Why don't people use MFP to set their calorie goals?
Replies
-
stanmann571 wrote: »shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?
Look around at the forums. Every day there's 5 threads of new people asking how MFP arrived at their calorie goal. You put in your stats and MFP commands you only eat X amount, but doesn't explain why that is, what went into calculating that number, the fact that that number might not be right for everyone, why the number might change as you lose weight, how that number is linked to your activity level, how you should handle exercise with that... need I go on?
Everything is pretty well explained in the stickies...but people are lazy...
When I started years ago, I also took all of about 5-10 minutes fiddling around with various goals, including maintenance and within that 5-10 minutes the math was pretty clear.5 -
krystenmlee1 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »In five years here, I'd have to say that a whole lot of people are just generally clueless as to how this tool works and is designed to work...which I really don't understand because it seemed pretty straight forward to me.
Do You follow the macros or calories?
I haven't logged in years, but when I did I looked at both. I concerned myself first and foremost with calories as that is what is the most important for losing weight. I looked at my macros as something to be generally aware of in terms of nutrition and whatnot, but I never did a whole lot of hand wringing over them or tried to be perfect or anything.0 -
Of the 10 or so people o know in real life that use MFP, I'm the only one who goes to the forums.
I really don't think you should HAVE to read the forums to be setup for success. Luckily, I do.
I've actually got a project I'm working on for how I'd personally do the "getting started" that would lead people to smart achievable goals and would help them on how to use the tool.0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?
Look around at the forums. Every day there's 5 threads of new people asking how MFP arrived at their calorie goal. You put in your stats and MFP commands you only eat X amount, but doesn't explain why that is, what went into calculating that number, the fact that that number might not be right for everyone, why the number might change as you lose weight, how that number is linked to your activity level, how you should handle exercise with that... need I go on?
And if 5 people a day are asking that questions, there are a whole bunch more people who have that same question, but haven't found the forums to ask it.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »i think a bit of suspicion is a good thing when it comes to mfp recommendations. When I first started I was 250 and 5'6 and because i wanted to lose at a rate of 2 pounds a week it set me at 1200, which was really way to low for me. After reading forums and such in about 3 weeks I upped to 1400 and continued to lose at 2 pounds a week. The default for 1200 for 2 pounds regardless of size seems reckless.
It's not a default of 1,200 for 2 pounds regardless of size though. I'm not sure what happened in your case (sometimes there are bugs or whatever), but people do sometimes enter a goal of 2 pounds a week and get a calorie goal that is higher than 1,200.
yes 1200 for 250 and 5'6" seems weird because when I started I was 230lbs and I'm 5'3" and I got at least 1400 at sedentary1 -
Age is a factor. A woman at 250 and 5'6", born before 1964, will get 1200.eliciaobrien1 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »i think a bit of suspicion is a good thing when it comes to mfp recommendations. When I first started I was 250 and 5'6 and because i wanted to lose at a rate of 2 pounds a week it set me at 1200, which was really way to low for me. After reading forums and such in about 3 weeks I upped to 1400 and continued to lose at 2 pounds a week. The default for 1200 for 2 pounds regardless of size seems reckless.
It's not a default of 1,200 for 2 pounds regardless of size though. I'm not sure what happened in your case (sometimes there are bugs or whatever), but people do sometimes enter a goal of 2 pounds a week and get a calorie goal that is higher than 1,200.
yes 1200 for 250 and 5'6" seems weird because when I started I was 230lbs and I'm 5'3" and I got at least 1400 at sedentary3 -
Not trying to be snarky - but everyday I see multiple posts about "how do I ....
Oh, you get that everywhere these days. My favourites are the ones where someone posts on Facebook "can anyone tell me when (such a shop) is open", or asks for a phone number. You're using the internet right now to ask this question! Google it you idiot!!
12 -
Mfp can only guesstimate. They have different versions of the calculator that uses different numbers.. some give you lower BMR, some higher... There is the Milfon st Joel, the Harris Benedict, the Cunningham..and others.. and each calculator can give you differing results. One of them put me at 1900c.. most put me at around 2300 to 2400 (what mfp says) and another.. omg.. put me at 3200!!! I deleted that one. Apparently it was WAY OFF. And one put me at 1600 which is WAY OFF. Two extremes. To individualize each person there would have to be hundreds of variables considered. So they keep it simple.
I like the sail rabbit calculator.. it has options for below sedentary for those who aren't even THAT active. Sedentary assumes you walk at the very least a couple thousand steps. And the majority of us do. But our burns may be high or low depending on individual metabolic rates.
Here is the sail rabbit one. It puts me at 150 less than what mfp calculates for me, which I have found to be more accurate.
http://www.sailrabbit.com/bmr/2 -
stanmann571 wrote: »shaunshaikh wrote: »I don't think MyFitnessPal does a good enough job explaining the tool or how to set goals and what the goals mean. It's had this problem since 2011 when I joined.
It's a weight loss site, what part of goal setting and weight loss specifically confuses you?
Look around at the forums. Every day there's 5 threads of new people asking how MFP arrived at their calorie goal. You put in your stats and MFP commands you only eat X amount, but doesn't explain why that is, what went into calculating that number, the fact that that number might not be right for everyone, why the number might change as you lose weight, how that number is linked to your activity level, how you should handle exercise with that... need I go on?
So poor reading comprehension skills. Got it.5 -
I think dieting is a social thing for many people - the constant demand for support, accountability, inspiration and motivation can point to that. This can also explain why fad diets get so much traction; taking part in something difficult builds social identity. And many people want to lose weight to look better - to others. Maybe it just feels natural, or even necessary, to discuss weightloss/nutrition goals with someone?I know I got confused one day when I changed my goal to lose 0.5kg a week and my daily calorie allowance didn't change. Extra research showed that my calorie goal was the bottom of the allowed limit so I understood why it hadn't changed.
Maybe it's a case of people not understanding the information that's presented to them. Could be because it's unexpected or because they don't trust it. Maybe they trust the opinions of others more? Who knows.7 -
MFP has also been telling me for the past year almost everyday that I will be at my "goal weight" in 5 weeks if everyday were like today. Well needless to say I'm still not at my goal weight following what it recommends for my activity level. Yesturday I started IIFYM and was given a whole different set of numbers than MFP was giving me. I still haven't adjusted to the increase in calories and increase in carbs quite yet but only time will tell.2
-
2
-
Maybe they just like being the center of attention5
-
My guess is that they don't believe the numbers that mfp has given them. When I tell people what my calorie goal is for the day via mfp they tell me it's to high and that mfp always aims to high. I have been told this for years and buy several people. I was told today that I won't ever lose weight if I go by what mfp calculated.1
-
maiseybehrends wrote: »MFP has also been telling me for the past year almost everyday that I will be at my "goal weight" in 5 weeks if everyday were like today. Well needless to say I'm still not at my goal weight following what it recommends for my activity level. Yesturday I started IIFYM and was given a whole different set of numbers than MFP was giving me. I still haven't adjusted to the increase in calories and increase in carbs quite yet but only time will tell.
I'm confused--if eating at mfp's recommendations for a year hasn't gotten you to your goal weight yet, why do you think eating more is going to get you there sooner?4 -
My guess is that they don't believe the numbers that mfp has given them. When I tell people what my calorie goal is for the day via mfp they tell me it's to high and that mfp always aims to high. I have been told this for years and buy several people. I was told today that I won't ever lose weight if I go by what mfp calculated.
Even registered dietitians can give lower numbers than MFP. When I was diagnosed with diabetes four years ago I saw a RD at the hospital. (I didn't learn anything, my parents had been diabetic for decades and I did a lot of research online before going to see him, I'm fairly well educated, but seeing a pro never hurts to make sure you haven't learned woo) He wanted to put me on a 1700 calorie diet.
I'm ashamed to say I didn't follow his plan, or get back on here (I had an account) and gained 45 pounds, but MFP gave 2200 calories to start with, and now that I'm back at the weight I was four years ago I get 1910 calories, and that's a little low still, so I eat back all of my exercise calories.
1 -
maiseybehrends wrote: »MFP has also been telling me for the past year almost everyday that I will be at my "goal weight" in 5 weeks if everyday were like today. Well needless to say I'm still not at my goal weight following what it recommends for my activity level. Yesturday I started IIFYM and was given a whole different set of numbers than MFP was giving me. I still haven't adjusted to the increase in calories and increase in carbs quite yet but only time will tell.
@maiseybehrends
Of course the numbers are different - the two sites use different methods.
On here you add your exercise after you do it - on the IIFYM site an average daily amount is included already.
They also work out the calorie deficit differently - percentage versus weight loss per week.
Two suggestions:- Understand the tool you choose.
- Adjust your calorie goal based on actual results. This is the really important one!
9 -
kommodevaran wrote: »
Age is a factor. A woman at 250 and 5'6", born before 1964, will get 1200.eliciaobrien1 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »i think a bit of suspicion is a good thing when it comes to mfp recommendations. When I first started I was 250 and 5'6 and because i wanted to lose at a rate of 2 pounds a week it set me at 1200, which was really way to low for me. After reading forums and such in about 3 weeks I upped to 1400 and continued to lose at 2 pounds a week. The default for 1200 for 2 pounds regardless of size seems reckless.
It's not a default of 1,200 for 2 pounds regardless of size though. I'm not sure what happened in your case (sometimes there are bugs or whatever), but people do sometimes enter a goal of 2 pounds a week and get a calorie goal that is higher than 1,200.
yes 1200 for 250 and 5'6" seems weird because when I started I was 230lbs and I'm 5'3" and I got at least 1400 at sedentary
Right. Totally forgot about age for some reason.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »i think a bit of suspicion is a good thing when it comes to mfp recommendations. When I first started I was 250 and 5'6 and because i wanted to lose at a rate of 2 pounds a week it set me at 1200, which was really way to low for me. After reading forums and such in about 3 weeks I upped to 1400 and continued to lose at 2 pounds a week. The default for 1200 for 2 pounds regardless of size seems reckless.
It's not a default of 1,200 for 2 pounds regardless of size though. I'm not sure what happened in your case (sometimes there are bugs or whatever), but people do sometimes enter a goal of 2 pounds a week and get a calorie goal that is higher than 1,200.
Yes my husband gets to eat 2050 calories for instance.0 -
For a macro split0
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
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K 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
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions