BREAKFAST - what is the truth?
Rannoch3908
Posts: 177 Member
So over the years I have heard everyone chime in on whether you need to eat breakfast or it's better to skip it.
Intermittent fasters will say to skip it - that it helps get your body to start burning your fat rather than your breakfast.
Other people say it's the most important meal of the day - that it kickstarts your metabolism to start burning fat and takes your body out of starvation mode (storing fat just in case).
What is the truth?
I am not hungry in the mornings but want to be doing what is right.
Intermittent fasters will say to skip it - that it helps get your body to start burning your fat rather than your breakfast.
Other people say it's the most important meal of the day - that it kickstarts your metabolism to start burning fat and takes your body out of starvation mode (storing fat just in case).
What is the truth?
I am not hungry in the mornings but want to be doing what is right.
4
Replies
-
You don't need to skip breakfast to burn fat.
You don't need to eat breakfast to burn fat.
The best decision is the one that fits with your preferences and lifestyle.
I feel terrible if I don't eat within 30 minutes or so or finishing my morning run. Breakfast is a non-negotiable part of me feeling happy and energetic. Other people can skip it easily and, in fact, find it makes it easier for them to meet their calorie goals.
There is no universal answer, the truth is that breakfast-eaters, breakfast-skippers, and breakfast-sometimers are all meeting their goals.
If you're not hungry in the AM, it sounds like skipping breakfast is the right call for you (unless there is a medical reason that you need to be eating something).31 -
probably neither, there is no such thing as starvation mode.7
-
there is no one-size-fits-all answer. there are intermittent fasters who do great on no breakfast. other people feel weak and crappy when they skip breakfast.
heck, the answer to this may change for you over time.
i used to do without breakfast in my teens because i wasn't hungry, but in my 30s and 40s when i was working out super heavy, i felt better and had better gains if i didn't skip any meals and included plenty of protein and enough carbs. now, years later and in poor shape, i'm not usually hungry first thing; i do best eating about 2 hours after i wake up - 1 hour after a heavy lifting day.
i can't see how it would be healthy to stuff down food when you're not hungry. do you get hungry at lunch or at a mid-point between breakfast and lunch time?
btw, starvation mode is a myth or no one would ever starve to death. your metabolism isn't a single thing but a combination of factors, and you burn calories all night while you sleep - your metabolism doesn't shut down so you don't need to wake it up.8 -
Rannoch3908 wrote: »So over the years I have heard everyone chime in on whether you need to eat breakfast or it's better to skip it.
Intermittent fasters will say to skip it - that it helps get your body to start burning your fat rather than your breakfast.
Other people say it's the most important meal of the day - that it kickstarts your metabolism to start burning fat and takes your body out of starvation mode (storing fat just in case).
What is the truth?
I am not hungry in the mornings but want to be doing what is right.
Neither is the truth.
"most important meal of the day" stems from a marketing campaign by Kelloggs way back when to get people to buy cereal.
There is also no magical fat burning happening with IF other than that produced by a calorie deficit. I'm not typically hungry most mornings so I don't usually eat until noon or 1...I'm in maintenance and I'm maintaining because I'm overall eating maintenance calories...so me doing IF has had no bearing on that.10 -
Breakfast literally means the time when you break your fast. If you aren’t hungry and want to do so 6 hrs after you get up, then do so. There is no “right” answer, each person is an individual and different things will work for each individual.8
-
Do what works for you.4
-
There has to be some science to when and how fat stores burn fastest.
I doubt the science behind Intermittent Fasting and why you fast is total BS right? I've read it helps you burn fat instead of the food your eating.
And I don't really know which works for me - both of them I guess.
1 -
Rannoch3908 wrote: »There has to be some science to when and how fat stores burn fastest.
I doubt the science behind Intermittent Fasting and why you fast is total BS right? I've read it helps you burn fat instead of the food your eating.
And I don't really know which works for me - both of them I guess.
Is the goal to lose fat the absolute fastest? Or is the goal to find a weight management strategy that is sustainable and fits easily into your life?
There probably is a fastest way to burn fat. But if it is IF, how does that help me if I'm doing it and feeling miserable, hungry, and weak? If it's always eating breakfast, how does that help someone who isn't hungry but is forcing themselves to wake up and choke down food they don't want?
The truth is that both approaches (or a mixture of the approaches, if your preference varies by day) work for fat loss in the context of a calorie deficit. I'm not sure why it has to be more complicated than that.
You might burn a handful of calories more per day with the "optimal" meal scheduling, but figuring that out and adhering to it is going to be a waste of time for all but the most elite body builders. Most of us are looking to shed excess pounds and then maintain that weight loss and we don't need to get all fancy with the meal timing for that.16 -
Rannoch3908 wrote: »There has to be some science to when and how fat stores burn fastest.
I doubt the science behind Intermittent Fasting and why you fast is total BS right? I've read it helps you burn fat instead of the food your eating.
And I don't really know which works for me - both of them I guess.
some of the people i know who intermittent fast simply do it to keep their calories down.
calories in, calories out - eat less than your body uses, lose weight. but if you lose weight fast, you'll be burning muscle along with fat, not a good thing, and you can make yourself weak and sick. also if you lose weight fast without changing your habits, you'll put that weight right back on.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Is the goal to lose fat the absolute fastest? Or is the goal to find a weight management strategy that is sustainable and fits easily into your life?
There probably is a fastest way to burn fat. But if it is IF, how does that help me if I'm doing it and feeling miserable, hungry, and weak? If it's always eating breakfast, how does that help someone who isn't hungry but is forcing themselves to wake up and choke down food they don't want?
The truth is that both approaches (or a mixture of the approaches, if your preference varies by day) work for fat loss in the context of a calorie deficit. I'm not sure why it has to be more complicated than that.
You might burn a handful of calories more per day with the "optimal" meal scheduling, but figuring that out and adhering to it is going to be a waste of time for all but the most elite body builders. Most of us are looking to shed excess pounds and then maintain that weight loss and we don't need to get all fancy with the meal timing for that.
THANK YOU!
The majority of meal scheduling is "Bro Science." Like @janejellyroll said it is a waste of time for most other than Elite Body Builders/Athletes may need the meal scheduling, but they also burn more calories in a day than some people do in 2-3 days. Even at that, most of their meal scheduling is about maintaining energy levels throughout the day and maintaining or gaining weight/mass. Even those in weight class athletics, where they typically cut to reach a lower weight typically eat for growth/maintenance , and do a water cut before weigh in.
If your goal is to lose weight it's all Calories In Calories Out. If you are hungry in the morning and it works for you then yes eat breakfast. If you aren't hungry, and you are able to get in your calories then breakfast isn't for you.
There is no conclusive study that I'm aware of that says one way is better than the other. This stuff all comes anecdotally about what worked for someone famous or someone that a friend of a friend who is an athletic trainer that knows someone else has said worked for them.
Listen to your body and follow it's cues.8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Rannoch3908 wrote: »There has to be some science to when and how fat stores burn fastest.
I doubt the science behind Intermittent Fasting and why you fast is total BS right? I've read it helps you burn fat instead of the food your eating.
And I don't really know which works for me - both of them I guess.
Is the goal to lose fat the absolute fastest? Or is the goal to find a weight management strategy that is sustainable and fits easily into your life?
There probably is a fastest way to burn fat. But if it is IF, how does that help me if I'm doing it and feeling miserable, hungry, and weak? If it's always eating breakfast, how does that help someone who isn't hungry but is forcing themselves to wake up and choke down food they don't want?
The truth is that both approaches (or a mixture of the approaches, if your preference varies by day) work for fat loss in the context of a calorie deficit. I'm not sure why it has to be more complicated than that.
You might burn a handful of calories more per day with the "optimal" meal scheduling, but figuring that out and adhering to it is going to be a waste of time for all but the most elite body builders. Most of us are looking to shed excess pounds and then maintain that weight loss and we don't need to get all fancy with the meal timing for that.
Exactly.
Let's just say that there's a fastest way, at the physiological level. Let's pretend, for the sake of argument, that it's the intermittent fasting method. So, we'll pretend that my body burns fat faster if I don't eat until later in the day. (I'm not saying it does or doesn't, at this point.)
How much faster? Since research studies aren't seeing *big* differences between calorie-controlled eating schedules, it should be a relatively small difference. (Criticism of calorie controlled studies: Inevitably short in duration, because you can't hold people prisoner to control calories, and free-living people cheat on the calories, and don't tell the truth about it. Been demonstrated - may not be intentional, but that's the effect.)
Me, personally, I feel crapola if I don't eat breakfast. I drag around. I get tired quickly/easily. If I work out, my workout is not very effective. I struggle to achieve intensity. Even my heart rate response to the same exercise stimulus tends to be worse, and the workout feels miserable. So, until I eat, I'm burning fewer calories because I feel fatigued and I'm doing less. How much less? Well, some other reasearch has show a difference up to low hundreds of calories per day between people who are fidgeters, and similar people who are non-fidgeters. So, probably draggy morning is somewhere in that realm, too.
Essentially, this is why we're saying that it makes the most sense to do what works best for you. Generally, evidence (short studies) suggests that IF and non-IF at constant calories end up with the same fat loss. (Admittedly, there's ongoing debate; and there are non-weight-loss benefits of fasting being investigated . . . but that wasn't what you asked about. And conclusions are very mixed, anyway.)
So, if the calorie differences between fasting and not fasting are fairly small, and I feel like crud fasted and therefore do less (thus burning fewer calories), how do those effects net out? There is certainly not a *big* calorie win there by forcing myself to fast, and there's a potential calorie expenditure loss, plus I would feel more miserable, more of the time. Why would that be a good plan, realistically, for my overall life balance and happiness? I think nuh-uh.
Oversimplifying, there are a couple of approaches to weight management. Some people like to pursue every last potential extra calorie-burning strategy, even if the proof for it is pretty light - so all the purported fat burning supplements and superfoods (no matter how unpleasant taste-wise), and special extra-intense exercise (no matter whether they enjoy it), and special ways of eating (food combining, fasting, calorie cycling, carb cycling, keto, whatever . . .). Other people like to seek out a set of habits that for them personally result in the right number of calories, but are relatively easy and relatively pleasant. (If you find the supplements tasty, the intense exercise fun, and whatever eating regimen congenial, that's great. Not saying no one does. Just saying it's obvious some people do them for the supposed weight-loss results, even though they hate doing them.)
Given that weight management is not a limited-duration project, but rather a lifelong need, I'm going to stick with that second approach, and find things that get/keep my weight where I want it, but are easy and pleasant, even if they're not theoretically the Absolute Most Ideal Way Technically Speaking.
Since I'm in year 4+ of maintenance after 3 previous decades of obesity, I'd say that for me, something about this approach is working. That's really all *I* need. So, if you want to try IF, and feel like it helps you . . . go for it. It is helpful for some people, usually those not hungry in the AM, or who prefer big meals, or that sort of thing.
There are a bunch of threads over in the debate section where people talk about IF nearly ad infinitum. They will cite the studies, and make more formal arguments. Here are a couple, at random:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10765344/please-help-with-this-argument-intermittent-fasting-related/p1
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10746848/intermittent-fasting-is-it-a-good-idea/p113 -
See where meal timing falls on the pyramid of priority? Dial in your calories. Once you're good at that, tackle your macros.
14 -
I overeat if I skip breakfast or have foods that don't keep me full. Due to this almost every morning I have two eggs and oatmeal. Keeps me full until lunch!2
-
The truth. Our mileage will always vary.
Somesayers say that if you don't eat breakfast it's indicative of a hormone imbalance. Others say there's no such thing as a need to eat within an hour of waking. If you've ever been to Greece, Italy or France, they don't eat a big breakfast. Just a few tiddlywinks here and there. Espresso and one piece of bread with butter.
If you've ever been to Ireland, Scotland or England, Wales...they eat a larger breakfast. Climate, longer winters, hard outdoor work all has something to do with it. If you're working in a coal mine loading 16 tons you'll eat more than someone who has a desk job.2 -
Other than body composition, I heard that eating breakfast is good for blood sugar control, or something along those lines. I just know that I feel better when I have a good breakfast, i'm in a better mood, i'm more productive.0
-
Rannoch3908 wrote: »
I doubt the science behind Intermittent Fasting and why you fast is total BS right? I've read it helps you burn fat instead of the food your eating.
Sure you burn more fat during the morning if you don't have breakfast early on.
But later in the day you eat more than if some of your daily allowance was spread out throughout the day so you burn less fat than someone else with a different eating pattern.
Really think you need to reflect on what seems a desperate search to make something simple more complicated.
Eat in a pattern that helps you adhere long term to a sensible calorie goal.8 -
Rannoch3908 wrote: »There has to be some science to when and how fat stores burn fastest.
Although there are limited. short term studies that show an advantage to almost any specific weight loss scheme (IF, Keto, lo-fat, Gluten-free, 5:2, OMAD, etc.) any large and long term studies have shown none of them are any different from each other in terms of weight loss (how much and how long kept off).
So, as others have said, do what works for you. If dividing your eating into 5 evenly spaced meals of the same number of calories helps you stay on track, do it. If skipping breakfast and only eating between noon and 8 works for you, do that. Ending my eating day with 2-3 ounces of mixed nuts works for me. Do what works for you.
8 -
You do you
For me breakfast is so important and keeps me from over eating. I eat breakcfst every day now. Some are bigger then others. Lunch is always light for me though because I like to eat at night.
CICO matters to me st the end of the day. I do keep in mind water or waste could factor in if I wrigh the next morning and have eaten dertain things1 -
For me, intermittent fasting (16:8 so it's basically just skipping breakfast) makes it easier for me to stay within my calorie limit. No idea about any of the science behind IF, but I've adapted to it and I'm not hungry until noon so it works for me.0
-
After reading that a high protein breakfast helps some people stay full longer I tried it and stay full until dinner1
-
I’ve read all the theories and studies about fasting, but only after I had been doing it for many, many years. It didn’t have an official name for it back in the 70s, when as a teenager I didn’t like eating breakfast or lunch because I couldn’t stay awake in class. I ate dinner and that was it, sometimes a pre-bed snack.
It doesn’t necessarily keep my weight down, on its own. It just makes it easier to get a deficit when I have limited time devoted to eating.
It just makes me feel better and healthier. And younger.1 -
There is no truth. There's very little truth in dieting besides "try to eat healthy foods most of the time, and if you wanna lose weight, eat less of them". Best not to even seek the hidden truth; there's only what works, and that's person-specific.
When it comes to breakfast, some people find eating it is beneficial for dieting, some don't. I've been doing IF for 15 months, so breakfast has not been part of the plan. I find it helpful to free up those calories to put into two larger meals (lunch and dinner). For other people, that doesn't work. I went on diet hiatus last week and find I still don't actually want breakfast even though I am now eating at maintenance and free to have it. Just not used to eating breakfast anymore and it does nothing for me.
I agree with the above posters about two things: one, you do adjust to not eating breakfast when you do IF and then you're just not hungry until lunch. Some kind of adaptation takes place, which is probably entirely psychological, but when you don't just "skip" breakfast now and then but have a time before which you never or very rarely eat, you do sort of get past the hunger pangs and fixation on food in the morning.
Two, while I love carbs and make no effort not to eat them, I'd have to admit that lower carb meals as the first meal tend to leave me less hungry later on. By which I mean higher protein, since I'm not going to eat a pailful of lard. Higher protein first-meals do seem to stave off the hunger longer. Why, I don't really know. If I know I have a high calorie dinner coming up such that there needs to be NO snacking between lunch and dinner, I will eat a high protein (aka lower carb) lunch so that I won't be hungry during the day.7 -
There is no truth. There's very little truth in dieting besides "try to eat healthy foods most of the time, and if you wanna lose weight, eat less of them". Best not to even seek the hidden truth; there's only what works, and that's person-specific.
When it comes to breakfast, some people find eating it is beneficial for dieting, some don't. I've been doing IF for 15 months, so breakfast has not been part of the plan. I find it helpful to free up those calories to put into two larger meals (lunch and dinner). For other people, that doesn't work. I went on diet hiatus last week and find I still don't actually want breakfast even though I am now eating at maintenance and free to have it. Just not used to eating breakfast anymore and it does nothing for me.
I agree with the above posters about two things: one, you do adjust to not eating breakfast when you do IF and then you're just not hungry until lunch. Some kind of adaptation takes place, which is probably entirely psychological, but when you don't just "skip" breakfast now and then but have a time before which you never or very rarely eat, you do sort of get past the hunger pangs and fixation on food in the morning.
Two, while I love carbs and make no effort not to eat them, I'd have to admit that lower carb meals as the first meal tend to leave me less hungry later on. By which I mean higher protein, since I'm not going to eat a pailful of lard. Higher protein first-meals do seem to stave off the hunger longer. Why, I don't really know. If I know I have a high calorie dinner coming up such that there needs to be NO snacking between lunch and dinner, I will eat a high protein (aka lower carb) lunch so that I won't be hungry during the day.
The healthy foods isn’t even the truth. Eat what you like so you can stick to your diet. If that’s TV dinners, simply choose ones that let you remain within your calorie goals.
A calorie deficit is all that matters for losing weight, not healthy foods.4 -
Dogmom1978 wrote: »There is no truth. There's very little truth in dieting besides "try to eat healthy foods most of the time, and if you wanna lose weight, eat less of them". Best not to even seek the hidden truth; there's only what works, and that's person-specific.
When it comes to breakfast, some people find eating it is beneficial for dieting, some don't. I've been doing IF for 15 months, so breakfast has not been part of the plan. I find it helpful to free up those calories to put into two larger meals (lunch and dinner). For other people, that doesn't work. I went on diet hiatus last week and find I still don't actually want breakfast even though I am now eating at maintenance and free to have it. Just not used to eating breakfast anymore and it does nothing for me.
I agree with the above posters about two things: one, you do adjust to not eating breakfast when you do IF and then you're just not hungry until lunch. Some kind of adaptation takes place, which is probably entirely psychological, but when you don't just "skip" breakfast now and then but have a time before which you never or very rarely eat, you do sort of get past the hunger pangs and fixation on food in the morning.
Two, while I love carbs and make no effort not to eat them, I'd have to admit that lower carb meals as the first meal tend to leave me less hungry later on. By which I mean higher protein, since I'm not going to eat a pailful of lard. Higher protein first-meals do seem to stave off the hunger longer. Why, I don't really know. If I know I have a high calorie dinner coming up such that there needs to be NO snacking between lunch and dinner, I will eat a high protein (aka lower carb) lunch so that I won't be hungry during the day.
The healthy foods isn’t even the truth. Eat what you like so you can stick to your diet. If that’s TV dinners, simply choose ones that let you remain within your calorie goals.
A calorie deficit is all that matters for losing weight, not healthy foods.
That is the truth for weight loss ONLY. If someone has 5 or 10 pounds to lose, yes, they can lose it eating Doritos. But many people have far more to lose than 10 pounds and their "diet" projects are going to be yearlong or multi-year or forever efforts. Eating Doritos around the clock is not going to work for them. The extreme position of "eat whatever you want within your calories" is fine short-term but there's more to good health than losing weight, as anyone who's crossed that 30 or 50 pound line knows. At some point you have to start paying attention to what goes in your mouth, not just how much of it.
TV dinners aren't that unhealthy. They're usually high in sodium, but otherwise they tend to be fairly well balanced and of moderate or at least measured calories. I've eaten plenty of them.7 -
Dogmom1978 wrote: »There is no truth. There's very little truth in dieting besides "try to eat healthy foods most of the time, and if you wanna lose weight, eat less of them". Best not to even seek the hidden truth; there's only what works, and that's person-specific.
When it comes to breakfast, some people find eating it is beneficial for dieting, some don't. I've been doing IF for 15 months, so breakfast has not been part of the plan. I find it helpful to free up those calories to put into two larger meals (lunch and dinner). For other people, that doesn't work. I went on diet hiatus last week and find I still don't actually want breakfast even though I am now eating at maintenance and free to have it. Just not used to eating breakfast anymore and it does nothing for me.
I agree with the above posters about two things: one, you do adjust to not eating breakfast when you do IF and then you're just not hungry until lunch. Some kind of adaptation takes place, which is probably entirely psychological, but when you don't just "skip" breakfast now and then but have a time before which you never or very rarely eat, you do sort of get past the hunger pangs and fixation on food in the morning.
Two, while I love carbs and make no effort not to eat them, I'd have to admit that lower carb meals as the first meal tend to leave me less hungry later on. By which I mean higher protein, since I'm not going to eat a pailful of lard. Higher protein first-meals do seem to stave off the hunger longer. Why, I don't really know. If I know I have a high calorie dinner coming up such that there needs to be NO snacking between lunch and dinner, I will eat a high protein (aka lower carb) lunch so that I won't be hungry during the day.
The healthy foods isn’t even the truth. Eat what you like so you can stick to your diet. If that’s TV dinners, simply choose ones that let you remain within your calorie goals.
A calorie deficit is all that matters for losing weight, not healthy foods.
That is the truth for weight loss ONLY. If someone has 5 or 10 pounds to lose, yes, they can lose it eating Doritos. But many people have far more to lose than 10 pounds and their "diet" projects are going to be yearlong or multi-year or forever efforts. Eating Doritos around the clock is not going to work for them. The extreme position of "eat whatever you want within your calories" is fine short-term but there's more to good health than losing weight, as anyone who's crossed that 30 or 50 pound line knows. At some point you have to start paying attention to what goes in your mouth, not just how much of it.
TV dinners aren't that unhealthy. They're usually high in sodium, but otherwise they tend to be fairly well balanced and of moderate or at least measured calories. I've eaten plenty of them.
you can be thin and eat crap. my very slim ex lived on snickers bars, pizza and chips, and he weighed a whopping 126 at 5' 8" tall.
6 -
You can lose 100 lbs eating cupcakes. All you have to do is eat fewer calories than you need...
CICO is king for weight loss. You might feel like crap if you live off of cupcakes, but you will still lose weight4 -
Along with all the platitudes I've always been told about breakfast is the simple realization that breakfast is by far my favorite meal! Everything else is salads and roasted vegetables and such. Breakfast is a variety of healthy foods - fiber, carbs, protein, fruit! I love it. It would be far easier to skip lunch or dinner because I'm never again as hungry during the day as I am at breakfast time.8
-
The truth is I need breakfast. Other people don't.6
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »Rannoch3908 wrote: »So over the years I have heard everyone chime in on whether you need to eat breakfast or it's better to skip it.
Intermittent fasters will say to skip it - that it helps get your body to start burning your fat rather than your breakfast.
Other people say it's the most important meal of the day - that it kickstarts your metabolism to start burning fat and takes your body out of starvation mode (storing fat just in case).
What is the truth?
I am not hungry in the mornings but want to be doing what is right.
Neither is the truth.
"most important meal of the day" stems from a marketing campaign by Kelloggs way back when to get people to buy cereal.
There is also no magical fat burning happening with IF other than that produced by a calorie deficit. I'm not typically hungry most mornings so I don't usually eat until noon or 1...I'm in maintenance and I'm maintaining because I'm overall eating maintenance calories...so me doing IF has had no bearing on that.
Not sure if the Kellogg's campaign worked. I almost always eat cereal for breakfast, but it's almost never Kellogg's.2 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Rannoch3908 wrote: »So over the years I have heard everyone chime in on whether you need to eat breakfast or it's better to skip it.
Intermittent fasters will say to skip it - that it helps get your body to start burning your fat rather than your breakfast.
Other people say it's the most important meal of the day - that it kickstarts your metabolism to start burning fat and takes your body out of starvation mode (storing fat just in case).
What is the truth?
I am not hungry in the mornings but want to be doing what is right.
Neither is the truth.
"most important meal of the day" stems from a marketing campaign by Kelloggs way back when to get people to buy cereal.
There is also no magical fat burning happening with IF other than that produced by a calorie deficit. I'm not typically hungry most mornings so I don't usually eat until noon or 1...I'm in maintenance and I'm maintaining because I'm overall eating maintenance calories...so me doing IF has had no bearing on that.
Not sure if the Kellogg's campaign worked. I almost always eat cereal for breakfast, but it's almost never Kellogg's.
And I eat cereal (sometimes Kellogg's) but never for breakfast.
2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K 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
- 421 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
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions