Paleo questions
MensEtSalvere2013
Posts: 230 Member
Hi, I am interested in trying Paleo. What are people's thoughts on it? What has been your experience in terms of weight loss?
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
0
Replies
-
What is your reasoning for wanting to try it? Have you tried calorie counting?0
-
Short story - I did Paleo for 4 months. I enjoyed it because it was so different from how I ate before. It's tough and restrictive but I lost weight fast. The bad thing is that I couldn't keep up this restrictive eating and once I started eating "normal" again, I gained all the weight back.
I did learn a lot of new healthy habits from Paleo - like eating more protein, veggies, fruits, less sweets, less processed foods -- but unless you can live like that forever, it's not a practical diet.
Calorie counting on MFP has been awesome -- I have been enjoying my favorite foods but keeping it within my calorie goal. This is a way I think is more livable long term.
BUUUUUT, the best way to learn is for you to experience it yourself. So give it a 30 day try if you're curious
0 -
Wanting to try Paleo as getting these last 25-30 pounds off has been hard0
-
Wanting to try Paleo as getting these last 25-30 pounds off has been hard
There's nothing magical about the Paleo diet, though I'm sure someone will come in and say otherwise.
Stay around your calorie goal and the weight will come off. It's not a quick process, so you need to stop looking for quick fixes.0 -
Do you know what Paleo is? What you are supposed to give up and what you are supposed to eat?
I ask because I've read a great many posts where people say they are eating Paleo or want to try Paleo, when all they really mean is they are giving up processed food.0 -
My personal experience: I lost almost 100 pounds in about 6 months eating Paleo, and then promptly put it all back on again.. I wasn't counting calories. When I came to this site, I originally intended to eat Paleo again, but to count calories as well. I realized that I had been eating only 800-1000 calories per day, and that was why I lost the weight so fast and then put it back on so fast. It was, for me, impossible to eat 1800 calories of chicken breast and salad and so I was severely restricting my calories without even realizing it.
Counting calories is a lot slower going since I am eating a healthy amount of calories, but the weight is actually staying off instead of yo-yoing all over the place and it is actually possible to stick to long term since I am not bored to death of my food.
Good reads:
http://evidencemag.com/why-calories-count
http://evidencemag.com/clean-eating-iifym/0 -
My personal experience: I lost almost 100 pounds in about 6 months eating Paleo, and then promptly put it all back on again.. I wasn't counting calories. When I came to this site, I originally intended to eat Paleo again, but to count calories as well. I realized that I had been eating only 800-1000 calories per day, and that was why I lost the weight so fast and then put it back on so fast. It was, for me, impossible to eat 1800 calories of chicken breast and salad and so I was severely restricting my calories without even realizing it.
Counting calories is a lot slower going since I am eating a healthy amount of calories, but the weight is actually staying off instead of yo-yoing all over the place and it is actually possible to stick to long term since I am not bored to death of my food.
Good reads:
http://evidencemag.com/why-calories-count
http://evidencemag.com/clean-eating-iifym/
See, this is what i mean. There is no reason one would eat only chicken breast and salad on a Paleo Diet.0 -
Google is your friend.0
-
See, this is what i mean. There is no reason one would eat only chicken breast and salad on a Paleo Diet.
Well, I didn't mean that literally..
Paleo/Clean Eating meant to me eating lean protein, eggs, vegetables, fruit, nuts and water. Bit of hyperbole. Sorry about the confusion.0 -
Wanting to try Paleo as getting these last 25-30 pounds off has been hard
I've been eating Primal, which is sort of a variation of Paleo, or some people call it Paleo-permissive. For example, with Primal, you can eat dairy if it agrees with you (don't have any adverse issues with lactose, casein, etc.), though they aim for full-fat varieties over low fat versions (cream, butter, cheese, full-fat yogurt, whole milk, etc.). But strict paleo adherents will say no dairy at all. For more info on Primal, check out marksdailyapple.com
I find that I just feel waaaay better eating Primal, and I think that's something you'll find with a lot of people who love the Paleo/Primal lifestyle. However, I now understand why it feels so much better to me. After years of bouts of major fatigue and weight gain/difficulty losing weight, the only thing that had helped was switching to Primal. Although the fatigue had gotten better, I was still really struggling with losing weight (I had a good 30-40 lbs to lose). After eating at a deficit of 700+ calories/day and not losing any weight, my doctor was finally convinced to look into it further. He finally believed me and that "eat less and move more" wasn't enough for me and something was up.
A few specialists later, and I was diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis (thyroid condition) and insulin resistance. Primal works great for Hashi's as it's an autoimmune disorder and they think is triggered by certain foods -- gluten seems to be the most popular of the suspected culprits.
I suspect that a lot of people that love Primal have experiences like mine -- they've had undiagnosed conditions for years -- either digestive issues, thyroid issues, lymph issues, etc., but they haven't been severe enough to be diagnosed by their doctors. They start Paleo/Primal and all of a sudden a lot of their symptoms clear up and they feel awesome.
As for weight loss, I know a lot of people that have done great body recomp and weight loss through Primal eating and exercise, though that may be accomplished just easily with a similar macro level. Usually, for Primal people, it ends up being a high fat, moderate protein and low-ish carb diet. The carbs are adjustable based on whether you want to lose fat (then lower the carbs) or are already at a good weight and just want to maintain or gain muscle or focus on performance (then can have more carbs). Eating Primally just sort of lends itself to these macros generally since you're really only getting your carbs from vegetables, some fruits and occasional starchy carbs like sweet potatoes.
I cook Primally, and I don't find it difficult at all. Vegetables, often in butter or coconut oil, tons of herbs, full-fat cheeses, tons of protein (love me a good steak), fruit on occasion (I'm low carbing it for the insulin resistance so I limit my fruit intake), dark chocolate on occasion, certain nuts (almonds, macadamia, etc.), bacon, etc. Shoot, I make a mean vodka sauce and instead of serving over pasta, I use spaghetti squash -- it's really good.
So, yeah, you're giving up grains so if you're a big bread, pasta or baked goods/sweets person, that part may be difficult. I have dark chocolate from time to time and I find that satisfies my sweet tooth. But, personally, I don't miss the bread, pasta, rice, etc. at all anymore. If I want to do something that they'd normally be served over -- like my penne alla vodka or a nice curry, I just make the sauce and serve it over spaghetti squash. I find it to be an awesome sauce delivery vehicle.
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.0 -
See, this is what i mean. There is no reason one would eat only chicken breast and salad on a Paleo Diet.
Well, I didn't mean that literally..
Paleo/Clean Eating meant to me eating lean protein, eggs, vegetables, fruit, nuts and water. Bit of hyperbole. Sorry about the confusion.
Paleo and clean eating aren't really the same thing either. Though, like "clean eating", "Paleo" also seems to quickly be losing consistent definition.0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.0 -
Hi, I am interested in trying Paleo. What are people's thoughts on it? What has been your experience in terms of weight loss?
Did it for a about a year. Lost some weight, gained a bunch of it back. It was miserable, constant cravings, low energy, and in the end it only "worked" if I ate a caloric deficit anyway.
*Much* happier - and more successful - with a IIFYM approach...0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.
Have you read any of the research on lectins?0 -
Do you know what Paleo is? What you are supposed to give up and what you are supposed to eat?
I ask because I've read a great many posts where people say they are eating Paleo or want to try Paleo, when all they really mean is they are giving up processed food.
FACEPALM - ouch that hurt.
I would definitely suggest reading up on paleo (sadly not many others on this site actually know anything about it) or about similar diets such as primal.0 -
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Interesting. Truly. Just some quick searches pulls up some interesting, science-backed things. I was looking at this one, which begs the question of whether, like lactose tolerance, some form of lectin tolerance is an evolutionary innovation in the past 30,000 years or so.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1115436/
"But if we all eat lectins, why don’t we all get insulin dependent diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, IgA nephropathy, and peptic ulcers?"0 -
Hi, I am interested in trying Paleo. What are people's thoughts on it? What has been your experience in terms of weight loss?
Did it for a about a year. Lost some weight, gained a bunch of it back. It was miserable, constant cravings, low energy, and in the end it only "worked" if I ate a caloric deficit anyway.
*Much* happier - and more successful - with a IIFYM approach...
What sort of cravings did you have? I'm just surprised to hear it as most folks I know that went Primal/Paleo said the exact opposite -- reduced/eliminated cravings and had tons of energy (myself included).0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.
Well, if that's your conclusion, I think that's a valid one. I personally fall on the other side of the equation and don't see the reason to include them given the lectin issue, especially as I think it's likely that some people have sensitivities to them like lactose, gluten, etc. To me, they both seem to be reasoned, reasonable opinions based on interpretation of some interesting facts and research. Differing conclusions are not lies.0 -
Hi, I am interested in trying Paleo. What are people's thoughts on it? What has been your experience in terms of weight loss?
Did it for a about a year. Lost some weight, gained a bunch of it back. It was miserable, constant cravings, low energy, and in the end it only "worked" if I ate a caloric deficit anyway.
*Much* happier - and more successful - with a IIFYM approach...
What sort of cravings did you have? I'm just surprised to hear it as most folks I know that went Primal/Paleo said the exact opposite -- reduced/eliminated cravings and had tons of energy (myself included).
Same here. I've not deprived myself of anything on primal I just don't eat the nutrient deficient I used to.
It's called choice. Just like its everybody's choice to restrict their daily intake of calories, regardless of the cravings they will be fighting or how hungry they be at the end of the calorie count!0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.
Well, if that's your conclusion, I think that's a valid one. I personally fall on the other side of the equation and don't see the reason to include them given the lectin issue, especially as I think it's likely that some people have sensitivities to them like lactose, gluten, etc. To me, they both seem to be reasoned, reasonable opinions based on interpretation of some interesting facts and research. Differing conclusions are not lies.
Of course some people have issues with lactose and gluten. Some people have issues with protein, nuts, chocolate, bananas and pretty much any other food you could name. It's possible to be allergic or sensitive to any food. That seems a poor reason to cut the food out if you don't have the problem. It's a bit like selling your car because your neighbor can't drive.
Do you also cut out celery, parsnips, broccoli, brussel sprouts, spinach, cauliflower, and strawberries? All of those (plus many other fruits and vegetables) contian toxins.0 -
Google is your friend.
Might use it to find a forum where you could ask a question.0 -
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.
Well, if that's your conclusion, I think that's a valid one. I personally fall on the other side of the equation and don't see the reason to include them given the lectin issue, especially as I think it's likely that some people have sensitivities to them like lactose, gluten, etc. To me, they both seem to be reasoned, reasonable opinions based on interpretation of some interesting facts and research. Differing conclusions are not lies.
Of course some people have issues with lactose and gluten. Some people have issues with protein, nuts, chocolate, bananas and pretty much any other food you could name. It's possible to be allergic or sensitive to any food. That seems a poor reason to cut the food out if you don't have the problem. It's a bit like selling your car because your neighbor can't drive.
Do you also cut out celery, parsnips, broccoli, brussel sprouts, spinach, cauliflower, and strawberries? All of those (plus many other fruits and vegetables) contian toxins.
I disagree. I think the diets originate, or at least now acknowledge, that there are a host of health issues out there that the proponents believe are linked to diet -- obesity probably being the largest, but also various GI tract issues, metabolism issues, thyroid issues, autoimmune issues, etc. And, some likely triggers or culprits have been identified -- gluten, lactose, casein, lectin, etc. Paleo/Primal takes a whole elimination approach and explains why they believe eliminating or reducing those things are better for overall health. Primal is more permissive and recommend bringing somethings back in if you don't have a reaction to them or eat them in moderation -- like dairy, dark chocolate, etc. Now, they may not be correct, or not correct for the reasons they believe, but there are a lot of people out there that have had a myriad of issues clear up or improve on the diets. Likely, because they do have issues with one or more of those things, but haven't been formally diagnosed or technology doesn't exist yet to diagnose them.
Now, others may not have any of these issues, so they see no difference between Paleo/Primal and another diet where the macros are the same. That's great for those people -- but those aren't the people that Paleo/Primal are likely going to help the most and it certainly doesn't negate the very valuable benefit that others experience.
It would be great if we could all just go into the doctor and have a personal, customized plan drawn up to address all these potential issues. But, that's just not realistic -- both in terms of money and current technology (though some of it may be possible). So, plenty of people are feeling sub-optimal or downright crappy and diet correction can do and has done great things for them.
Just because it doesn't help you or didn't work for you doesn't make it (1) a lie, (2) based on psuedoscience or (3) mean it won't greatly improve others' lives.0 -
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.
Well, if that's your conclusion, I think that's a valid one. I personally fall on the other side of the equation and don't see the reason to include them given the lectin issue, especially as I think it's likely that some people have sensitivities to them like lactose, gluten, etc. To me, they both seem to be reasoned, reasonable opinions based on interpretation of some interesting facts and research. Differing conclusions are not lies.
Of course some people have issues with lactose and gluten. Some people have issues with protein, nuts, chocolate, bananas and pretty much any other food you could name. It's possible to be allergic or sensitive to any food. That seems a poor reason to cut the food out if you don't have the problem. It's a bit like selling your car because your neighbor can't drive.
Do you also cut out celery, parsnips, broccoli, brussel sprouts, spinach, cauliflower, and strawberries? All of those (plus many other fruits and vegetables) contian toxins.
I disagree. I think the diets originate, or at least now acknowledge, that there are a host of health issues out there that the proponents believe are linked to diet -- obesity probably being the largest, but also various GI tract issues, metabolism issues, thyroid issues, autoimmune issues, etc. And, some likely triggers or culprits have been identified -- gluten, lactose, casein, lectin, etc. Paleo/Primal takes a whole elimination approach and explains why they believe eliminating or reducing those things are better for overall health. Primal is more permissive and recommend bringing somethings back in if you don't have a reaction to them or eat them in moderation -- like dairy, dark chocolate, etc. Now, they may not be correct, or not correct for the reasons they believe, but there are a lot of people out there that have had a myriad of issues clear up or improve on the diets. Likely, because they do have issues with one or more of those things, but haven't been formally diagnosed or technology doesn't exist yet to diagnose them.
Now, others may not have any of these issues, so they see no difference between Paleo/Primal and another diet where the macros are the same. That's great for those people -- but those aren't the people that Paleo/Primal are likely going to help the most and it certainly doesn't negate the very valuable benefit that others experience.
It would be great if we could all just go into the doctor and have a personal, customized plan drawn up to address all these potential issues. But, that's just not realistic -- both in terms of money and current technology (though some of it may be possible). So, plenty of people are feeling sub-optimal or downright crappy and diet correction can do and has done great things for them.
Just because it doesn't help you or didn't work for you doesn't make it (1) a lie, (2) based on psuedoscience or (3) mean it won't greatly improve others' lives.
Saying beans are unhealthy is a lie. There is plenty of research showing the eating beans on a regular basis is not unhealthy. When diets are compared, the healthiest are always rich in legumes.0 -
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.
Well, if that's your conclusion, I think that's a valid one. I personally fall on the other side of the equation and don't see the reason to include them given the lectin issue, especially as I think it's likely that some people have sensitivities to them like lactose, gluten, etc. To me, they both seem to be reasoned, reasonable opinions based on interpretation of some interesting facts and research. Differing conclusions are not lies.
Of course some people have issues with lactose and gluten. Some people have issues with protein, nuts, chocolate, bananas and pretty much any other food you could name. It's possible to be allergic or sensitive to any food. That seems a poor reason to cut the food out if you don't have the problem. It's a bit like selling your car because your neighbor can't drive.
Do you also cut out celery, parsnips, broccoli, brussel sprouts, spinach, cauliflower, and strawberries? All of those (plus many other fruits and vegetables) contian toxins.
I disagree. I think the diets originate, or at least now acknowledge, that there are a host of health issues out there that the proponents believe are linked to diet -- obesity probably being the largest, but also various GI tract issues, metabolism issues, thyroid issues, autoimmune issues, etc. And, some likely triggers or culprits have been identified -- gluten, lactose, casein, lectin, etc. Paleo/Primal takes a whole elimination approach and explains why they believe eliminating or reducing those things are better for overall health. Primal is more permissive and recommend bringing somethings back in if you don't have a reaction to them or eat them in moderation -- like dairy, dark chocolate, etc. Now, they may not be correct, or not correct for the reasons they believe, but there are a lot of people out there that have had a myriad of issues clear up or improve on the diets. Likely, because they do have issues with one or more of those things, but haven't been formally diagnosed or technology doesn't exist yet to diagnose them.
Now, others may not have any of these issues, so they see no difference between Paleo/Primal and another diet where the macros are the same. That's great for those people -- but those aren't the people that Paleo/Primal are likely going to help the most and it certainly doesn't negate the very valuable benefit that others experience.
It would be great if we could all just go into the doctor and have a personal, customized plan drawn up to address all these potential issues. But, that's just not realistic -- both in terms of money and current technology (though some of it may be possible). So, plenty of people are feeling sub-optimal or downright crappy and diet correction can do and has done great things for them.
Just because it doesn't help you or didn't work for you doesn't make it (1) a lie, (2) based on psuedoscience or (3) mean it won't greatly improve others' lives.
Saying beans are unhealthy is a lie. There is plenty of research showing the eating beans on a regular basis is not unhealthy. When diets are compared, the healthiest are always rich in legumes.
I'm not sure they say beans are unhealthy. My understanding is that the point is that lectins can cause considerable damage to the body when consumed in great numbers, things like legumes contain a great deal of them, so they avoid them on that basis. Especially when the upside of beans and legumes can be obtained from other sources.0 -
Do you know what Paleo is? What you are supposed to give up and what you are supposed to eat?
I ask because I've read a great many posts where people say they are eating Paleo or want to try Paleo, when all they really mean is they are giving up processed food.
^^ This
I have several friends of mine that are into it. They mostly eat meat and veggies and that's it. No dairy is allowed and a whole host of plants are off limits.0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.
Right. Around here, people can laugh and joke, but they won't let a lie stand, not a lie about food or exercise.0 -
18 months low carb (keto).
All I can say is that it is not magic and despite what you read or what people say, you can not eat as much as you like if you want to lose weight. Measuring your calories is still required but you are focusing on fat as energy vs carbs.
I have eaten LOTS of calories in a day, upwards of 5k for weeks on end without gaining any weight which seems sorta off. (Just a note, I kept my protein intake around my ideal LBM)
In addition, the first few days of SHARP weight loss is all water. The hardest thing is the loss of carbs and your body's harsh cravings for it - after about 7 days, that passes and it is fun.0 -
Have you read any of the research on lectins?
Yes, I have. Whole foods are often more than sum of their parts. Many very heatlhy foods have toxins in them. That's why we have organs to deal with toxins.
Well, if that's your conclusion, I think that's a valid one. I personally fall on the other side of the equation and don't see the reason to include them given the lectin issue, especially as I think it's likely that some people have sensitivities to them like lactose, gluten, etc. To me, they both seem to be reasoned, reasonable opinions based on interpretation of some interesting facts and research. Differing conclusions are not lies.
Of course some people have issues with lactose and gluten. Some people have issues with protein, nuts, chocolate, bananas and pretty much any other food you could name. It's possible to be allergic or sensitive to any food. That seems a poor reason to cut the food out if you don't have the problem. It's a bit like selling your car because your neighbor can't drive.
Do you also cut out celery, parsnips, broccoli, brussel sprouts, spinach, cauliflower, and strawberries? All of those (plus many other fruits and vegetables) contian toxins.
I disagree. I think the diets originate, or at least now acknowledge, that there are a host of health issues out there that the proponents believe are linked to diet -- obesity probably being the largest, but also various GI tract issues, metabolism issues, thyroid issues, autoimmune issues, etc. And, some likely triggers or culprits have been identified -- gluten, lactose, casein, lectin, etc. Paleo/Primal takes a whole elimination approach and explains why they believe eliminating or reducing those things are better for overall health. Primal is more permissive and recommend bringing somethings back in if you don't have a reaction to them or eat them in moderation -- like dairy, dark chocolate, etc. Now, they may not be correct, or not correct for the reasons they believe, but there are a lot of people out there that have had a myriad of issues clear up or improve on the diets. Likely, because they do have issues with one or more of those things, but haven't been formally diagnosed or technology doesn't exist yet to diagnose them.
Now, others may not have any of these issues, so they see no difference between Paleo/Primal and another diet where the macros are the same. That's great for those people -- but those aren't the people that Paleo/Primal are likely going to help the most and it certainly doesn't negate the very valuable benefit that others experience.
It would be great if we could all just go into the doctor and have a personal, customized plan drawn up to address all these potential issues. But, that's just not realistic -- both in terms of money and current technology (though some of it may be possible). So, plenty of people are feeling sub-optimal or downright crappy and diet correction can do and has done great things for them.
Just because it doesn't help you or didn't work for you doesn't make it (1) a lie, (2) based on psuedoscience or (3) mean it won't greatly improve others' lives.
Saying beans are unhealthy is a lie. There is plenty of research showing the eating beans on a regular basis is not unhealthy. When diets are compared, the healthiest are always rich in legumes.
I'm not sure they say beans are unhealthy. My understanding is that the point is that lectins can cause considerable damage to the body when consumed in great numbers, things like legumes contain a great deal of them, so they avoid them on that basis. Especially when the upside of beans and legumes can be obtained from other sources.
I don't know to whom you refer when you say "they", but I've been told by many Paleo followers that legumes are unhealthy. Some even call them poison.
All lies.0 -
I'm not sure why Paleo/Primal gets so much gruff on this site, but I love it and would highly recommend it to anyone.
I will give gruff to any diet that says beans are unhealthy. It's a lie.
Right. Around here, people can laugh and joke, but they won't let a lie stand, not a lie about food or exercise.
It's not a lie. It's a difference of opinion. I think it's a little hyperbole to call beans poison, but I understand the reference. Perhaps you guys just hang out with some uneducated friends or just super zealous folks. There are plenty of people that do Paleo/Primal with a little more sanity and flexibility. Sort of like religion -- you can be orthodox or modern/flexible.0
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
- 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