lb of fat wieghs the same as lb of muscle
Replies
-
the thread 3500 cals IS NOT 1 pound! the tird post down.
You've been trolled.
Welcome to the internet.0 -
I don't get it.
So should I eat back my exercise calories or not?0 -
Sorry if I cramped anyone style by starting this. If you don't want to talk about it then move on. It was just for fun.0
-
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school0 -
ETA: JUst read the whole thead and it seems like a lot of peoplle don't get it. Can someone please point me in the direction of a post where anyone says 1lb of muscle weighs more than 1lb of fat, because I have never seen anyone say that in my life.
the thread 3500 cals IS NOT 1 pound! the tird post down.
[/quote]
Just had a look. Thats blatantly a joke response to a ridiculous post, which I think (hope?) is also a joke.0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
Oh really?
:huh:
Edit: to put a spotlight on a statement I just can't reconcile...0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
Nobody said that a lb of something weighs more than a 1lb of something else! What are you arguing?!
I need to leave this thead now
0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
Nobody said that a lb of something weighs more than a 1lb of something else! What are you arguing?!
I need to leave this thead now
oh yes that has been said many many many times on here believe it or not and i think that was the reason why the op made this thread in the first place :laugh:0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.0 -
To clarify, I meant noone in this thread, including the person you were responding to.do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
Nobody said that a lb of something weighs more than a 1lb of something else! What are you arguing?!
I need to leave this thead now
oh yes that has been said many many many times on here believe it or not and i think that was the reason why the op made this thread in the first place :laugh:
Although I have never seen it anywhere else on the board either.
I have seen muscle weighs more than fat, which people often seem to misread as 1lb of muscle weighs more than 1lb of fat, but never actually seen anyone say 1lb of muscle weighs more than 1lb of fat.0 -
This new and exciting.0
-
My momma said alligators are ornery 'cause they got all dem teeth and no toothbrush.
You don't have what they call "the social skills." That's why you never have any friends, 'cept fo' yo' mama.0 -
Yes. Yes. YES. Thank you.do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.0 -
0 -
0 -
*headdesk headdesk headdesk*0
-
I don't see how anyone can say different. A lb is a lb no matter what material you are talking about. The amount of space that said object takes up may be different that is about it.
Seriously, are we back to this ridiculousness again? MFP should ban every poster who starts a post like this.0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
Nobody said that a lb of something weighs more than a 1lb of something else! What are you arguing?!
I need to leave this thead now
oh yes that has been said many many many times on here believe it or not and i think that was the reason why the op made this thread in the first place :laugh:
No it hasn't.0 -
Love the picture. It's so true.0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.
muscle is denser than fat not heavier... weight is measured in grams ounces pounds and so on so how can two things have two different weights????? if i go to the deli and ask for a pound of turkey breast i may have more turkey breast if i ask them to slice it thin rather than thick but the total weight is still a pound.
again when you bring volume into the discussion you are no longer taking "weight" you are talking about density...0 -
I don't see how anyone can say different. A lb is a lb no matter what material you are talking about. The amount of space that said object takes up may be different that is about it.
I always giggle a little when someone thinks one item is heavier then the other of the same weight. Not sure if they really 'think' it but their words imply it. Cracks me up everytime.
Not sure why some are getting so grumpy with this post. Its a shame to be negative to an interesting topic. I have been on MFP a month and I have read threads stating simular topic, but I still found this discussion helpful...well the postive parts that is:).0 -
Love the picture. It's so true.
Well, except for the math, but other than that, totally true.0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.
muscle is denser than fat not heavier... weight is measured in grams ounces pounds and so on so how can two things have two different weights????? if i go to the deli and ask for a pound of turkey breast i may have more turkey breast if i ask them to slice it thin rather than thick but the total weight is still a pound.
again when you bring volume into the discussion you are no longer taking "weight" you are talking about density...
Two things that are the same size can have different weights. I have two two inch balls. One is made from wood. The other from steel. Guess what??? They have different weights. I can say 1 ball weighs more than the other. I'm talking about weight. Density makes the difference in the weight. You are getting 5th grade science concepts confused.
Your argument makes no sense. If you truly believe that you cannot compare the weight of 1 cubic inch of fat with the weight of 1 cubic inch of muscle, then you must also believe that you cannot compare the size of 1 pound of fat with the size of 1 pound of muscle.0 -
One day you will click onto what everyone is saying here and feel ridiuculous. Noone is saying 1lb of something weighs more than 1lb of another. Yes 1lb is 1lb, does not mean everything on the entire earth weighs the same.do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.
muscle is denser than fat not heavier... weight is measured in grams ounces pounds and so on so how can two things have two different weights????? if i go to the deli and ask for a pound of turkey breast i may have more turkey breast if i ask them to slice it thin rather than thick but the total weight is still a pound.
again when you bring volume into the discussion you are no longer taking "weight" you are talking about density...
That being said I am going to force myself to go now, no point talking to a brick wall lol (which by the way would be much much heavier than a similar wall made of feathers
) 0 -
Damn...I've done all that work trying to get muscles for nothing then. I should be trying to get fat so I will weigh less...baha!0
-
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.
muscle is denser than fat not heavier... weight is measured in grams ounces pounds and so on so how can two things have two different weights????? if i go to the deli and ask for a pound of turkey breast i may have more turkey breast if i ask them to slice it thin rather than thick but the total weight is still a pound.
again when you bring volume into the discussion you are no longer taking "weight" you are talking about density...
OMG when will you stop this madness.
Density= mass/volume
mass = measure of object's resistance to acceleration
weight = mass x gravity (standard = 9.806 m/s^2)
Gravity is essentially a constant, so....
density = (weight /9.806 m/s^2)/ volume
are we catching on yet the relationship here?????
[edited to correct my algebra, not my science]0 -
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.
muscle is denser than fat not heavier... weight is measured in grams ounces pounds and so on so how can two things have two different weights????? if i go to the deli and ask for a pound of turkey breast i may have more turkey breast if i ask them to slice it thin rather than thick but the total weight is still a pound.
again when you bring volume into the discussion you are no longer taking "weight" you are talking about density...
OMG when will you stop this madness.
Density= mass/volume
mass = measure of object's resistance to acceleration
weight = mass x gravity (standard = 9.806 m/s^2)
Gravity is essentially a constant, so....
density = (weight /9.806 m/s^2)/ volume
are we catching on yet the relationship here?????
[edited to correct my algebra, not my science]
Just stop.0 -
One other thing, if we have to talk about weight and mass only in seperate contexts, and therefore everything weighs the same. In the same vain does this mean everything also has the same mass? As of course 1 cubic inch of one thing is the same as 1 cubic inch as another, and we can't bring weight into it!0
-
do people actually say a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat?
I can't believe we are *still* having this conversation. Muscle does weigh more than fat, as in if you have the same volume of muscle and fat, the muscle will weigh more. One cubic inch of fat also weighs more than one cubic inch of air. It's not rocket science. Just some of us catch on that the rest of statement "muscle weighs more than fat" is "for the same amount of volume"....so you can be lifting weights, lowering your size, lowering your body fat, be building muscle, and see nothing change on the scale.
please stop your argument is wrong... weight vs mass density are two different concepts often confused by many people on this site including yourself...
a pound is a pound no matter if it is fat, muscle, feathers, bricks, lettuce or whatever it is still a pound... now density is the amount of space something takes up and that will vary by objects. yes a pound of fat has more density than a pound of muscle. yes a pound of bricks has more density than a pound of feathers.
i hopes this clears up the confusion with you people that failed basic science in school
are you familiar with the concept of volume?
ok.
Now take one cubic inch of fat and put it next to one cubic inch of muscle.
Which weighs more?
Yes. We are talking about density. But the common colloquialism "muscle weighs more than fat" is correct if we all understand we are comparing the same volume of muscle to fat, because muscle has more density (ie. weight per volume). I never said a pound of anything weighs more than a pound of anythign else. Please reread my post.
I have two science degrees, and I find your condescending attitude laughable because while you may understand science, your reading comprehension is painfully lacking.
muscle is denser than fat not heavier... weight is measured in grams ounces pounds and so on so how can two things have two different weights????? if i go to the deli and ask for a pound of turkey breast i may have more turkey breast if i ask them to slice it thin rather than thick but the total weight is still a pound.
again when you bring volume into the discussion you are no longer taking "weight" you are talking about density...
Two things that are the same size can have different weights. I have two two inch balls. One is made from wood. The other from steel. Guess what??? They have different weights. I can say 1 ball weighs more than the other. I'm talking about weight. Density makes the difference in the weight. You are getting 5th grade science concepts confused.
Your argument makes no sense. If you truly believe that you cannot compare the weight of 1 cubic inch of fat with the weight of 1 cubic inch of muscle, then you must also believe that you cannot compare the size of 1 pound of fat with the size of 1 pound of muscle.
i said nothing about a specific volume of anything so dont try to add words to support your incorrect argument. i said from the beginning fat is denser than muscle you would have a greater amount in a pound of fat vs a pound of muscle but they would both still WEIGH the same.. one may take up more space but the WEIGHT would always be 1lb on the scale.0 -
This NEW science stuff is weird. I said it in the other thread, but it clearly bears repeating here.
Drop a lb of feathers from a given height along with a lb of bricks/rocks. You will find that the bricks land first EVERY time - proof that the gravitational effect on the lb of bricks is greater. Thus, they are heavier. This is a simple experiment anyone can do.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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