The joys of office broscience - misguided food/nutrition advice
Replies
-
upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
My fat's set at 25% and my calorie goal is only 1600 and I could do it easily.
That's coffee, a protein bar, and a green smoothie for breakfast, a lemon/rosemary/garlic chicken breast with a sweet potato and broccoli for lunch, and the Big Mac for dinner.
I don't even like Big Macs but it's just silly to say it can't fit.
Now this is actually a pretty decent 48% carbs, 28% protein and 24% fat (ratio seems like you were shooting for 50-30-20) with the only reason you missed was because you went a tad over on fat (gotta blame the Big Mac for this one, funny thing the mc double that I said earlier in this thread as a substitution, would have put you on point). Definitely see some sacrifices being made for that Big Mac (leading to my second point why for a Big Mac) but missing mark for both carbs and protein for 4% combined to go to fat is not hitting your macros. Also 50-30-20 typically is a ratio used for bulking which if that's your aim, go nuts and dirty bulk away on Big Macs.
First of all, you realize you don't have to hit exactly the number of grams right? You'll drive yourself crazy with that. Most people do fat and protein as minimums but since you seem to be aiming for under on fat I did that. Second, I did not go over on fat. I used 42 of 44 allowed grams. Like I said, my fat is set at 25%. I also went over on protein by 11 grams. If I wanted to hit closer on that I'd do a smaller piece of chicken and have another veggie.
I'm not bulking, and I would be sad if those were bulking calories.
And yes, you can't eat a Big Mac and a bunch of other stuff. But that's true of anything. Tonight I had goat cheese so I sacrificed avocado.
I do get that however if I'm off that much for all of my macros I don't pretend that I hit them. Successful days are usually 0-2% off and that's usually only between solely protein and carbs. 2% off carbs, 2% off protein and 4% off fat is a fail. And no I don't drive myself crazy. Chipotle is my friend, my takeout place has my steak tips on lock, and I love myself a spicy chicken sandwich from Wendy's like you better believe (very risky though similar to this whole Big Mac discussion) and when my girlfriend and I go out yea there is usually wings and/or a flatbread involved and hella wine but if I know my percentages are out of whack that is a CHEAT DAY, even if it is only off 3% or more. But again someone already proved me wrong with their 40-30-30 so yes I do retract my statement of it fitting.
So, being off by more than 1-3 grams is a fail in your opinion? And you say you don't drive yourself crazy?0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
My fat's set at 25% and my calorie goal is only 1600 and I could do it easily.
That's coffee, a protein bar, and a green smoothie for breakfast, a lemon/rosemary/garlic chicken breast with a sweet potato and broccoli for lunch, and the Big Mac for dinner.
I don't even like Big Macs but it's just silly to say it can't fit.
Now this is actually a pretty decent 48% carbs, 28% protein and 24% fat (ratio seems like you were shooting for 50-30-20) with the only reason you missed was because you went a tad over on fat (gotta blame the Big Mac for this one, funny thing the mc double that I said earlier in this thread as a substitution, would have put you on point). Definitely see some sacrifices being made for that Big Mac (leading to my second point why for a Big Mac) but missing mark for both carbs and protein for 4% combined to go to fat is not hitting your macros. Also 50-30-20 typically is a ratio used for bulking which if that's your aim, go nuts and dirty bulk away on Big Macs.
First of all, you realize you don't have to hit exactly the number of grams right? You'll drive yourself crazy with that. Most people do fat and protein as minimums but since you seem to be aiming for under on fat I did that. Second, I did not go over on fat. I used 42 of 44 allowed grams. Like I said, my fat is set at 25%. I also went over on protein by 11 grams. If I wanted to hit closer on that I'd do a smaller piece of chicken and have another veggie.
I'm not bulking, and I would be sad if those were bulking calories.
And yes, you can't eat a Big Mac and a bunch of other stuff. But that's true of anything. Tonight I had goat cheese so I sacrificed avocado.
I do get that however if I'm off that much for all of my macros I don't pretend that I hit them. Successful days are usually 0-2% off and that's usually only between solely protein and carbs. 2% off carbs, 2% off protein and 4% off fat is a fail. And no I don't drive myself crazy. Chipotle is my friend, my takeout place has my steak tips on lock, and I love myself a spicy chicken sandwich from Wendy's like you better believe (very risky though similar to this whole Big Mac discussion) and when my girlfriend and I go out yea there is usually wings and/or a flatbread involved and hella wine but if I know my percentages are out of whack that is a CHEAT DAY, even if it is only off 3% or more. But again someone already proved me wrong with their 40-30-30 so yes I do retract my statement of it fitting.
Check out the sample day I posted - it fits your macros 40-40-20 almost perfectly and is filled with a ton of food which hits both macro and micro needs. Sorry I didn't post a screen shot of it, I was doing it from my phone. You keep ignorning the YOUR part in IIFYM. Just because YOU choose to have only 20% fat and feel like it's cheating to have a Big Mac or some wings doesn't mean that other people do. To expect everyone to believe the same as you would not be IIFYM. Also, IIFYM people generally don't say that they've cheated by having whatever they choose.
FTR, I'm not an IIFYMer per-se. I aim to meet my macros, but mine are custom and different from yours and I really don't care if I go over one day or not. I also don't care about 1 day out of 7. I like to look at my whole week and make sure my micros are where I want them. The macros usually fall in to place.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
My fat's set at 25% and my calorie goal is only 1600 and I could do it easily.
That's coffee, a protein bar, and a green smoothie for breakfast, a lemon/rosemary/garlic chicken breast with a sweet potato and broccoli for lunch, and the Big Mac for dinner.
I don't even like Big Macs but it's just silly to say it can't fit.
Now this is actually a pretty decent 48% carbs, 28% protein and 24% fat (ratio seems like you were shooting for 50-30-20) with the only reason you missed was because you went a tad over on fat (gotta blame the Big Mac for this one, funny thing the mc double that I said earlier in this thread as a substitution, would have put you on point). Definitely see some sacrifices being made for that Big Mac (leading to my second point why for a Big Mac) but missing mark for both carbs and protein for 4% combined to go to fat is not hitting your macros. Also 50-30-20 typically is a ratio used for bulking which if that's your aim, go nuts and dirty bulk away on Big Macs.
First of all, you realize you don't have to hit exactly the number of grams right? You'll drive yourself crazy with that. Most people do fat and protein as minimums but since you seem to be aiming for under on fat I did that. Second, I did not go over on fat. I used 42 of 44 allowed grams. Like I said, my fat is set at 25%. I also went over on protein by 11 grams. If I wanted to hit closer on that I'd do a smaller piece of chicken and have another veggie.
I'm not bulking, and I would be sad if those were bulking calories.
And yes, you can't eat a Big Mac and a bunch of other stuff. But that's true of anything. Tonight I had goat cheese so I sacrificed avocado.
I do get that however if I'm off that much for all of my macros I don't pretend that I hit them. Successful days are usually 0-2% off and that's usually only between solely protein and carbs. 2% off carbs, 2% off protein and 4% off fat is a fail. And no I don't drive myself crazy. Chipotle is my friend, my takeout place has my steak tips on lock, and I love myself a spicy chicken sandwich from Wendy's like you better believe (very risky though similar to this whole Big Mac discussion) and when my girlfriend and I go out yea there is usually wings and/or a flatbread involved and hella wine but if I know my percentages are out of whack that is a CHEAT DAY, even if it is only off 3% or more. But again someone already proved me wrong with their 40-30-30 so yes I do retract my statement of it fitting.
So, being off by more than 1-3 grams is a fail in your opinion? And you say you don't drive yourself crazy?
You have to care about both the grams and percentages because it's all up to calories in versus calories out at the end of the day for any diet or eating lifestyle. 3 grams of fat to me is barely anything as that is 27 calories versus my 2500 a day. But for the examples I've seen based on 1500-1700 that is a very different story in terms of percentages. The crazy part is claiming IIFYM and not measuring your portions and planning and choosing your meals wisely. I am dying to get to July/August when I get to maintain/bulk because that shoots me back to 3000 again but even with that it's about making wise picks, good substitutions and eating the things that allow you to do your activity while still maintaining a "normal" lifestyle. This whole thread rebuttable kind of deflected my original point where I stated that you can't blame IIFYM on people who choose Big Macs everyday just because it "fits" because it doesn't necessarily "fit", that's an excuse to eat *kitten* once a day while hating you life for the rest of it.
::steps off soapbox, turns backs, sighs and walks away::
0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
My fat's set at 25% and my calorie goal is only 1600 and I could do it easily.
That's coffee, a protein bar, and a green smoothie for breakfast, a lemon/rosemary/garlic chicken breast with a sweet potato and broccoli for lunch, and the Big Mac for dinner.
I don't even like Big Macs but it's just silly to say it can't fit.
Now this is actually a pretty decent 48% carbs, 28% protein and 24% fat (ratio seems like you were shooting for 50-30-20) with the only reason you missed was because you went a tad over on fat (gotta blame the Big Mac for this one, funny thing the mc double that I said earlier in this thread as a substitution, would have put you on point). Definitely see some sacrifices being made for that Big Mac (leading to my second point why for a Big Mac) but missing mark for both carbs and protein for 4% combined to go to fat is not hitting your macros. Also 50-30-20 typically is a ratio used for bulking which if that's your aim, go nuts and dirty bulk away on Big Macs.
First of all, you realize you don't have to hit exactly the number of grams right? You'll drive yourself crazy with that. Most people do fat and protein as minimums but since you seem to be aiming for under on fat I did that. Second, I did not go over on fat. I used 42 of 44 allowed grams. Like I said, my fat is set at 25%. I also went over on protein by 11 grams. If I wanted to hit closer on that I'd do a smaller piece of chicken and have another veggie.
I'm not bulking, and I would be sad if those were bulking calories.
And yes, you can't eat a Big Mac and a bunch of other stuff. But that's true of anything. Tonight I had goat cheese so I sacrificed avocado.
I do get that however if I'm off that much for all of my macros I don't pretend that I hit them. Successful days are usually 0-2% off and that's usually only between solely protein and carbs. 2% off carbs, 2% off protein and 4% off fat is a fail. And no I don't drive myself crazy. Chipotle is my friend, my takeout place has my steak tips on lock, and I love myself a spicy chicken sandwich from Wendy's like you better believe (very risky though similar to this whole Big Mac discussion) and when my girlfriend and I go out yea there is usually wings and/or a flatbread involved and hella wine but if I know my percentages are out of whack that is a CHEAT DAY, even if it is only off 3% or more. But again someone already proved me wrong with their 40-30-30 so yes I do retract my statement of it fitting.
So, being off by more than 1-3 grams is a fail in your opinion? And you say you don't drive yourself crazy?
You have to care about both the grams and percentages because it's all up to calories in versus calories out at the end of the day for any diet or eating lifestyle. 3 grams of fat to me is barely anything as that is 27 calories versus my 2500 a day. But for the examples I've seen based on 1500-1700 that is a very different story in terms of percentages. The crazy part is claiming IIFYM and not measuring your portions and planning and choosing your meals wisely. I am dying to get to July/August when I get to maintain/bulk because that shoots me back to 3000 again but even with that it's about making wise picks, good substitutions and eating the things that allow you to do your activity while still maintaining a "normal" lifestyle. This whole thread rebuttable kind of deflected my original point where I stated that you can't blame IIFYM on people who choose Big Macs everyday just because it "fits" because it doesn't necessarily "fit", that's an excuse to eat *kitten* once a day while hating you life for the rest of it.
::steps off soapbox, turns backs, sighs and walks away::
You got presented by 3 or 4 examples of a big mac EASILY fitting into a 1500-1700 calorie diet. You don't need to put it in quotation marks. It does fit.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
My fat's set at 25% and my calorie goal is only 1600 and I could do it easily.
That's coffee, a protein bar, and a green smoothie for breakfast, a lemon/rosemary/garlic chicken breast with a sweet potato and broccoli for lunch, and the Big Mac for dinner.
I don't even like Big Macs but it's just silly to say it can't fit.
Now this is actually a pretty decent 48% carbs, 28% protein and 24% fat (ratio seems like you were shooting for 50-30-20) with the only reason you missed was because you went a tad over on fat (gotta blame the Big Mac for this one, funny thing the mc double that I said earlier in this thread as a substitution, would have put you on point). Definitely see some sacrifices being made for that Big Mac (leading to my second point why for a Big Mac) but missing mark for both carbs and protein for 4% combined to go to fat is not hitting your macros. Also 50-30-20 typically is a ratio used for bulking which if that's your aim, go nuts and dirty bulk away on Big Macs.
First of all, you realize you don't have to hit exactly the number of grams right? You'll drive yourself crazy with that. Most people do fat and protein as minimums but since you seem to be aiming for under on fat I did that. Second, I did not go over on fat. I used 42 of 44 allowed grams. Like I said, my fat is set at 25%. I also went over on protein by 11 grams. If I wanted to hit closer on that I'd do a smaller piece of chicken and have another veggie.
I'm not bulking, and I would be sad if those were bulking calories.
And yes, you can't eat a Big Mac and a bunch of other stuff. But that's true of anything. Tonight I had goat cheese so I sacrificed avocado.
I do get that however if I'm off that much for all of my macros I don't pretend that I hit them. Successful days are usually 0-2% off and that's usually only between solely protein and carbs. 2% off carbs, 2% off protein and 4% off fat is a fail. And no I don't drive myself crazy. Chipotle is my friend, my takeout place has my steak tips on lock, and I love myself a spicy chicken sandwich from Wendy's like you better believe (very risky though similar to this whole Big Mac discussion) and when my girlfriend and I go out yea there is usually wings and/or a flatbread involved and hella wine but if I know my percentages are out of whack that is a CHEAT DAY, even if it is only off 3% or more. But again someone already proved me wrong with their 40-30-30 so yes I do retract my statement of it fitting.
So, being off by more than 1-3 grams is a fail in your opinion? And you say you don't drive yourself crazy?
You have to care about both the grams and percentages because it's all up to calories in versus calories out at the end of the day for any diet or eating lifestyle. 3 grams of fat to me is barely anything as that is 27 calories versus my 2500 a day. But for the examples I've seen based on 1500-1700 that is a very different story in terms of percentages. The crazy part is claiming IIFYM and not measuring your portions and planning and choosing your meals wisely. I am dying to get to July/August when I get to maintain/bulk because that shoots me back to 3000 again but even with that it's about making wise picks, good substitutions and eating the things that allow you to do your activity while still maintaining a "normal" lifestyle. This whole thread rebuttable kind of deflected my original point where I stated that you can't blame IIFYM on people who choose Big Macs everyday just because it "fits" because it doesn't necessarily "fit", that's an excuse to eat *kitten* once a day while hating you life for the rest of it.
::steps off soapbox, turns backs, sighs and walks away::
Who exactly is doing this? I haven't seen any examples of that in this thread.0 -
This thread used to be fun. Now we're arguing with some guy who doesn't even know how IIFYM works.0
-
I liked this thread before it stopped being about stupidity and just became about being obtuse.0
-
Alatariel75 wrote: »I liked this thread before it stopped being about stupidity and just became about being obtuse.
I dunno, I think the anti-big mac guy is a shining example of what this thread is about!0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »I liked this thread before it stopped being about stupidity and just became about being obtuse.
I dunno, I think the anti-big mac guy is a shining example of what this thread is about!
Fair point.0 -
-
Back to the original point IIFYM or not
0 -
shrinkingletters wrote: »Here, I made an astrology dietary restrictions for y'all:
Aries: Can only eat food they've won in a street fight.
Taurus: Can only eat animal proteins from animals that do not exceed 35mph at full speed.
Gemini: Can only eat food scavenged from self-help group craft tables.
Cancer: Can only eat food from neglected cans and boxes in the back of the very top shelf in the kitchen.
Leo: Can only eat foods that can be arranged into a self-portrait.
Virgo: Can only eat foods that can slide easily through the chute under the door.
Libra: Can only eat foods that compliment their accessories.
Scorpio: Can only eat foods that can hold their own in a staring match.
Sagittarius: Can only eat foods from countries they cannot pronounce.
Capricorn: Can only eat foods that their employer agrees to write off as a tax deduction.
Aquarius: Can only eat foods that make it through their teleportation device without fusing to a nasty housefly.
Pisces: Can only eat foods that remind them of that time their mother forgot to pick them up from soccer practice.
Gemini should be "Can eat everything in doubles" since it's the twin sign.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »Back to the original point IIFYM or not
I don't get this.... if I have 700 calories for dinner, and I order a diet coke with my meal, which brings it under 700 cals (where a normal coke would make it 900), it's the the whole point of calorie counting?
Your logic is bad, and you should feel bad.0 -
What?!?!? Jelly Beans aren't healthy?!?! But they're beans!!! Beans are supposed to be good for you. LMAOAlatariel75 wrote: »I know I've posted this before, but I don't think it was this thread. I used to work with a girl who cut out carbs and couldn't work out why she wasn't losing weight. She wasn't eating any rice, potato, pasta, bread, grains, crackers etc etc... she was complaining about this while eating a bag of jelly beans. I asked about the jelly beans, she said one of the reasons she was attracted to the low carb diet was being able to snack on them as much as she liked...
... you should have seen the look on her face when I gently explained that sugar was a carb. She had no idea.
0 -
I argued with a friend today who said I shouldn't have toast because carbs make you 'blow up and gain weight'.
I also feel the desire to throw something at another friend who is always 'Oh you can't have this you are on a diet' And refuses to believe I can eat whatever I want I just have to watch how much I eat. If I want that bowl of ice cream, either I eat a smaller dinner or I throw in an extra work out(or two).0 -
MarciBkonTrk wrote: »Here are my two favorites!
1. Dark urine is not a sign of dehydration, it's a sign that your kidneys are working to reabsorb the water your body needs! Huh? So why is it when a doctor thinks you are dehydrated one of the first things checked is the color of your urine.
2. Blending fruits and veggies into a smoothie destroys the fiber and nutrients mainly because of the heat generated during the blending process kills the nutrient and the act of blending kills the fiber. That must be one high-powered blender!!!
Fiber can be killed? !
Yes, it was the belief of some smoothie hater.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have any. I did see someone recommend this on fb today: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1899171592?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1430278934&sr=1-1&keywords=kristen leigh bell&pldnSite=10 -
KatieJane83 wrote: »I just had to sit and suffer through overhearing a coworker go on, ad nauseam through my cubicle wall, how eating carbs after dinner will mean they don't get digested but get immediately turned into evil evil adipose! Apparently everything else if fine, just not doze evil carbz.
The evens that I can't = all of them
Sorry, just had to spread my misery. Anyone have any other overheard gems to share?
"Bro!" Looks like this thread needs to be renamed. 0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have any. I did see someone recommend this on fb today: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1899171592?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1430278934&sr=1-1&keywords=kristen leigh bell&pldnSite=1
What puppy wouldn't be stressed out after a hard day laying in the yard? It's nice for them to come in, take off their doggie sweater and booties, and relax with a nice aromatherapy bath. They don't call it a dog's life because it's easy, you know.0 -
So not to be argumentative, but I think it's interesting that people seem to be thinking that we should EAT our sign (i.e., Pisces eats fish, Taurus eats beef). As a Sagittarius, I'm not really into this idea (although I guess it goes back to how as a Type B I should be drinking the kumis), but my initial assumption was that we would eat as our sign would eat.
Not that that helps me a lot! ;-)
How can I get a conclusive answer on this very important question?0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have any. I did see someone recommend this on fb today: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1899171592?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1430278934&sr=1-1&keywords=kristen leigh bell&pldnSite=1
Okay, is this where I fess up to how I have actually purchased an odorless (to humans) stress reducing scent thing for one of my cats, who also happens to be a stress eater. From PetCo, though. It wasn't due to the eating, but a brief and relatively mild stint with psychogenic alopecia (only just learned the name for it).
(Don't judge!)
(Or do, fair game in this thread.)
;-)0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have any. I did see someone recommend this on fb today: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1899171592?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1430278934&sr=1-1&keywords=kristen leigh bell&pldnSite=1
Okay, is this where I fess up to how I have actually purchased an odorless (to humans) stress reducing scent thing for one of my cats, who also happens to be a stress eater. From PetCo, though. It wasn't due to the eating, but a brief and relatively mild stint with psychogenic alopecia (only just learned the name for it).
(Don't judge!)
(Or do, fair game in this thread.)
;-)
Feliway? That does actually work for some cats (not mine it seems unfortunately!). Also have a cat with psychogenic alopecia, unfortunately neither brief nor mild (though not to the point of licking herself raw, just bald), and not helped by also having a myriad of allergies. Her belly actually has a nice coating of peach fuzz at the moment, about which I am ecstatic.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »So not to be argumentative, but I think it's interesting that people seem to be thinking that we should EAT our sign (i.e., Pisces eats fish, Taurus eats beef). As a Sagittarius, I'm not really into this idea (although I guess it goes back to how as a Type B I should be drinking the kumis), but my initial assumption was that we would eat as our sign would eat.
Not that that helps me a lot! ;-)
How can I get a conclusive answer on this very important question?
I would have thought it was eating how your sign eats too. I therefore choose to be a herbivorous fish.0 -
Just @ the gym and saw a broscience in action. Dude lifts in a moderately heavy fleece jacket, shirt, shorts, & hat...takes his 5 mins beteween sets in the sauna. I was under the impression that heating like that is probably not good for one, but what do I know. Stilllll, I thought of this thread.0
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have any. I did see someone recommend this on fb today: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1899171592?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1430278934&sr=1-1&keywords=kristen leigh bell&pldnSite=1
Okay, is this where I fess up to how I have actually purchased an odorless (to humans) stress reducing scent thing for one of my cats, who also happens to be a stress eater. From PetCo, though. It wasn't due to the eating, but a brief and relatively mild stint with psychogenic alopecia (only just learned the name for it).
(Don't judge!)
(Or do, fair game in this thread.)
;-)
Feliway? That does actually work for some cats (not mine it seems unfortunately!). Also have a cat with psychogenic alopecia, unfortunately neither brief nor mild (though not to the point of licking herself raw, just bald), and not helped by also having a myriad of allergies. Her belly actually has a nice coating of peach fuzz at the moment, about which I am ecstatic.
Yes--that's it. Couldn't think of the name. I used it for a while, but have finally phased it out.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
you're using a big mac as an example of something you "could" eat in IIFYM, but you think nobody SHOULD. everyone else is probably just following suit. you'd have to pay me some pretty big money to eat an actual big mac, but substitute it for two slices of cheese pizza from domino's, it's the same damn thing. YOU don't think it's workable into a weight-loss diet. *I* have proven that it can be. i'm not uber-picky about my macros but i'm never far off 50/25/25 which is works best for me.
is it cheating? not at all. it's not a cheat, it's a choice. i CHOOSE to have this treat once in a while, and in order to "afford" it i make other choices the rest of the day. the next day (or week..) i don't make any such alterations, i eat what i normally eat, but there is NOTHING AT ALL wrong with treating yourself occasionally.
the whole point of fitting your macros is.. fitting your macros. in the case of my two slices of cheese pizza, the numbers work, and i've lost 70 lbs by NOT telling myself i can't have my damn pizza.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I don't have any. I did see someone recommend this on fb today: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1899171592?ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&qid=1430278934&sr=1-1&keywords=kristen leigh bell&pldnSite=1
What puppy wouldn't be stressed out after a hard day laying in the yard? It's nice for them to come in, take off their doggie sweater and booties, and relax with a nice aromatherapy bath. They don't call it a dog's life because it's easy, you know.
If someone hasn't made a puppy Mr Rogers video yet, they need to.0 -
One day someone told that me that if you eat while sitting down, food automatically turns to fat. Food can only be digested if you eat while standing up (cause you know, gravity). I just nodded. Also, your metabolism shuts down after a certain time and doesn't come back on until exactly 6am. Same person. lol0
-
MarciBkonTrk wrote: »KatieJane83 wrote: »I just had to sit and suffer through overhearing a coworker go on, ad nauseam through my cubicle wall, how eating carbs after dinner will mean they don't get digested but get immediately turned into evil evil adipose! Apparently everything else if fine, just not doze evil carbz.
The evens that I can't = all of them
Sorry, just had to spread my misery. Anyone have any other overheard gems to share?
"Bro!" Looks like this thread needs to be renamed.
In typical MFP fashion part of it has degenerated into a stupid argument involving someone who doesn't fully get what they're talking about. Don't ever change MFP!
However, I do have to say I am quite proud of those of you who have appreciated the true value of this thread (i.e. relax and have a good laugh) and are constantly seeking to redirect it to its original intent. Yay for you guys!0 -
I don't think I'd mind eating horse but that's illegal in the US.lemurcat12 wrote: »So not to be argumentative, but I think it's interesting that people seem to be thinking that we should EAT our sign (i.e., Pisces eats fish, Taurus eats beef). As a Sagittarius, I'm not really into this idea (although I guess it goes back to how as a Type B I should be drinking the kumis), but my initial assumption was that we would eat as our sign would eat.
Not that that helps me a lot! ;-)
How can I get a conclusive answer on this very important question?
"Pet broscience" is a whole other can of worms
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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