Does myfitnesspal work for men?
Replies
-
It's all about the calorie count . . . It's a great tool for accountability.
THIS ^^^0 -
just because you read it it doesn't mean its true
Haha. Aint that the truth! I don't truly believe anything until I am thoroughly convinced of the fact. This is just something that I would like to explore and understand the math behind all this. I'm guessing that the initial target is a complete guess based on statistics. Does the software adjust when it sees that your losing too fast or too slow?0 -
Woman tend to be more willing to go for the whole supportive environment thing that the boards are. There are probably a lot more men who just use the mobile app and don't post on the msg board.
I think this may be true. My husband and I are doing this weight loss thing together and we both use MFP. He's lost 20lbs and I've lost 15lbs. I've been reading and posting on the forums. He's perused the forums a bit, but he's never posted.
The person who told us about MFP is a guy, he's lost about 50lbs.0 -
This is just something that I would like to explore and understand the math behind all this. I'm guessing that the initial target is a complete guess based on statistics. Does the software adjust when it sees that your losing too fast or too slow?
I wouldn't say it's a complete guess. MFP uses generally accepted formulas in determining BMR and Activity Level. These formulas then take into account the information you entered when you signed up. So while the info given is tailored to you it's only as accurate as the formula which is close enough for most of us.
As for adjustments, it will decrease your calorie goal for every 10 lbs you lose since your BMR goes down as you weigh less. It'll also warn you if you net below 1200 a day.0 -
Works for me. The men and women are extremely supportive and make the work seem like fun.0
-
Just in case it hasn't been said enough... the site definitely works for both men and women.
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter0 -
Still a newbie here, so not sure if MFP works for me, but I'm loving the food diary becasue it's easy to keep tarck of things and use it as a journal to record my throughts and feelings as I try once again to shed some bulk. If there are any MFP-buddies with tips and tricks for a desk-jockey, then add me as a friend :happy:0
-
Yeah, it works.
Wow... Congratulations Brent... now that's what I call weightloss! Can't see myself getting quite as gym-fit, but every liitle helps :flowerforyou:0 -
It worked for me. This site was recommended by two guy friends.0
-
This site is working for me!! Lots of fit and unfit men on here. The women tend to use the forums more and the social aspect of the website, but lots of men do too, and even more men are using the site purely for logging calories consumed and burned. it works, and I don't think its tailored more to women....its just that more women participate in the forum discussions than men do.0
-
This is just something that I would like to explore and understand the math behind all this. I'm guessing that the initial target is a complete guess based on statistics. Does the software adjust when it sees that your losing too fast or too slow?
I wouldn't say it's a complete guess. MFP uses generally accepted formulas in determining BMR and Activity Level. These formulas then take into account the information you entered when you signed up. So while the info given is tailored to you it's only as accurate as the formula which is close enough for most of us.
As for adjustments, it will decrease your calorie goal for every 10 lbs you lose since your BMR goes down as you weigh less. It'll also warn you if you net below 1200 a day.
A friend here at MFP helped me find this: http://www.free-workout-routines.net/tdee.html
It gives the formula that you are probably talking about. There is a separate one for men and women. Following the math from this site, I computed the same result that MFP gave me. I'm happy to see this.
I'm convinced that this will work for me. Just the fact that I'm keeping track of calories will probably do the most good. Especially since I LOVE dark beers. Gonna have to cut that out a bit.0 -
Glad you found some backup to set your mind at ease. This site works very well as long as you're honest and consistent. As for the beer, all things in moderation
0 -
I feel that this site is tailored for women. Does myfitnesspal give different targets for each gender? How much does gender factor into weight loss?
Yes, this site will and does work for men. That is because men face the same physiological reality as women: to lose weight, or even better, fat, you have to create a calorie deficit. In other words if you provide your body with less calories (energy) than it needs to maintain itself (TDEE) it will look to its body stores to make up the difference. The quality of your diet and training routine will determine the percentage of the weight which is lost through pure fat and muscle (although genetics largely determines this.)
When calculating your deficit level MFP will take into account current weight, height, age, gender and activity level to calculate your TDEE calorie level. It will then subtract a certain amount from it to give your daily calorie goal depending on how much weight you have put in you would like to lose her per week (eg 1lb)0 -
Works for me....and I had to cross off my gender (and height, and initial weight and so on) when I signed up, so I assume it does take gender into account when running the algrorithms that spit out the numbers for you.0
-
There are a lot of women on this site for sure, but there is nothing female-specific about using a food database and calorie-counter. The calculator that sets your target uses your sex - males get to eat more calories (which to me is an even better perk than peeing standing up).0
-
There are a lot of women on this site for sure, but there is nothing female-specific about using a food database and calorie-counter. The calculator that sets your target uses your sex - males get to eat more calories (which to me is an even better perk than peeing standing up).
Boy... that would be good... haven't been able to pee standing up for years as to be frank the belly gets in the way. Much safer to sit and know it's not all going down my trouser legs :laugh:0 -
You've come to the right place Kyle. MFP def works for fellows, just be honest, be smart and willing to make adjustments, and stay with it. You'll be standing proudly again in no time.0
-
I feel completely the same, I ended up here because I signed up for MyFitnessPal, and the newsfeed only has articles by and for women. It’s full of articles such as where a particular dietician or influencer chooses to eat, but every single one of them is written by and aimed at women, there is not a single male anywhere to be found and I really didn’t feel it was meant for men. Good to see that I’m wrong, there’s a lot of welcoming comments here, but the app itself did seem that it wasn’t meant for me.0
-
To be honest, I wasn't even aware there's a newsfeed. Been on this website since.. 2014 or so? I use it for the forums and for tracking my food intake. Both work for men and women and everyone inbetween. I guess there are better sources for celebrity and other *kitten* news.3
-
-
If I could go back to 2011 what would I do 🤔2
-
rileysowner wrote: »
I’ve heard this since forever really, and I was surprised to see that when my husband and I did a weight loss challenge we lost the exact same amount every week with the exact same deficit. I was shocked! So, I’m kind of curious if this is really true or a myth that’s been passed down. Is it because they have more muscle? Wouldn’t that mean they lose water weight less than we do, slowing down weight loss on the scale? Can someone provide some insight? I’m sure the OP doesn’t mind since this thread is from over a decade ago.0 -
rileysowner wrote: »
I’ve heard this since forever really, and I was surprised to see that when my husband and I did a weight loss challenge we lost the exact same amount every week with the exact same deficit. I was shocked! So, I’m kind of curious if this is really true or a myth that’s been passed down. Is it because they have more muscle? Wouldn’t that mean they lose water weight less than we do, slowing down weight loss on the scale? Can someone provide some insight? I’m sure the OP doesn’t mind since this thread is from over a decade ago.
Based on the number of women who complain about how easy it is for the husband/boyfriend to lose weight faster, I would say it is true. I know in our household I have usually lost faster than my wife has in the past. This would likely be because men have higher testosterone levels and generally carry more lean mass. Of course this is not like I have some actual study on it. It is based on anecdotal information. There may be studies. I have neither the time nor the energy to search for them. Also, I would say this would be something in general. There are many confounding factors for individuals that would change the results for them as individuals.1 -
rileysowner wrote: »rileysowner wrote: »
I’ve heard this since forever really, and I was surprised to see that when my husband and I did a weight loss challenge we lost the exact same amount every week with the exact same deficit. I was shocked! So, I’m kind of curious if this is really true or a myth that’s been passed down. Is it because they have more muscle? Wouldn’t that mean they lose water weight less than we do, slowing down weight loss on the scale? Can someone provide some insight? I’m sure the OP doesn’t mind since this thread is from over a decade ago.
Based on the number of women who complain about how easy it is for the husband/boyfriend to lose weight faster, I would say it is true. I know in our household I have usually lost faster than my wife has in the past. This would likely be because men have higher testosterone levels and generally carry more lean mass. Of course this is not like I have some actual study on it. It is based on anecdotal information. There may be studies. I have neither the time nor the energy to search for them. Also, I would say this would be something in general. There are many confounding factors for individuals that would change the results for them as individuals.
I’ve heard the same complaints, so assumed it must be true, but my personal data proved otherwise. I have a feeling it’s more about NEAT, accurate calorie counting, and a tiny amount due to testosterone. I’ll have to do a little digging and see if there’s a more thorough explanation.0 -
Precondition for the generalities that follow: the generic male who would NOT frequent MFP and would only be indirectly connected to MFP via their female conduit is generally less (overtly and actively) concerned about appearance than the generic female who frequents MFP and has a history of "dieting"
--may have generally done less dieting over the years leaving them in a better starting position
--may have a generous amount of ready to lose visceral fat and be starting with more fat available to lose. Remember that essential fat levels are less for males. So 25% or 30% fat does not reflect an identical availability of fat to lose
--has a higher tdee in general so a 500 deficit is a much smaller percentage of tdee and likely easier to adhere to.
--this also means that half a plate is a much larger absolute deficit for your average male than average female resulting in faster loss
--same applies to total glycogen (this is unchecked assumption)
--generally speaking may have ready to take to the bank wins for easy early losses: cut down on beer, less fast food, less "nachos".
--may have ability to add some easier exercise wins due to muscle/test as discussed
Don't know that longer term adherence is any different.
To the original question I would say that the relative visible m-f ratio on MFP favors the f side. And when I walk past the community centre and see who is attending exercise classes guess what I also see as the predominant demographic? F side by a landslide. Gym/weights are certainly not one sided but they are not quite 50-50 when I've observed them. M side there.
So while people may follow the crowd and engage in certain things more or less does not mean that the things will not work for them if they do engage
Gym, exercise class and MFP will all work. Equally. If YOU choose to engage and work them.2 -
--may have generally done less dieting over the years leaving them in a better starting position
Very likely--may have a generous amount of ready to lose visceral fat and be starting with more fat available to lose. Remember that essential fat levels are less for males. So 25% or 30% fat does not reflect an identical availability of fat to lose
There’s a chance they could have more to lose and less essential fat, but I don’t see how the same deficit doesn’t equal a very similar loss, after the initial water drop if you set up your goals right.--has a higher tdee in general so a 500 deficit is a much smaller percentage of tdee and likely easier to adhere to.
This is what I’m thinking. They have either a higher NEAT/TDEE or the calorie counting is off. I do feel that muscle mass has a slightly higher calorie burn, but not a ton like many believe it to be.--generally speaking may have ready to take to the bank wins for easy early losses: cut down on beer, less fast food, less "nachos".
This was my assumption from the beginning with our weight loss challenge, but we had the same wins there. We both weighed and logged all our calories, weighed ourselves daily, and had the same trend. Maybe I’m the weird one.
Not sure what/who your other response was for but I’m guessing they’re missing out if you don’t repost it there 😉.
1 -
--may have generally done less dieting over the years leaving them in a better starting position
Very likely--may have a generous amount of ready to lose visceral fat and be starting with more fat available to lose. Remember that essential fat levels are less for males. So 25% or 30% fat does not reflect an identical availability of fat to lose
There’s a chance they could have more to lose and less essential fat, but I don’t see how the same deficit doesn’t equal a very similar loss, after the initial water drop if you set up your goals right.--has a higher tdee in general so a 500 deficit is a much smaller percentage of tdee and likely easier to adhere to.
This is what I’m thinking. They have either a higher NEAT/TDEE or the calorie counting is off. I do feel that muscle mass has a slightly higher calorie burn, but not a ton like many believe it to be.
--generally speaking may have ready to take to the bank wins for easy early losses: cut down on beer, less fast food, less "nachos".
This was my assumption from the beginning with our weight loss challenge, but we had the same wins there. We both weighed and logged all our calories, weighed ourselves daily, and had the same trend. Maybe I’m the weird one.
Not sure what/who your other response was for but I’m guessing they’re missing out if you don’t repost it there 😉.
IIRC, the estimate is that a pound of muscle burns maybe 8 calories per day at rest, vs. maybe 2 calories per pound of fat, so that explicit difference is tiny. How many pounds difference in body comp is kind of individual; and of course men tend to be bigger overall as well as leaner (more muscle mass) at any given BMI.
I've long thought that having lower body fat and more muscle within the same sex probably makes it easier and more fun to move, such that same-sex people at the same weight but materially different muscle mass and strength may automagically tend to have different NEAT, but I admit that's pure speculation. Don't even want to speculate about male vs. female in that respect, though.
This next is going to get me in trouble, I predict.
What I do see in my social circle (keep in mind that I'm dinosaur-old) is that cultural expectations seem to have the potential to create more NEAT-y lives for men, i.e., they're expected to do home chores that involve the heavy lifting and more physical vigor, in homes with both men and women. They're also more likely to have more physical jobs. I grant that research also shows that statistically men get to sit around more at home, while women spend more time on home chores, so who knows. Also - obviously - none of that is universal.
It's been ages I've been single (widowed), but I don't think hubs and I ever lost weight at the same time. I know that when he was younger, he could eat what seemed like prodigious amounts and stay literally skinny, but some of that was probably genetics, and a certain natural athleticism.
1 -
This next is going to get me in trouble, I predict.
It made total sense back then. Now that I’ve had the opposite experience, to my absolute shock, and lost weight consistently with my husband, I can’t help but ask, maybe this belief is holding us ladies back and not as relevant anymore? It might be true, it might not be, and it might be too complicated to test, but it’s an interesting belief to revisit.0 -
This next is going to get me in trouble, I predict.
It made total sense back then. Now that I’ve had the opposite experience, to my absolute shock, and lost weight consistently with my husband, I can’t help but ask, maybe this belief is holding us back and not as relevant anymore? It might be true, it might not be, and it might be too complicated to test, but it’s an interesting belief to revisit.
I think there's (as a tendency) a weird thing where women bond over "it's so hard to lose weight". I think "men have it easy" can be a corollary to that. (Or "young people have it easy", premenopausal people, naturally thin people (whoever the heck they are), athletic people, whatever.)
There are even some groups/threads here on MFP that - I'm in trouble again here - look like that to me, congratulating each other on being down a pound, over-reacting to water weight weirdness, commiserating over how hard it is to resist that big slice of cake when everyone else is eating the whole thing, reassuring each other that it's OK when weight goes up . . . whatever.
I'm not sure, but I feel like - again, as a generality - men don't fall into this particular kind of bonding ritual. (I think they have bonding rituals, some of them equally dysfunctional, just different. I say that based on a long career in a male-dominated field, and some social contexts that also had more men than women, like martial arts classes.)
Besides that, I think there's a general human tendency to think things (about weight loss) that have the shape "people like me have it really hard, when everyone else has it so easy". Age, sex, thyroid conditions, pushy family members, blah blah blah. Completely without foundation? Maybe not. Overblown? IMO quite possibly.2 -
Considering includes exactly zero adaptability for women's hormonal cycles, I'd say it's tailored for men, along with almost all the diet and exercise research studies it's based on where women were excluded. Even now pregnancy and breastfeeding information in relation to weight and excercise will never show up as sponsored info. Can women use it? Sure. Was it designed specifically for us and how we differ from men? Absolutely not.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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