The thread killer, or ignored question...

Typically though, the first post has no indicator of what the situation of the person is, and most of the time it's because they're not losing weight anyway, so all we can do is ask questions... and it's the most basic one, because it's the only way to know for sure if the person is overeating or not.

So other ways to elicit some useful information might be -

What are you trying to achieve?
What does good look like?
What are you doing to make sure that you know how much you eat?
What tools do you use to help you control what you eat?

There are similar issues when people talk about "cardio" as their calories out dimension. It needs some elicitation to establish whether that means 20 minutes in front of a DVD or sub 50 minute 10Ks four times per week.

I think the reason the question is often is ignored is because it's not a yes or no answer. Most of us weigh some things, sometimes, until we get a feel for sizes. It's possible to be semi-accurate without weighing everything or even anything. Most people think they're accurate enough. Are they? It depends on their goal deficit, usually. That's one reason I say AIMING for 2 lbs/week is fine. You'll probably only achieve one due to measurement error.

The one I see over and over is this: "I've done everything right for a whole week, including Insanity and weights and running, and I've gained! I'm 19, 5'4" and 122 lbs." That's not food measurement error. That's (normal, human) body dysmorphia and impatience and water.

Typically though, the first post has no indicator of what the situation of the person is, and most of the time it's because they're not losing weight anyway, so all we can do is ask questions... and it's the most basic one, because it's the only way to know for sure if the person is overeating or not.

So other ways to elicit some useful information might be -

What are you trying to achieve?
What does good look like?
What are you doing to make sure that you know how much you eat?
What tools do you use to help you control what you eat?

There are similar issues when people talk about "cardio" as their calories out dimension. It needs some elicitation to establish whether that means 20 minutes in front of a DVD or sub 50 minute 10Ks four times per week.

I usually ask several questions, including questions about goals, time frame (have you been stalled for 2 weeks or 2 months? etc). I also ask about a food scale. If I just ask "are you logging accurately" most people will say yes, even if they are not. I ask specifically about the scale because I want to know how accurate is accurate.

I personally want to get an idea of what's been going on, aside from what they write in the OP, before I offer an advice. Because the advice I want to give based on the first post might not be appropriate once more information is given. I don't see any problem with asking exactly what I need to know in order to form a response that will be most helpful. If I say "what tools are you using to ensure accurate logging" and they don't list a scale, I'm just going to come back with "but are you using a food scale?" Saves time to just ask what I want to know directly.

It's a good thing that different people give advice in different ways. Some may respond better to my technique, some might respond better to yours.

The responsibility is on the person asking the question to effectively convey the information or the intent. So if the original poster doesn't give a lot of information, or doesn't say what they want other than "help" or "any advice," the readers are left to respond based on what they think the poster is asking. So while I agree that there are lots of nice open ended questions people can ask to get the same information, the poster themselves also needs to take some responsibility and just be upfront about things instead of making the community drag it out of them.

I would have to disagree with this. I am a mom of 7 children. I have lost the weight after each of them and never with the use of a food scale. It isn't a matter of laziness, but of reality. If I am going to get 7 children fed, I don't have time to measure out and weigh each item I am eating and then record it, etc. I do use a measuring cup for pasta which I love, but most things I give a close guess and err on the side of caution. If you use a food scale and it has helped you then great, but that doesn't mean everyone who doesn't do what you do is lazy. :flowerforyou:

Nobody with 7 kids is ever gonna be lazy... Must be a lovely chaos, though:flowerforyou:

I have been successful so far without the use of a scale.
I have one to avoid being a "why am I not losing weight / inches / whatever posters"

I have been drinking rum this evening so please enjoy this cat gif sponsored by me:

Nope. Didn't see the thread, but when someone posts re: stalling or regaining, one of the most common and first-asked questions is "are you weighing your food to ensure accurate measurement?"

So, observationally, yes. Most MFP folks are weighing their food.

Not even close. The people giving out that advice are a vocal minority.

I agree.

I think we all have different levels of accuracy that satisfy us.

For me, I feel like eyeballing it works. My husband and I are both cooks and bakers, in fact he's better at cooking than I am...but I think I have a better "eyeballing" skill. The other night he said there were 2 cups of beans in our bowls and I laughingly said, nope, 1 cup. He measured the ladle used and it was exactly 1/2 cup, so I was exactly correct. Sure I am not 100% accurate all of the time, but I'm pretty decent at it and that means accurate enough for me.

I wouldn't want to get too attached to weighing everything because it would cause me a lot more anxiety eating in restaurants. I don't want that. I want to feel relatively 'normal' even though I do plan to log for many years to come as I maintain after reaching my goal.

I also would never weigh peanut butter. WTF.

That said, the only way I'd consider weighing all of my food is if I found myself unhappily plateauing at 190-200 lb. I want to be 180 or below. I don't see that happening, but who knows.

Peanut butter is very dense, and even a little off is a huge calorie difference. Your reaction to that is weird. There are something's I may not be as picky about, but peanut butter is always weighed because as I said, it's calorie laden in very small amounts. Even being a little off in the measurement is a huge calorie difference.

Pasta is another one where I think a serving is really three. I have to measure pasta. No choice or I will over eat. While one serving of pasta is stupid, because it's so small, it helps to drive home why we are so fat as a nation. When I go to a restaurant, the serving is probably for 5. It's gross, to be honest. And, to think I never thought anything about it and thought those portions were normal. It wasn't until I traveled heavily internationally that I learned that America is a bunch of pigs when it comes to food. That's when I started dialing things back a notch.

My hats off to you though on your measuring skills. I can't do that. I've experimented a lot and decided I just don't know jack *kitten* amount portions. I've tried guess the weight of various meats, or looking at a thing of rice and trying to guess a serving and be hugely off. I can never guess with any accuracy at all. So, I stick to what works, I weigh and measure everything.

I thought about the peanut butter thing. I'm guessing you would weigh the spoon it's in, then the spoonful? That would make sense. I was all "wtf" because my non-weighing brain was picturing someone stacking the mushy sticky peanut butter on a scale like they stack sliced meat at the deli. Then having to scrape it off. LOL

Yes, I weigh the spoon, then scoop out the peanut butter and weigh that. I have to usually, put some back in the jar because I always scoop too much.

two years ago I lost 20 pounds with no food scale. eyeballing and measuring worked just fine for me.