is horrific right now. I'm not talking about multiple entries for the same thing or incomplete/incorrect entries, that's always been around for as long as I've been here but the liquid measurements for solid food items and the glitch where it goes back to the default measurement and the crazy verified food entries (like 8000 calorie stick of butter, verified).

    Since I do a lot of cooking from scratch, most things I use I can find in system-generated entries, and those are pretty easy to differentiate from user-created entries because their syntax is fairly predictable. I verify user-created entries against the package and correct when wrong.

    Are the verified foods not system generated entries?

    I used to use the same wording as the nutritiondata site and found that those entries had a variety of measurments and all the correct info in it. Now I find they do not.

    Foods show as verified for two reasons:
    1. They are a system entry
    2. They are a user entry that had enough other users click on Nutrition Info and answer Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    Before I answer Yes, I verify every single category, but clearly others do not.

    It's not user created entries I have an issue with. It's incorrect verified entries. I can't screen shot right now but look up butter, salted. 1 stick is over 8000 calories. There are a few others like that.

    User entries can also be Verified - enough other users clicked on Nutrition Info and answered Yes to the question Is this entry correct?

    0adtrhj8accx.png

    Would you look at that. That does seem to be a system entry. I've been using the old entry.

    Well, if everyone clicks on No to the question Is this entry correct?, hopefully this will get called to someone's attention.
  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 17,959 Member
    Options
    Can a user verify an entry more than once? It might explain some of these whacky verified foods, if people are 'trolling' the database by adding a completely wrong food then verifying it a bunch.
  • Bob314159
    Bob314159 Posts: 1,178 Member
    Options
    That's my reason for paying - no other perks are provided and I still have access to a dumb forum system and unreliable food base.
    psulemon wrote: »
    I like it because of being able to set up the account by grams and not percentages and some of the reporting is pretty cool.

  • Mo__Mo
    Mo__Mo Posts: 14 Member
    Options
    I like that I can set by macros by gram and not percentage. I like that I can choose to have exercise not alter those numbers. What I don't get is why, if I choose not to add exercise calories back in, then those are not counted in my "If every day was like today" estimate. I get that it was easier to code that way, just take the leftover calories, and not check whether there are also exercise calories, but it renders one of my favorite features, that 5 week number, useless.