MFP vs IPOARM vs Level Obstacles
Replies
-
I think they probably all work, so it's a case of finding what suits.
I started with MFP, aiming to lose 1/2 lb to 1 lb a week and that worked. I changed over to IPOARM with a 20% cut and that worked. I don't worry too much about macros, but aim for healthy eating with a good amount of veg and oily fish and try to eat more protein than I would normally eat. There isn't much difference in the calories between the two methods. If I did MFP at 1/2 lb a week, I'd be eating more than on IPOARM.
I prefer not having to log exercise calories (to be honest, I rarely time exercise, and I'm not clear about exactly how much I burn because some of my exercise involves low activity periods). I'd rather make an estimate and stick to it.
Incidentally, not everybody chooses to lose 2lb a week on MFP. I didn't. However, MFP would set me to 1200 whether I chose 2lb or 1lb. And that's important when it comes to stalls. Obviously if I DID set 2lb a week and stuck to it religiously, I would only lose 1lb (actually less than 1lb, because 1200 wouldn't give me a 500 cal deficit). I think 1lb a week or less is quite difficult to notice over short periods, because of daily fluctuations of (for me) 1 - 2 lb. It can easily look as if somebody is stalling, especially if MFP had told them they were going to lose more.0 -
hmmmmm... so watch should I weigh? 5'2 , 100 pounds. Healthy. I really don't care for formulas and predictions. I go my my ability to move my body. Why are all of you fighting over formulas?
*i'm so over pop up docs.
You've never been fat. Most of us have. Have some empathy instead of gloating.0 -
I still follow basic TDEE guidelines, macros 40/30/30
This. I'm a simpleton. If there are too many things to factor in/worry about, I get confused and lose interest.
TDEE - 20%, macros 40/30/30. My focus right now is maintaining lean mass while I lose body fat. This works for me.
ETA - If it weren't for all the work that HelloitsDan, Heybales, and everyone else has put in to help people for free, I'd still be doing it the MFP way, using food as a reward ("earning" food/bev through exercise, which NO), and worrying about "going over" on rest days.
The way I do things now is the closest I think you can get to "real life", while still being tremendously effective. It's easy to follow, sustainable, and there is no deprivation involved.0 -
And nobody comes on here and sets themselves on 1 lb per week loss.
Believe it or not, I actually *did* set my goals as 1lb per week the day I set up my MFP account. I realized later that I was one of the very few that actually read the word "recommended" next to that option.0 -
While I generally use MFP with a few tweaks, Level was MUCH easier for me to understand. Waaaay fewer numbers and intimidating walls of text.
A lot of people are very confused by the jargon and need something simpler or else they'll get scared off.
That's not what we want to happen here.0 -
I started on MFP settings - got 1200 cals (of course, female 5'2) starved for a week.
Read IPOARM (several times) upped my cals felt happier lost 10lbs.
Started NROL4W and used their calculations upped cals again - lost 8".
Read Level Obstacles and saw that this was a much simplified explanation for noobs and wished I'd had this when I started.
I now recommend Level Obstacles to noobs as I think it is easier to understand when you are starting out, IPOARM has just become far too complicated - most people don't know their body fat starting out and the wall of text can be so intimidating, plus there are how many versions and spin offs?
Yeah, I mentioned above, that for me, I needed to do trial and error with maintenance calories to find what worked for me. Like you, everything was setting me too low because I am small. I was actually at the point of trying to set my calories in order to prevent weight loss. So, I just wanted to add that also the NROLFW settings were also too low for me (even if I ate the exercise calories everyday, including rest days, I would still lose weight).0 -
When I got here in December 2012, I used the MFP method and the standard 1200 cals/day. Then I ran across IPOARM (Level wasn't "released" yet) and used that. Yes, it was a bit verbose, but it made sense to me and I adopted that plan with success. I still follow IPOARM and recalculate my number after each 10lb loss.
Then Level came out, the cut to the chase version, much simpler, and I think appeals to the newbie.0 -
To be honest, I think the easiest thing is the calculators at Scooby's Workshop.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/
Just put your stats in, use Katch-McArdle if you know your body fat %, and Mifflin St-Jeor if you don't. Activity level descriptions are simple. Choose your deficit, and it does the calculation for you.
Of course, it doesn't give all the background information, doesn't give precise calorie burns, doesn't tell you what deficit to go for, etc., but it's great to use alongside IPOARM, or for trying things out. I think it would be fine to use it and just go into more detail if it's not working.0 -
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
You have to look for the Net calories.
And youhave the coice to eat the exercise calories or not.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
I concur with both of these posts. But people have always sought a higher power in all things. If you don't give them something they get anxious.0 -
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
I mean if it's really that simple, we should all eat 500 calories a day, you know? What's the problem, it's a deficit and it's simple... Obviously things are a bit more complex.
"Eat 500 calories a day" would be dumb, not simple.
There's a vast gulf between that and the 5,000-word essay full of charts and graphs that is IPOARM.0 -
i think we need a new name for IPOARM so that we can make a distinction between the version created by Dan and the one edited by Pu.
i suggest... Dan's Edited Roadmap by Pu
in this way, we can more easily tell which version we are referring to.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Bump to follow.
I think Sara's point is critical. These models are a good place to start - they provide some context, structure, and a beginning. Then you need to tweak with experience and continued learning.0 -
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
I mean if it's really that simple, we should all eat 500 calories a day, you know? What's the problem, it's a deficit and it's simple... Obviously things are a bit more complex.
"Eat 500 calories a day" would be dumb, not simple.
There's a vast gulf between that and the 5,000-word essay full of charts and graphs that is IPOARM.
The "Essay" explains "why" simple things are sometimes dumb. It is a dumb, Why not just eat 1,000 calories a day? not as dumb, but still dumb. You where in the topic of the formula i made. Some of you where criticizing because i didn't "explain" where i got the data from. Now you're saying, explaining is too much to read. IPOARM is meant to be through.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.
umm. no.
we were pointing out that you made it up. there's a big distinction between not disclosing the source of your data and not having any data at all.0 -
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
when you're strange,
faces come out in the rain.0 -
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
I mean if it's really that simple, we should all eat 500 calories a day, you know? What's the problem, it's a deficit and it's simple... Obviously things are a bit more complex.
"Eat 500 calories a day" would be dumb, not simple.
There's a vast gulf between that and the 5,000-word essay full of charts and graphs that is IPOARM.
The "Essay" explains "why" simple things are sometimes dumb. It is a dumb, Why not just eat 1,000 calories a day? not as dumb, but still dumb. You where in the topic of the formula i made. Some of you where criticizing because i didn't "explain" where i got the data from. Now you're saying, explaining is too much to read. IPOARM is meant to be through.
You made up data and presented it as if it were science. And you got called on it.0 -
i think we need a new name for IPOARM so that we can make a distinction between the version created by Dan and the one edited by Pu.
i suggest... Dan's Edited Roadmap by Pu
in this way, we can more easily tell which version we are referring to.
I like it...short and to the point:flowerforyou:0 -
I'm winging it.
MFP is giving me some ludicrous number around 1300 cals which is not feasible for me.
Road map is way too complicated and even just the BMR calculation are way different depending of the formula I'm using so it screws up the TDEE calculation.
Level obstacle doesn't take into consideration macros, which are important to me. ( I'm trying to be a healthier person with a much more balanced diet more than just losing weight for the sake of it)
So I have my macros set at 40/30/30 and my cals set at 1500 ( which is the lowest I eat) and I go up to 1900 on days with a lot of workouts. I might be slowing down my weight loss process by doing so but it's constant. Haven't plateaued in 8 months.0 -
I would like to point out he's squatting 405 lbs in his ticker. That is all, carry on.
Thank you, I was trying to add that up too, but the smaller weights on the left fooled me.
that's the weight rack! everyone notices that tho. I may have to use a different shot for my ticker.
till I change the ticker i'll just leave this here.
Nah, just let me and others think your left side is so much stronger you got some 25's added on that side.
I may have said this before, but dayumm!!!0 -
What is worse is when you do something that can help a many many people, and people come and troll and derail your topic. They ruin it for everyone... I made a topic yesterday, some of my friends weren't able to read it, they left comments "can't wait to read it." But trolls ruined it and we had to delete the topic. To bad people miss out cause of petty people who just want to argue.
Dan's Edited Road Map by Pu is complicated. Pages of text, graphs, several links, and multiple sites to page through to get to an appropriate calorie goal.
People wishing for something simpler are hardly trolls. And you're being silly by bringing that up again. You're not a child who got hauled off the playground yesterday.
Don't act like one.0 -
To be honest, I think the easiest thing is the calculators at Scooby's Workshop.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/
Just put your stats in, use Katch-McArdle if you know your body fat %, and Mifflin St-Jeor if you don't. Activity level descriptions are simple. Choose your deficit, and it does the calculation for you.
Of course, it doesn't give all the background information, doesn't give precise calorie burns, doesn't tell you what deficit to go for, etc., but it's great to use alongside IPOARM, or for trying things out. I think it would be fine to use it and just go into more detail if it's not working.
Scooby estimate way too high, IMO. Your results will vary. But it was telling me to eat like 3600 cals a day. Yeah, right. I don't want to be a cow.
It SHOULD be the same as the Fat2Fit radio one if it's the Katch-McArdle number on both. I'll have to try testing it out to see if it actually is! I find that for me, Katch-McArdle BMR (calculated at Scooby or Fat2fit) gives me the lowest figure for TDEE - 20%. Then it's the Mifflin St-Jeor at Scooby. Then there's quite a big gap and the one linked to in the level obstacles post, or the Harris-Benedict BMR (at Scooby or Fat2fit) are quite close together. There's a difference of almost 200 between all the calculations. I aim for the lowest figure or a bit above.
I don't think the problem is with the Scooby website in particular, as the calculations to seem to come out much the same for me as they do at other websites. The reason I go to Scooby is that it does the sums and gives you the TDEE minus whatever, so it's a little quicker and simpler.0 -
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
I mean if it's really that simple, we should all eat 500 calories a day, you know? What's the problem, it's a deficit and it's simple... Obviously things are a bit more complex.
"Eat 500 calories a day" would be dumb, not simple.
There's a vast gulf between that and the 5,000-word essay full of charts and graphs that is IPOARM.
The "Essay" explains "why" simple things are sometimes dumb. It is a dumb, Why not just eat 1,000 calories a day? not as dumb, but still dumb. You where in the topic of the formula i made. Some of you where criticizing because i didn't "explain" where i got the data from. Now you're saying, explaining is too much to read. IPOARM is meant to be through.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.
umm. no.
we were pointing out that you made it up. there's a big distinction between not disclosing the source of your data and not having any data at all.
Okay, so what deficits do you recommend?
i don't. i don't fancy myself some sort of guru for others. i have been asked by people on my friends list for help and i have provided it, but always by showing them how to do the calculations themselves and explaining to them the tradeoffs involved in the decision making process.
you want to create a formula that takes all thought out of the process. if you can do that, then more power to you. but it needs to be correct and it needs to be based on ACTUAL DATA AND RESULTS. it can't be based on anecdotal evidence. that's all you have to back up your suggestions. that's fine so long as it comes with a big disclaimer to that effect. but don't try passing it off as more than that. until somebody has the volume of data necessary to draw the conclusions you are trying to draw, any attempt to create a simple formula that fits everyone (or almost everyone) is premature.0 -
Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation.0
-
In my opinion, all of these really overcomplicate things. It's a little crazy.
We all want a plan though, with something behind it that we can believe in. That's all it's about.
If you're an extreme pragmatic, this is all silly. But, many folks need something to believe in and need to feel that it's harder than it really is.
People are strange. Lol
I mean if it's really that simple, we should all eat 500 calories a day, you know? What's the problem, it's a deficit and it's simple... Obviously things are a bit more complex.
"Eat 500 calories a day" would be dumb, not simple.
There's a vast gulf between that and the 5,000-word essay full of charts and graphs that is IPOARM.
The "Essay" explains "why" simple things are sometimes dumb. It is a dumb, Why not just eat 1,000 calories a day? not as dumb, but still dumb. You where in the topic of the formula i made. Some of you where criticizing because i didn't "explain" where i got the data from. Now you're saying, explaining is too much to read. IPOARM is meant to be through.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.
umm. no.
we were pointing out that you made it up. there's a big distinction between not disclosing the source of your data and not having any data at all.
Okay, so what deficits do you recommend?
i don't. i don't fancy myself some sort of guru for others. i have been asked by people on my friends list for help and i have provided it, but always by showing them how to do the calculations themselves and explaining to them the tradeoffs involved in the decision making process.
you want to create a formula that takes all thought out of the process. if you can do that, then more power to you. but it needs to be correct and it needs to be based on ACTUAL DATA AND RESULTS. it can't be based on anecdotal evidence. that's all you have to back up your suggestions. that's fine so long as it comes with a big disclaimer to that effect. but don't try passing it off as more than that. until somebody has the volume of data necessary to draw the conclusions you are trying to draw, any attempt to create a simple formula that fits everyone (or almost everyone) is premature.
The problem is, you guys think i am presenting it as a fact. I am not, i am presenting it as "this is what i recommend." That's it.
Can you or anyone else provide any ACTUAL DATA AND RESULTS, that says when to have a 1lbs loss a week, or 1.5, or 2.0 weight loss a week? What about for carb in take?, protein intake?, fat intake?, exercise calorie burn???
Can anyone??? It's all just "recommendations" that's all.
i am flabbergasted that you still don't understand. here it is as simple as i can say it...
this site is full of people who have no clue how to go about losing weight but desperately need/want to do so.
if you're going to set yourself us some sort of authority and pass along advice, then you need to have some credibility. Dan's IPOARM was reasonably credible. it's all based on research from others and although there might be tiny details to quibble about, i don't think he wrote anything that was fundamentally flawed or could be challenged.
you then edited it. that's fine. i don't know exactly what edits you made, but i assume they were for readability and to add in the spreadsheet aspect. that's all fine. so long as nothing new was introduced and you were simply trying to make the tool more useful, more power to you.
then you tried to add something new which was not based on any research and which you couldn't defend. it was only THAT which people were discussing yesterday. because you couldn't/wouldn't defend your data and then complained to the mods to delete all of the posts that you didn't like, it escalated. instead of learning from that, you continue to mis-characterize what happened there. nobody was trolling. we were simply driving home the point that your graphs had no validity because they were based on only 2 data points, which you later admitted that you made up. if you had 50 or 60 data points taken from real, actual tracking of people and drew a graph based on that and offered it as a supplemental appendix for IPOARM, people would be patting you on the back for a job well done.
can you see the issue now? it's not about what you were trying to do. it's all about how you went about it.0 -
Oh boy.
Heres the deal with the 3 methods:
Do what works for you.
MFP if followed correctly will work just as well as IPOARM and the other one.
The true winner is the person who is most consistent using whatever method they want.
Put down your guns and lets all have a drink.
;D0 -
To be honest, I think the easiest thing is the calculators at Scooby's Workshop.
http://scoobysworkshop.com/accurate-calorie-calculator/
Just put your stats in, use Katch-McArdle if you know your body fat %, and Mifflin St-Jeor if you don't. Activity level descriptions are simple. Choose your deficit, and it does the calculation for you.
Of course, it doesn't give all the background information, doesn't give precise calorie burns, doesn't tell you what deficit to go for, etc., but it's great to use alongside IPOARM, or for trying things out. I think it would be fine to use it and just go into more detail if it's not working.
Scooby estimate way too high, IMO. Your results will vary. But it was telling me to eat like 3600 cals a day. Yeah, right. I don't want to be a cow.
It SHOULD be the same as the Fat2Fit radio one if it's the Katch-McArdle number on both. I'll have to try testing it out to see if it actually is! I find that for me, Katch-McArdle BMR (calculated at Scooby or Fat2fit) gives me the lowest figure for TDEE - 20%. Then it's the Mifflin St-Jeor at Scooby. Then there's quite a big gap and the one linked to in the level obstacles post, or the Harris-Benedict BMR (at Scooby or Fat2fit) are quite close together. There's a difference of almost 200 between all the calculations. I aim for the lowest figure or a bit above.
I don't think the problem is with the Scooby website in particular, as the calculations to seem to come out much the same for me as they do at other websites. The reason I go to Scooby is that it does the sums and gives you the TDEE minus whatever, so it's a little quicker and simpler.
Scooby says my TDEE is 1345. Wrong! and... I'm sedentary. My weight stayed at 97 -99 eating 1970 calories for 6 months, went up to 2500+ and I gained 1 pound per month. No exercise.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
- 96.4K 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