Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Meat Eater, Vegetarian or Vegan?
Replies
-
vivmom2014 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »*Eating* animal products isn't an ethical decision, in my opinion. I'm not sure who you are responding to who said that, so I'll save space for them to respond.
Avoiding animal exploitation *is* an ethical decision. So eating an egg is a ethically neutral act. Treating a chicken as if they are simply a means to an end, a way to get an egg that can be slaughtered when it can no longer meet a human desire, that's what I object to. Due to economic reasons, there are very few ways to obtain eggs that don't support treating chickens in a way that I object to.
If chickens were treated as if they were more than means to an end, veganism (as it relates to chickens) wouldn't be an issue. If cows were treated as if they were more than means to an end, veganism (as it relates to cows) wouldn't be an issue. Veganism is a response to animal exploitation. This exploitation exists even outside of factory farming (as you sharing the common practice of small farms -- and your practice -- of killing "spent" hens. Animal exploitation goes beyond factory farming. Even small farms and hobbyists support hatcheries that cull male chicks. Even small farms and hobbyists slaughter animals. Veganism isn't just a response to factory farming.
If you're using to thinking of chickens as a way to get eggs (or chicken meat) or of cows as a way to get milk (or beef), this is probably an weird way of thinking of it. It may seem like animal mistreatment is limited to what happens on factory farms. But to a vegan, even "kinder" methods of getting animal products to the table create more suffering than we wish to support.
Eating the egg itself? That's not what is objected to. But that act doesn't exist in a vacuum. We're looking at what is supported by that decision, what other acts become economically or logistically necessary when many people in society wish to eat eggs.
Thanks for this informative reply. I'm wondering: do vegans support euthanasia in an old, ill family pet?
{may be wildly off topic, but Jane if you have a moment to answer I'd appreciate it. thanks.}
I don't think there is a universal vegan answer, but I know of many vegans who have chosen euthanasia to reduce suffering for their companion animals. If I was in that situation, I would choose it myself. I don't think there is any value in prolonging life -- in and of itself -- when suffering is going on and recovery isn't possible. In context, if I was in that situation and couldn't make the decision, I would want someone to make that decision for me too.
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »vivmom2014 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »*Eating* animal products isn't an ethical decision, in my opinion. I'm not sure who you are responding to who said that, so I'll save space for them to respond.
Avoiding animal exploitation *is* an ethical decision. So eating an egg is a ethically neutral act. Treating a chicken as if they are simply a means to an end, a way to get an egg that can be slaughtered when it can no longer meet a human desire, that's what I object to. Due to economic reasons, there are very few ways to obtain eggs that don't support treating chickens in a way that I object to.
If chickens were treated as if they were more than means to an end, veganism (as it relates to chickens) wouldn't be an issue. If cows were treated as if they were more than means to an end, veganism (as it relates to cows) wouldn't be an issue. Veganism is a response to animal exploitation. This exploitation exists even outside of factory farming (as you sharing the common practice of small farms -- and your practice -- of killing "spent" hens. Animal exploitation goes beyond factory farming. Even small farms and hobbyists support hatcheries that cull male chicks. Even small farms and hobbyists slaughter animals. Veganism isn't just a response to factory farming.
If you're using to thinking of chickens as a way to get eggs (or chicken meat) or of cows as a way to get milk (or beef), this is probably an weird way of thinking of it. It may seem like animal mistreatment is limited to what happens on factory farms. But to a vegan, even "kinder" methods of getting animal products to the table create more suffering than we wish to support.
Eating the egg itself? That's not what is objected to. But that act doesn't exist in a vacuum. We're looking at what is supported by that decision, what other acts become economically or logistically necessary when many people in society wish to eat eggs.
Thanks for this informative reply. I'm wondering: do vegans support euthanasia in an old, ill family pet?
{may be wildly off topic, but Jane if you have a moment to answer I'd appreciate it. thanks.}
I don't think there is a universal vegan answer, but I know of many vegans who have chosen euthanasia to reduce suffering for their companion animals. If I was in that situation, I would choose it myself. I don't think there is any value in prolonging life -- in and of itself -- when suffering is going on and recovery isn't possible. In context, if I was in that situation and couldn't make the decision, I would want someone to make that decision for me too.
Thanks.
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »vivmom2014 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »*Eating* animal products isn't an ethical decision, in my opinion. I'm not sure who you are responding to who said that, so I'll save space for them to respond.
Avoiding animal exploitation *is* an ethical decision. So eating an egg is a ethically neutral act. Treating a chicken as if they are simply a means to an end, a way to get an egg that can be slaughtered when it can no longer meet a human desire, that's what I object to. Due to economic reasons, there are very few ways to obtain eggs that don't support treating chickens in a way that I object to.
If chickens were treated as if they were more than means to an end, veganism (as it relates to chickens) wouldn't be an issue. If cows were treated as if they were more than means to an end, veganism (as it relates to cows) wouldn't be an issue. Veganism is a response to animal exploitation. This exploitation exists even outside of factory farming (as you sharing the common practice of small farms -- and your practice -- of killing "spent" hens. Animal exploitation goes beyond factory farming. Even small farms and hobbyists support hatcheries that cull male chicks. Even small farms and hobbyists slaughter animals. Veganism isn't just a response to factory farming.
If you're using to thinking of chickens as a way to get eggs (or chicken meat) or of cows as a way to get milk (or beef), this is probably an weird way of thinking of it. It may seem like animal mistreatment is limited to what happens on factory farms. But to a vegan, even "kinder" methods of getting animal products to the table create more suffering than we wish to support.
Eating the egg itself? That's not what is objected to. But that act doesn't exist in a vacuum. We're looking at what is supported by that decision, what other acts become economically or logistically necessary when many people in society wish to eat eggs.
Thanks for this informative reply. I'm wondering: do vegans support euthanasia in an old, ill family pet?
{may be wildly off topic, but Jane if you have a moment to answer I'd appreciate it. thanks.}
I don't think there is a universal vegan answer, but I know of many vegans who have chosen euthanasia to reduce suffering for their companion animals. If I was in that situation, I would choose it myself. I don't think there is any value in prolonging life -- in and of itself -- when suffering is going on and recovery isn't possible. In context, if I was in that situation and couldn't make the decision, I would want someone to make that decision for me too.
I agree with @janejellyroll here. I would choose euthanasia for me, my furry family members, etc if they were in a position of suffering and could not possibly recover, and could not make the choice for themselves. I've been put in a position to make this decision for a close human family member, and knowing the suffering and the cost of continuing life, from my perspective, allowing dignity through ending is the more humane and ethical choice.
Not everyone will agree with me on that, but that's fine. We all come to our reasons differently and interpret our ethics through our own filters. Sometimes what seems clear cut, is not always so, and it's reasons like that which cause me to lurk on threads like these. I prefer to see how others rationalize or come to their decisions and how it impacts them.
We've all lived very different lives, that shape us differently. I think a common thread that has been expressed in many of the responses here is an overall feeling of care and concern, but it tends to be applied differently by different people.
Reasoning is interesting.0 -
What I expected to be a dumpster fire turned into an interesting and thougtful discussion. One of the things that always gets me with the arguments on this subject is that they will always necessitate the drawing of somewhat arbitrary lines. It's common, for example, to grant moral rights to "persons," but defining "persons" can be a very challenging exercise. In contemporary western society we apply that term to all of humanity regardless of the ability to reason and act in a moral way (or, as in the past and horrifically, additionally race and gender). Some view that as over- and under-inclusive because it is possible to to envision a non-human animal with the ability to reason and act morally (and some have presented evidence that these animals do exist) while it is clear that some humans do not have such an ability (someone in a vegetative state, for example, and those with other less, but still severe, mental disabilities). For many of us, the difficulty with not including all of humanity was more than adequately highlighted throughout the 20th Century, so it seems we have settled on that as at least the minimum set of "persons." Many argue that (i) we need to expand that set to include all living creatures or at least all animals regardless of such beings' ability to reason or act in a moral manner, or (ii) how we treat non-human sentient beings is a reflection of who we are and that is enough to necessitate treating such beings in an ethical manner (in other words, in both cases, even defining the set of "persons" is not an adequate determination of who should have rights). In the end, there is bound to be a bit of disagreement on this subject. It's nice to see people being thoughtful about it all. Like ethics in general and much of philosophy, it's a challenging subject. So much so that this short paragraph jumps all over the subject, and I'm sure someone will (rightfully) tear it apart. I wish I still felt like I knew any of the answers.1
-
A balanced vegan diet is the best diet. Why?
1. Cardiovascular disease and heart attacks and coronary artery disease rates are RIDICULOUSLY LOW in VEGANS
2. Increased longevity (6-10 years longer
3. High fiber= less constipation
4. ONLY sustainable diet w/ growing population and pollution
5. Conserves 600 gallons of water a DAY
6. Prevents animal TORTURE and abuse (Would you torture & kill your dog? No? Guess what, pigs are shown to be just as smart and social as dogs.)
7. Clear arteries=increased bloodflow= better SEXUAL PERFORMANCE
8. Helps prevent cancer bc green leafy vegetables = alkaline body= unfavorable to cancerous tumors
9. Lowers blood pressure and cholesterol
Most of all- delicious!! Encourages creativity with food and experimentation
Hmu if you want to learn more or watch Forks Over Knives and Earthlings (documentaries)0 -
There's a stunningly long list of omnivorous octogenarians too.0
-
Regarding #3, not everyone struggles with constipation. Some people struggle with the flip side of that, and in some cases a high fiber diet can make digestive symptoms worse. As for #8, it's certainly possible to eat multiple servings of green leafy vegetables while eating an omnivorous diet.aadtamhankar wrote: »A balanced vegan diet is the best diet. Why?
1. Cardiovascular disease and heart attacks and coronary artery disease rates are RIDICULOUSLY LOW in VEGANS
2. Increased longevity (6-10 years longer
3. High fiber= less constipation
4. ONLY sustainable diet w/ growing population and pollution
5. Conserves 600 gallons of water a DAY
6. Prevents animal TORTURE and abuse (Would you torture & kill your dog? No? Guess what, pigs are shown to be just as smart and social as dogs.)
7. Clear arteries=increased bloodflow= better SEXUAL PERFORMANCE
8. Helps prevent cancer bc green leafy vegetables = alkaline body= unfavorable to cancerous tumors
9. Lowers blood pressure and cholesterol
Most of all- delicious!! Encourages creativity with food and experimentation
Hmu if you want to learn more or watch Forks Over Knives and Earthlings (documentaries)
0 -
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Regarding #3, not everyone struggles with constipation. Some people struggle with the flip side of that, and in some cases a high fiber diet can make digestive symptoms worse. As for #8, it's certainly possible to eat multiple servings of green leafy vegetables while eating an omnivorous diet.aadtamhankar wrote: »A balanced vegan diet is the best diet. Why?
1. Cardiovascular disease and heart attacks and coronary artery disease rates are RIDICULOUSLY LOW in VEGANS
2. Increased longevity (6-10 years longer
3. High fiber= less constipation
4. ONLY sustainable diet w/ growing population and pollution
5. Conserves 600 gallons of water a DAY
6. Prevents animal TORTURE and abuse (Would you torture & kill your dog? No? Guess what, pigs are shown to be just as smart and social as dogs.)
7. Clear arteries=increased bloodflow= better SEXUAL PERFORMANCE
8. Helps prevent cancer bc green leafy vegetables = alkaline body= unfavorable to cancerous tumors
9. Lowers blood pressure and cholesterol
Most of all- delicious!! Encourages creativity with food and experimentation
Hmu if you want to learn more or watch Forks Over Knives and Earthlings (documentaries)
It's true that not every omnivore suffers from it, but just go to the nearest pharmacy and you'll see an abundance of suppositories and laxatives. Companies won't make them if people aren't buying them. It's true that it does take the body some time to adjust to a high fiber diet from a low fiber omnivorous diet. In the long run, high fiber is better.
People can certainly include great leafy vegetables in an omnivorous diet, but the alkaline effealct is negated bc meat and dairy make the body acidic which promotes cancer growth.
0 -
aadtamhankar wrote: »
You're doing a diservice to veganism. I'm definitely not a vegan, but the garbage you're posting isn't helping your cause. You might want to actually read through the thread first, or any one of the hundreds of threads that have been posted on here. The alkaline body, Forks over Knives, generalizations based on comparisons to average diets, etc. have been done to death.0 -
-
Not everyone can eat high fiber. My body can't handle it so I am on a low residue, low fiber diet.0
-
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »
You're doing a diservice to veganism. I'm definitely not a vegan, but the garbage you're posting isn't helping your cause. You might want to actually read through the thread first, or any one of the hundreds of threads that have been posted on here. The alkaline body, Forks over Knives, generalizations based on comparisons to average diets, etc. have been done to death.
I don't believe I am doing a disservice to it at all. I am not attacking anyone, and I am new to this app, but I did not see the benefits presented in a clear list when browsing so I decided to make one. Had it been done before? Probably, but it never hurts to reiterate
0 -
aadtamhankar wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »
You're doing a diservice to veganism. I'm definitely not a vegan, but the garbage you're posting isn't helping your cause. You might want to actually read through the thread first, or any one of the hundreds of threads that have been posted on here. The alkaline body, Forks over Knives, generalizations based on comparisons to average diets, etc. have been done to death.
I don't believe I am doing a disservice to it at all. I am not attacking anyone, and I am new to this app, but I did not see the benefits presented in a clear list when browsing so I decided to make one. Had it been done before? Probably, but it never hurts to reiterate
Knock yourself out. It's like me arguing with Creflow Dollar about harming Christianity . . .0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.0 -
Meat eater, though I wish my body did better with grains than it does with chicken breasts and fish. And eggs.0
-
singingflutelady wrote: »Not everyone can eat high fiber. My body can't handle it so I am on a low residue, low fiber diet.
There are always exceptions You have to find what works best for you. 0 -
aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
You do know that is a little misleading. All they are saying is that it increases your risk from 5% to 6% of getting colorectal cancer if you eat 2 slices of bacon A DAY. I'm on a class 1 drug that only raises my risk by less than 1%. Neither of those are significant1 -
singingflutelady wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
You do know that is a little misleading. All they are saying is that it increases your risk from 5% to 6% of getting colorectal cancer if you eat 2 slices of bacon A DAY. I'm on a class 1 drug that only raises my risk by less than 1%
Thank you for clarifying that.
But the carcinogenic aspect is not the only thing problematic about Bacon. 68% of Bacon's calories come from fat, half of that is saturated. Also, one ounce contains 30mg of cholesterol. 4-5 slices will put you at almost half your daily sodium intake. Processed meat in general is linked to lower sperm counts.
0 -
briegirl28 wrote: »Meat eater, though I wish my body did better with grains than it does with chicken breasts and fish. And eggs.
Transitioning to a vegan diet can certainly be tough on the body if it is used to eating meat. Idk the extent of your education on veganism, but maybe try being vegetarian first and see how your body handles it?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
Everyone should do their research, however documentaries do not accomplish that goal. Documentaries are biased art that proceed to convince you of their argument by skewing the data. So, yes...do your research.
Any diet can be healthy. Any diet can be unhealthy.
I just recommend documentaries bc they present a lot of info with less effort on the part of the viewer. Not everyone has the time to read abstracts on Pubmed, though this is probably ideal.
I have to disagree with you that every diet can be healthy. A diet of processed meat and sugary donuts really can't be healthy. In fact the obesity rares in this country show that the majority of Americans don't eat a healthy diet.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Yes, but you did not specify that in your previous post. As she pointed out, a lot of people do not eat a nutritious diet as it is. I'm sure there are enough people out there that start off with donuts/pastries/cereal at breakfast, followed by fast food (burgers, sandwiches) at lunch, and then more restaurant food (like steak, more burgers, etc.) at dinner. I'm reasonably certain that the average person (especially in the U.S.) is not chowing down on a balanced, varied diet.aadtamhankar wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
Everyone should do their research, however documentaries do not accomplish that goal. Documentaries are biased art that proceed to convince you of their argument by skewing the data. So, yes...do your research.
Any diet can be healthy. Any diet can be unhealthy.
I just recommend documentaries bc they present a lot of info with less effort on the part of the viewer. Not everyone has the time to read abstracts on Pubmed, though this is probably ideal.
I have to disagree with you that every diet can be healthy. A diet of processed meat and sugary donuts really can't be healthy. In fact the obesity rares in this country show that the majority of Americans don't eat a healthy diet.
Nice straw man. A diet that is varied and also includes processed meat and sugar donuts can be healthy.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I don't like to eat meat for ethical reasons, so I usually don't (I'm human, though, and I am still an emotional eater). But I find my body feels better when I eat plant-based. Meat and sugar tend to make me crave more meat and sugar and I end up way over-eating food that makes my body feel sluggish. I can eat more food and feel full without feeling heavy or having taken in a ton of calories when I eat plant-based. I just always try to make sure I'm getting the nutrients I need, and it helps when most everything you eat is full of nutrients. If you don't eat a variety of plant-based foods, a vegan diet won't be healthy because you won't get the nutrition you need. But I think that can go for any kind of diet. And I definitely don't think one thing works for everyone.0
-
aadtamhankar wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »A balanced vegan diet is the best diet. Why?
1. Cardiovascular disease and heart attacks and coronary artery disease rates are RIDICULOUSLY LOW in VEGANS
2. Increased longevity (6-10 years longer
3. High fiber= less constipation
4. ONLY sustainable diet w/ growing population and pollution
5. Conserves 600 gallons of water a DAY
6. Prevents animal TORTURE and abuse (Would you torture & kill your dog? No? Guess what, pigs are shown to be just as smart and social as dogs.)
7. Clear arteries=increased bloodflow= better SEXUAL PERFORMANCE
8. Helps prevent cancer bc green leafy vegetables = alkaline body= unfavorable to cancerous tumors
9. Lowers blood pressure and cholesterol
Most of all- delicious!! Encourages creativity with food and experimentation
Hmu if you want to learn more or watch Forks Over Knives and Earthlings (documentaries)
#3-Medication side effects cause constipation too. It's not all to be blamed on a diet.
As an omnivore I can still achieve (and do achieve) all of those things listed.
I'd love some sources for these claims, especially #8, which smacks of nonsense. Documentaries like Forks over Knives is hardley a reliable source-it's one sided to make the argument in favor of it's cause.0 -
aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
There are some people that support the earth being flat, even some that have PhD's in scientific fields. Does that mean you don't dismiss flat earth theory either? That's pretty much the equivalent of how much alkaline body "theory" makes sense in terms of what the main body of biology and chemistry know about mammalian physiology. Failure to understand that diminishes your reputation for making further claims and strengthens the view that your claims are informed by the goal of promoting veganism rather than a concern for the truth.
FYI, the sun is a class 1 carcinogen, has been for a while. You'll also get rickets if you either don't expose yourself to it, or follow a proper supplementation.0 -
aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
You do know that is a little misleading. All they are saying is that it increases your risk from 5% to 6% of getting colorectal cancer if you eat 2 slices of bacon A DAY. I'm on a class 1 drug that only raises my risk by less than 1%
Thank you for clarifying that.
But the carcinogenic aspect is not the only thing problematic about Bacon. 68% of Bacon's calories come from fat, half of that is saturated. Also, one ounce contains 30mg of cholesterol. 4-5 slices will put you at almost half your daily sodium intake. Processed meat in general is linked to lower sperm counts.
Vegetarian diets are linked to lower testosterone. So long as we're throwing random facts out there.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Yes, but you did not specify that in your previous post. As she pointed out, a lot of people do not eat a nutritious diet as it is. I'm sure there are enough people out there that start off with donuts/pastries/cereal at breakfast, followed by fast food (burgers, sandwiches) at lunch, and then more restaurant food (like steak, more burgers, etc.) at dinner. I'm reasonably certain that the average person (especially in the U.S.) is not chowing down on a balanced, varied diet.aadtamhankar wrote: »aadtamhankar wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »
I appreciate the picture
Everyone should definitely do their own research way, hence I recommended the documentaries. And I agree that the acidic body is still being researched, but I'm hesitant to completely dismiss it bc there are some doctors who support it.
Although the cancer link is pretty undisputed, especially regarding red and processed meat. Bacon is a class 1 carcinogen now.
Everyone should do their research, however documentaries do not accomplish that goal. Documentaries are biased art that proceed to convince you of their argument by skewing the data. So, yes...do your research.
Any diet can be healthy. Any diet can be unhealthy.
I just recommend documentaries bc they present a lot of info with less effort on the part of the viewer. Not everyone has the time to read abstracts on Pubmed, though this is probably ideal.
I have to disagree with you that every diet can be healthy. A diet of processed meat and sugary donuts really can't be healthy. In fact the obesity rares in this country show that the majority of Americans don't eat a healthy diet.
Nice straw man. A diet that is varied and also includes processed meat and sugar donuts can be healthy.
It's pretty obvious that she was using diet in the broader sense, considering that this thread is *specifically* on vegan, vegetarian, and ominvorous diets. Why would she even have to caveat, "I am not talking about Cooter McGillicutty's Funyuns and grape drink diet"? It is a moot point anyway, because all three diets can encompass donuts, Funyuns* and grape drink, candy, and many other obesity-inducing foods. She called him out an a strawman logical fallacy, now I'm calling you out on a red herring logical fallacy. The bad eating habits of the average person are not relevant to the overall ideal of the three diets under discussion.
*Edit to note: Funyuns are not actually vegan, as they apparently contain some kind of cow product for that fun taste. However, I like the way it sounds so I will leave it there for rhetorical purposes, and vegans are invited to replace them with Doritos, Lays, Sour Patch Kids, or Pringles.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