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.
which is the best diet for overall health and weight loss
Replies
-
I would agree that those pushing LCHF as a healthy way to eat often promote eating lots of veg, whole foods, higher quality meats, and other things I'd agree with, but of course you don't have to do LCHF like that, and I think it's in conflict with some of the more popular sites that seem to push doing less than 20 g carbs or the idea that always lower (less than 20 g total) is better. As well as some people (Jimmy Moore springs to mind) who actually recommend keeping protein on what I'd consider the lower end.
Bigger point -- since we agree that LFHC can be done very healthfully and may be an easier or more sustainable way to eat for some, but not others (since that matters) -- is that if you are comparing I think you should compare diets where people are trying to eat healthfully. I'd say a diet where you aren't watching carbs but ARE trying to eat healthfully WOULD include veg at most meals on average (unless you were someone with a pattern where you just ate a ton of veg at one meal or included them as snacks). For some people, maybe making those healthier choices are easier when doing very low carb, since they are limiting their options and would still want some variety. I have never found it hard to include veg when eating at any carb level, so for me that seems odd, but I get that for some that may happen, I still think it's wrong to claim LCHF is more of a vegetable-oriented diet. I'd instead say that any healthy pattern of eating will prioritize vegetables, and LCHF can do this, as other diets can too.1 -
In general I agree. Everything apart from your disagreement of me claiming that LCHF is more of a vegetable-oriented diet. All I am claiming is that the carb aspect of the diet tends to be more veg oriented and that is only a claim based on my own personal experience and other low carb forums and sites I follow. I cannot speak for the millions of other people that find success on a LCHF diet model.0
-
Irishman1970 wrote: »Bottom line people the sugar industry has paid the right people to convince you fat is bad - why - because there is ALOT of money to be made form producing sugar - but like I said feel free to fill your diet with sugar all you want
Did you watch Sugarcoated?0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Regular meat is going to miss quite some nutrients. Unless you can afford and eat multiple pounds of sirloin a day.
http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/beef-products/3794/2
As I am not advocating eating just meat as a diet, my question was:
Could I get optimal micro nutrients from 40 - 100g of fruit or veg?
Fruits and vegetables have varying amounts of micronutrients, but if you take broccoli (often recognized as nutrient-rich) as an example, no. You wouldn't get "optimal" micronutrients from 100 grams of broccoli. The context of the rest of the diet would be important, but if you're counting on 100 grams of broccoli to give you what you need, you're going to be in trouble.
100g of broccoli is 7g of cArbs! Could I get my micro nutritional requirements from the 33 - 93g of carbs from other fruit and veg ?
Are you asking about eating 40 -100 grams of carbohydrates per day? Because your question was about eating 40-100 grams of fruit or vegetables.
Sorry I wasn’t literal enough.40. - 100g of carbs ( general range for LCHF) from fruit and veg .
You asked about 40-100 g of vegetables/fruits, that's not just a matter of not being "literal" enough; you apparently meant something entirely different from what you said.
My view is that sure, if someone wanted to, they could get sufficient fruit/veg (it would be mostly veg) on 40-100 g net carbs, although it would likely require a bit more attention than eating a nutrition focused but less low carb diet. There's nothing wrong with that; a vegan diet requires more attention (and some supplementation) to meet all nutrients, and yet can be as healthy as any diet.
I found myself cutting back on vegetables/worried about type of veg, and not really able to get in fruit (I did eat some nuts and some greek yogurt, which added carbs, both of which I think are healthy and the nuts I consider important), when eating around 35 g net carbs/60-65 g total carbs, and I think my diet was healthy and more than adequate for micronutrients, although I don't like the idea of avoiding fruit to the extent I had to. IMO, there are more benefits from foods such as fruits and veg and other whole foods that tend to be eaten in most blue zone diets and seem to correlate with positive effects than we have actually identified. The UK's recent promotion of 10+ servings of veg/fruit is based on such correlations, although I'd agree that it could be due to other causes (the types of people who eat such diets would have other good habits, the produce would displace other foods).
That aside, IMO, you can get enough veg on a keto diet if you make an effort and use most of your carbs for veg and don't feel compelled to cut carbs as low as is sometimes promoted (20 g total carbs, or even 40 g total carbs isn't something I'd be comfortable with).
It was off the back of a conversation about low carb not allowing for optimal nutrition.
I think it a little disingenuous to suggest that you thought I was talking only 7g of carbs, but hey MFP has been like that for years.
I doubt most on a SAD diet get 40 - 100g (of carbs) from fruit and veg.
How was it disingenuous for people to think you meant what you actually typed?14 -
janejellyroll wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »Regular meat is going to miss quite some nutrients. Unless you can afford and eat multiple pounds of sirloin a day.
http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/beef-products/3794/2
As I am not advocating eating just meat as a diet, my question was:
Could I get optimal micro nutrients from 40 - 100g of fruit or veg?
Fruits and vegetables have varying amounts of micronutrients, but if you take broccoli (often recognized as nutrient-rich) as an example, no. You wouldn't get "optimal" micronutrients from 100 grams of broccoli. The context of the rest of the diet would be important, but if you're counting on 100 grams of broccoli to give you what you need, you're going to be in trouble.
100g of broccoli is 7g of cArbs! Could I get my micro nutritional requirements from the 33 - 93g of carbs from other fruit and veg ?
Are you asking about eating 40 -100 grams of carbohydrates per day? Because your question was about eating 40-100 grams of fruit or vegetables.
Sorry I wasn’t literal enough.40. - 100g of carbs ( general range for LCHF) from fruit and veg .
You asked about 40-100 g of vegetables/fruits, that's not just a matter of not being "literal" enough; you apparently meant something entirely different from what you said.
My view is that sure, if someone wanted to, they could get sufficient fruit/veg (it would be mostly veg) on 40-100 g net carbs, although it would likely require a bit more attention than eating a nutrition focused but less low carb diet. There's nothing wrong with that; a vegan diet requires more attention (and some supplementation) to meet all nutrients, and yet can be as healthy as any diet.
I found myself cutting back on vegetables/worried about type of veg, and not really able to get in fruit (I did eat some nuts and some greek yogurt, which added carbs, both of which I think are healthy and the nuts I consider important), when eating around 35 g net carbs/60-65 g total carbs, and I think my diet was healthy and more than adequate for micronutrients, although I don't like the idea of avoiding fruit to the extent I had to. IMO, there are more benefits from foods such as fruits and veg and other whole foods that tend to be eaten in most blue zone diets and seem to correlate with positive effects than we have actually identified. The UK's recent promotion of 10+ servings of veg/fruit is based on such correlations, although I'd agree that it could be due to other causes (the types of people who eat such diets would have other good habits, the produce would displace other foods).
That aside, IMO, you can get enough veg on a keto diet if you make an effort and use most of your carbs for veg and don't feel compelled to cut carbs as low as is sometimes promoted (20 g total carbs, or even 40 g total carbs isn't something I'd be comfortable with).
It was off the back of a conversation about low carb not allowing for optimal nutrition.
I think it a little disingenuous to suggest that you thought I was talking only 7g of carbs, but hey MFP has been like that for years.
I doubt most on a SAD diet get 40 - 100g (of carbs) from fruit and veg.
How was it disingenuous for people to think you meant what you actually typed?
12 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »In general I agree. Everything apart from your disagreement of me claiming that LCHF is more of a vegetable-oriented diet. All I am claiming is that the carb aspect of the diet tends to be more veg oriented and that is only a claim based on my own personal experience and other low carb forums and sites I follow. I cannot speak for the millions of other people that find success on a LCHF diet model.
I think you are right in that most low carbers tend to use vegetables as their main carb source. If one tries to keep refined carbs in the diet, your portion sizes decrease dramatically, not to mention fibre decreases.
Some make LCHF a plant oriented diet, and I agree that it is not all of us. I would say just as many make their diet animal based, with the same health benefits as plant based.1 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »In general I agree. Everything apart from your disagreement of me claiming that LCHF is more of a vegetable-oriented diet. All I am claiming is that the carb aspect of the diet tends to be more veg oriented and that is only a claim based on my own personal experience and other low carb forums and sites I follow. I cannot speak for the millions of other people that find success on a LCHF diet model.
I think you are right in that most low carbers tend to use vegetables as their main carb source. If one tries to keep refined carbs in the diet, your portion sizes decrease dramatically, not to mention fibre decreases.
Some make LCHF a plant oriented diet, and I agree that it is not all of us. I would say just as many make their diet animal based, with the same health benefits as plant based.
Agreed, I’m animal based all the way.
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »In general I agree. Everything apart from your disagreement of me claiming that LCHF is more of a vegetable-oriented diet. All I am claiming is that the carb aspect of the diet tends to be more veg oriented and that is only a claim based on my own personal experience and other low carb forums and sites I follow. I cannot speak for the millions of other people that find success on a LCHF diet model.
I think you are right in that most low carbers tend to use vegetables as their main carb source. If one tries to keep refined carbs in the diet, your portion sizes decrease dramatically, not to mention fibre decreases.
Some make LCHF a plant oriented diet, and I agree that it is not all of us. I would say just as many make their diet animal based, with the same health benefits as plant based.
Agreed, I’m animal based all the way.
"Plant based diet" seems to be the buzz phrase lately. It has that same superior feel to it (for me) that some say they feel when people discuss clean eating or paleo or whatever.
I feel that when some say plant based diet, that it is implied to be the healthiest or ideal diet. Almost like a pat on the back is expected (again, just my perception).
I'm not saying that a plant based diet can't be healthy, or that it does not correlate with good nutrition in some healthy cultures, but I dislike the trend towards encouraging more plants and less animal products for everyone... The thinking behind that food pyramid from the 90s just won't die.
For some reason it is still implied that plant based nutrition trumps animal based nutrition at all times.
0 -
"Plant-based diet" to me is just a way of saying "vegan" that doesn't imply it's being done from ethical considerations or require no longer wearing leather. It doesn't even mean you are eating particularly healthfully, although it usually does tend to correlate with more of a focus on nutrition and health than merely being vegan (as that again may have to do with nothing but concern about animals). (But it's also a common religious discipline -- not so common in the US as eating "no meat but fish," of course -- and for that I wouldn't think it means you are focusing on eating super healthfully.)
I don't think a plant-based diet is the healthiest or ideal diet (because as mentioned above I don't think such a diet exists, there are many healthy diets and the best is the one that is sustainable and non stressful and enjoyable, and also other lifestyle considerations are probably more important once you have a not terrible diet and a calorie appropriate one).
That said, I do think eating "mostly plants" is probably healthier than not (I personally would not call that a "plant-based diet"), that eating a significant amount of non-starchy veg and some fruit correlates with positive health outcomes, and that after a point more meat in a diet (especially more high fat or processed meat, like bacon and sausage) tends to have a negative correlation. But that governs my own preferences and way of eating, I don't go around telling people who eat lots of meat (common in the US) that it's bad for them or that they should reduce meat consumption. In fact, I think probably if your diet is otherwise healthful (I'd think eating a good amount of non starchy veg also, and not a ton of low nutrient foods that would crowd out other sources of calories) and you are not overweight and active, that it's probably not even much of a difference. I think for some eating more meat may make those other things easier to achieve.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »"Plant-based diet" to me is just a way of saying "vegan" that doesn't imply it's being done from ethical considerations or require no longer wearing leather. It doesn't even mean you are eating particularly healthfully, although it usually does tend to correlate with more of a focus on nutrition and health than merely being vegan (as that again may have to do with nothing but concern about animals). (But it's also a common religious discipline -- not so common in the US as eating "no meat but fish," of course -- and for that I wouldn't think it means you are focusing on eating super healthfully.)
I don't think a plant-based diet is the healthiest or ideal diet (because as mentioned above I don't think such a diet exists, there are many healthy diets and the best is the one that is sustainable and non stressful and enjoyable, and also other lifestyle considerations are probably more important once you have a not terrible diet and a calorie appropriate one).
That said, I do think eating "mostly plants" is probably healthier than not (I personally would not call that a "plant-based diet"), that eating a significant amount of non-starchy veg and some fruit correlates with positive health outcomes, and that after a point more meat in a diet (especially more high fat or processed meat, like bacon and sausage) tends to have a negative correlation. But that governs my own preferences and way of eating, I don't go around telling people who eat lots of meat (common in the US) that it's bad for them or that they should reduce meat consumption. In fact, I think probably if your diet is otherwise healthful (I'd think eating a good amount of non starchy veg also, and not a ton of low nutrient foods that would crowd out other sources of calories) and you are not overweight and active, that it's probably not even much of a difference. I think for some eating more meat may make those other things easier to achieve.
So true. I completely agree with the bolded. And that starchy or refined foods can crowd out the veg - hat is likely where low carbers who have increased their veg intake are coming from.
As an aside on terminology, I've always thought plant based meant it was a mostly plant diet: not having meat at every meal or the focus of all meals. I think of animal based as animal products being the basis for most meals like bacon and eggs, or a big steak with a side salad... In my mind, plant based might be a small steak cut up on a salad, plus a bun or potato. Or a vegetarian chili with a bit of cheese, whereas the animal based one would remove the beans, keep some of the celery or peppers, and (of course) add cheese on top.
1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »"Plant-based diet" to me is just a way of saying "vegan" that doesn't imply it's being done from ethical considerations or require no longer wearing leather. It doesn't even mean you are eating particularly healthfully, although it usually does tend to correlate with more of a focus on nutrition and health than merely being vegan (as that again may have to do with nothing but concern about animals). (But it's also a common religious discipline -- not so common in the US as eating "no meat but fish," of course -- and for that I wouldn't think it means you are focusing on eating super healthfully.)
I don't think a plant-based diet is the healthiest or ideal diet (because as mentioned above I don't think such a diet exists, there are many healthy diets and the best is the one that is sustainable and non stressful and enjoyable, and also other lifestyle considerations are probably more important once you have a not terrible diet and a calorie appropriate one).
That said, I do think eating "mostly plants" is probably healthier than not (I personally would not call that a "plant-based diet"), that eating a significant amount of non-starchy veg and some fruit correlates with positive health outcomes, and that after a point more meat in a diet (especially more high fat or processed meat, like bacon and sausage) tends to have a negative correlation. But that governs my own preferences and way of eating, I don't go around telling people who eat lots of meat (common in the US) that it's bad for them or that they should reduce meat consumption. In fact, I think probably if your diet is otherwise healthful (I'd think eating a good amount of non starchy veg also, and not a ton of low nutrient foods that would crowd out other sources of calories) and you are not overweight and active, that it's probably not even much of a difference. I think for some eating more meat may make those other things easier to achieve.
So true. I completely agree with the bolded. And that starchy or refined foods can crowd out the veg - hat is likely where low carbers who have increased their veg intake are coming from.
Yeah, I'm just saying that if you compare healthy diets, a healthy or nutrition-focused moderate or high carb diet wouldn't crowd out veg with starchy or refined foods. But on the bigger point it seems we agree anyway.As an aside on terminology, I've always thought plant based meant it was a mostly plant diet: not having meat at every meal or the focus of all meals.
I think some use it that way, but mostly these days I see it used to mean diet without animal foods, but in diet only, not a vegan (which is an ethical thing). I think it's kind of a dumb term in that I also think one can eat a mostly plant diet (and thus a "plant-based" one) without cutting out meat and dairy and eggs, but I'm bowing to standard/common usage, at least where I live, and it is a useful term in that "vegan" assumes an ethical commitment and no animal products in clothes or skin creams or whatnot too.I think of animal based as animal products being the basis for most meals like bacon and eggs, or a big steak with a side salad...
That just seems like the all-American midwestern diet I grew up with! ;-)
I'm not debating the "plant-based" term, btw, I just think it's used in different ways and was clarifying how I was using it/usually interpret it.0 -
Eat real foods. Not too much. Mostly plants.8
-
Because the Flying Spaghetti Monster is just as real as "leaky gut" is.
Agreed. If our guts were truly leaking for days and weeks on end we would die of sepsis/septic shock with a high fever, fast heart rate and shortness of breath. Bleeding ulcers can do you in but they're not diagnosed as a leaky gut.
The best diet is not a diet at all. It's a protocol that you create for yourself that you can actually live with for the rest of your life. You do everything on your own terms with foods that you enjoy. I don't believe that 30 day food group elimination diets solve anything. A healthy relationship with food cannot be repaired with a temporary fix. Some may claim that you can live without 4 or 5 food groups indefinitely but I don't believe that for a micro and macro second. Any 'diet' that results in a calorie deficit will work.
Where the rubber meets the road is how sustainable it is a year or two from now. Being brutally strict right out of the chute won't last. It can be a setup for another food bender on down the line. There's only choices and consequences. Go slow and the stats are on your side for actually making it to maintenance. Even then, there is no such thing as the finish line. Tracking your portions works.
10 -
The one that you can stick to for the rest of your life and keeps you healthy. It's different for everyone.4
-
KETO- LCHF all the way baby13
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »LCHF! Any diet which reduces inflammatory foods and increases intake of foods high in anti oxidants!
Bacon, cheese, coconut oil, bulletproof coffee and "fat bombs" are anti-inflammatory and high in antioxidants?
Foods high in saturated fats are definitely less inflammatory than foods high in polyunsaturated fats!
Are you suggesting that the foods you listed are the ‘only’ foods you can eat on a LCHF diet?
Are you suggesting that the foods eaten by people not on ketogenic diets are all inflammatory and low in antioxidants?tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »LCHF! Any diet which reduces inflammatory foods and increases intake of foods high in anti oxidants!
Bacon, cheese, coconut oil, bulletproof coffee and "fat bombs" are anti-inflammatory and high in antioxidants?
Foods high in saturated fats are definitely less inflammatory than foods high in polyunsaturated fats!
Are you suggesting that the foods you listed are the ‘only’ foods you can eat on a LCHF diet?
Are you suggesting that the foods eaten by people not on ketogenic diets are all inflammatory and low in antioxidants?
I’m suggesting a person on a LCHF (not necessarily keto) will likely be eating less inflammatory and oxidising foods (less grains and refined sugars)! Are you suggesting otherwise?
Are you familiar with Blue Zones? Lots of fruits, veggies, legumes, whole grains, incredibly high incidence of healthy and active centenarians?
Fruit and veggies, saturated fats, nuts and seeds are all great inclusions in a LCHF diet - especially the veggies, nuts seeds.
I should think a diet like the blue zone is very high in antioxidants and low in most types of inflammatory foods.
Hi Dude--welcome back. I was wondering what happened to you. The forums have been tamer since you left. Still on a meat based diet I see. I would just like to comment on the blue zones in Italy. Pasta is a basic here, so is pizza, so I guess they're not that inflammatory, or the "healthy" foods are cancelling them out.5 -
snowflake954 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »LCHF! Any diet which reduces inflammatory foods and increases intake of foods high in anti oxidants!
Bacon, cheese, coconut oil, bulletproof coffee and "fat bombs" are anti-inflammatory and high in antioxidants?
Foods high in saturated fats are definitely less inflammatory than foods high in polyunsaturated fats!
Are you suggesting that the foods you listed are the ‘only’ foods you can eat on a LCHF diet?
Are you suggesting that the foods eaten by people not on ketogenic diets are all inflammatory and low in antioxidants?tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »LCHF! Any diet which reduces inflammatory foods and increases intake of foods high in anti oxidants!
Bacon, cheese, coconut oil, bulletproof coffee and "fat bombs" are anti-inflammatory and high in antioxidants?
Foods high in saturated fats are definitely less inflammatory than foods high in polyunsaturated fats!
Are you suggesting that the foods you listed are the ‘only’ foods you can eat on a LCHF diet?
Are you suggesting that the foods eaten by people not on ketogenic diets are all inflammatory and low in antioxidants?
I’m suggesting a person on a LCHF (not necessarily keto) will likely be eating less inflammatory and oxidising foods (less grains and refined sugars)! Are you suggesting otherwise?
Are you familiar with Blue Zones? Lots of fruits, veggies, legumes, whole grains, incredibly high incidence of healthy and active centenarians?
Fruit and veggies, saturated fats, nuts and seeds are all great inclusions in a LCHF diet - especially the veggies, nuts seeds.
I should think a diet like the blue zone is very high in antioxidants and low in most types of inflammatory foods.
Hi Dude--welcome back. I was wondering what happened to you. The forums have been tamer since you left. Still on a meat based diet I see. I would just like to comment on the blue zones in Italy. Pasta is a basic here, so is pizza, so I guess they're not that inflammatory, or the "healthy" foods are cancelling them out.
Hey Snowflake, yep I'm still here
For sanity reasons I took a break from the forums (only to replace them with Brexit ones instead lol).
And yes I'm still a carnivore at heart.
I have noticed that the forums seem a little different (more polite).
Hope you and yours are well.
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »snowflake954 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »LCHF! Any diet which reduces inflammatory foods and increases intake of foods high in anti oxidants!
Bacon, cheese, coconut oil, bulletproof coffee and "fat bombs" are anti-inflammatory and high in antioxidants?
Foods high in saturated fats are definitely less inflammatory than foods high in polyunsaturated fats!
Are you suggesting that the foods you listed are the ‘only’ foods you can eat on a LCHF diet?
Are you suggesting that the foods eaten by people not on ketogenic diets are all inflammatory and low in antioxidants?tennisdude2004 wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »LCHF! Any diet which reduces inflammatory foods and increases intake of foods high in anti oxidants!
Bacon, cheese, coconut oil, bulletproof coffee and "fat bombs" are anti-inflammatory and high in antioxidants?
Foods high in saturated fats are definitely less inflammatory than foods high in polyunsaturated fats!
Are you suggesting that the foods you listed are the ‘only’ foods you can eat on a LCHF diet?
Are you suggesting that the foods eaten by people not on ketogenic diets are all inflammatory and low in antioxidants?
I’m suggesting a person on a LCHF (not necessarily keto) will likely be eating less inflammatory and oxidising foods (less grains and refined sugars)! Are you suggesting otherwise?
Are you familiar with Blue Zones? Lots of fruits, veggies, legumes, whole grains, incredibly high incidence of healthy and active centenarians?
Fruit and veggies, saturated fats, nuts and seeds are all great inclusions in a LCHF diet - especially the veggies, nuts seeds.
I should think a diet like the blue zone is very high in antioxidants and low in most types of inflammatory foods.
Hi Dude--welcome back. I was wondering what happened to you. The forums have been tamer since you left. Still on a meat based diet I see. I would just like to comment on the blue zones in Italy. Pasta is a basic here, so is pizza, so I guess they're not that inflammatory, or the "healthy" foods are cancelling them out.
Hey Snowflake, yep I'm still here
For sanity reasons I took a break from the forums (only to replace them with Brexit ones instead lol).
And yes I'm still a carnivore at heart.
I have noticed that the forums seem a little different (more polite).
Hope you and yours are well.
The forums are polite--for a reason. Everything has changed. Back to the OP. The very "best" diet? Hmmm, hard to say because things change. I like the idea that I had growing up, a well-ballanced diet. This means a bit of this and that, without demonizing or eliminating any food group. I find that the macro split that MFP gives me is perfect. I personally eat the Med way because I live here.4
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
- 426 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