Weight loss flow chart... 2.0!
Options
Replies
-
Chrysalid2014 wrote: »@Pu_239Here is a more complete version. It also addresses the issue where people's TDEE is lower than estimated and they're doing everything right, in this case they wouldn't be losing weight either. Also addresses the issue of having realistic expectations for weight loss and a reasonable calorie deficit.
The OP started a thread. He/She already stated that he/she will edit the chart during the weekend due to lack of time. If you want to make a chart of your own to link on forums you should make a blog post or another thread while mentioning the OP. Otherwise give ideas to the OP and he/she will judge if the additions that you want are essential.if you or anyone else has suggestions on wording/typos message me.
While you are trying to be helpful most likely it seems like you are trying to prove that your chart is better and somewhat take "credits" for it which ends up being rude towards the OP.
Actually if you read all the posts you'll see that OP invited anyone with better design software/skills to make their own version of the chart. She also stated that she had tried to think of a way to "include people who maybe lost a few pounds at first and then stalled" without overcomplicating things... which the alternative version covers. I think the goal is that everyone puts their heads together and collaborates to get the best possible chart, is it not...?
[edit] Everybody's name who contributed could go on it, if people feel it's that important (?)... personally I think that's a bit like being back in grade school, but whatever...
She changed her mind on people who had already lost some weight, because that would, indeed, be a different chart progression and, as she said, overcomplicate things.
Here's what she said:I think you're right. I was trying to also include people who maybe lost a few pounds at first and then stalled, but maybe that over-complicates things.0 -
Great chart, OP. Looks really good.
I like Mr. Knight's tl, dr version also.0 -
Came back and found new avatars.
I like the flow chart for it's simplicity.0 -
-
Bumping to the top of the forum.0
-
This is such a great flowchart. It deserves to be bumped twice today.0
-
It's obvious a lot of time and effort was devoted to the creation of this Visio masterpiece. With that said, a picture is worth 1000 words . . . kudos to the abbreviated version. Social media has conditioned us to shun thoughts more than 140 characters long. Thanks to all of those who read the blogs, posts and offer support. MFP offers something for everyone and there is something magical knowing across the nations we are not alone in our triumphs and struggles.
0 -
Can we post this image (not this thread but the image itself) at the top of the forum? This would cut down on 50% of the new threads each day of people having the same issues and not using the search function.0
-
Can we post this image (not this thread but the image itself) at the top of the forum? This would cut down on 50% of the new threads each day of people having the same issues and not using the search function.
Sadly, I think it would just end up as part of the "must reads" stickied at the top of each section, and no one seems to read those anyway. Still, there's a sticky suggestions thread on the feedback board if you want the mods to see your suggestion.0 -
I notice that one of the questions takes a user to advice to perhaps do exactly what they are doing today or increase calorie consumption. This would be the "Are you eating back some or all of your exercise calories?" question.
If the answer is "Yes, I'm eating back some (25%) of them", the result will direct a user to keep doing the same thing.
If the answer is "Yes, I'm eating back some (10%) of them", the result will direct a user to increase calorie consumption.0 -
HappyCampr1 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »I notice that one of the questions takes a user to advice to perhaps do exactly what they are doing today or increase calorie consumption. This would be the "Are you eating back some or all of your exercise calories?" question.
If the answer is "Yes, I'm eating back some (25%) of them", the result will direct a user to keep doing the same thing.
If the answer is "Yes, I'm eating back some (10%) of them", the result will direct a user to increase calorie consumption.
I'm not the one who made the chart, but my opinion on this is that if someone is only eating back 10% of their exercise calories and they are not losing, then the exercise is not the issue...it's the logging or the activity level (or medical issues). Even with the over estimations in the database, 25% should work. If it's not, then the issue is likely elsewhere.
I do understand your take on it, but I think it's moot, since at that point it's probably an issue not related to the exercise.
That would cause a user to follow the flowchart away from medical issues or the answer that MFP forums can't help. These 2 answers at the bottom appear to be created in order to include the unusual situations that are encountered by a minority of users. If the goal is to be inclusive of even those users, then the presented flow chart fails. The fix to that failure is to either present the last possibility first as a disclaimer or to split the path to 3 decision points (I'm eating back ALL / SOME / NONE of my exercise calories). Then if 25% is the magical number (magical unless there is objective criteria to support this - and if not, then there is another failure in the chart), that is another branch (either a 4th branch for those eating 25% or less vs. greater than 25% OR a separate decision point).
My opinion is it makes the most sense to include a disclaimer at the beginning unless the percentages have demonstrated scientific validity. If the objective information presented can be shown to be scientifically sound (beyond anectdotal 'evidence'), additional branches must be included to prevent encouragement to increase caloric intake for users who fall into the categories of eating back <25% of their exercise calories currently.0 -
HappyCampr1 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »HappyCampr1 wrote: »midwesterner85 wrote: »I notice that one of the questions takes a user to advice to perhaps do exactly what they are doing today or increase calorie consumption. This would be the "Are you eating back some or all of your exercise calories?" question.
If the answer is "Yes, I'm eating back some (25%) of them", the result will direct a user to keep doing the same thing.
If the answer is "Yes, I'm eating back some (10%) of them", the result will direct a user to increase calorie consumption.
I'm not the one who made the chart, but my opinion on this is that if someone is only eating back 10% of their exercise calories and they are not losing, then the exercise is not the issue...it's the logging or the activity level (or medical issues). Even with the over estimations in the database, 25% should work. If it's not, then the issue is likely elsewhere.
I do understand your take on it, but I think it's moot, since at that point it's probably an issue not related to the exercise.
That would cause a user to follow the flowchart away from medical issues or the answer that MFP forums can't help. These 2 answers at the bottom appear to be created in order to include the unusual situations that are encountered by a minority of users. If the goal is to be inclusive of even those users, then the presented flow chart fails. The fix to that failure is to either present the last possibility first as a disclaimer or to split the path to 3 decision points (I'm eating back ALL / SOME / NONE of my exercise calories). Then if 25% is the magical number (magical unless there is objective criteria to support this - and if not, then there is another failure in the chart), that is another branch (either a 4th branch for those eating 25% or less vs. greater than 25% OR a separate decision point).
My opinion is it makes the most sense to include a disclaimer at the beginning unless the percentages have demonstrated scientific validity. If the objective information presented can be shown to be scientifically sound (beyond anectdotal 'evidence'), additional branches must be included to prevent encouragement to increase caloric intake for users who fall into the categories of eating back <25% of their exercise calories currently.
Again...just me, but I think the users should be eating back minimum 25% of their exercise. I have no problem encouraging users to eat back at least 25%. I lost my weight eating back about 90% of my exercise. MFP is designed for people to eat back their exercise. As I stated earlier, if someone is not losing and they are eating back less than ten percent of their calories (as in your earlier point), then the issue isn't with their exercise calories. If they fix the real issue, then increasing their exercise calories upwards from that ten percent will not be a problem for them.
There is nothing "magical" about eating 25% or 50% of exercise calories. Asking for scientific evidence to that effect is silly. The point here is to establish that the database generally (but not always) overestimates exercise calories. To offset that, it is usually recommended that you cut back on logging the estimated burn.
If you are a user who does not wish to eat back exercise calories, you should be following the TDEE method of calculating calories instead of MFP's method. MFP creates a deficit before exercise and presumes people will be eating those calories back.
The matter of whether increasing caloric intake will resolve a weight loss stall sounds like an area where users will legitimately disagree. In such cases where there is no clear "right" answer, it really should be either disclaimed or omitted.
The other piece missing from this flowchart altogether is the user-stated MFP activity level, especially as it relates to tracking exercise.0 -
I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.0 -
Wasn't the first version of this flowchart also hijacked by a user with a medical condition trying to ascribe his way of eating to everyone else? It was so long ago, I don't remember. I'm just not sure why these issues are being suggested 6 MONTHS after the chart was created and given to the community to use. Countless users have stated that it was very useful to them in that time.0
-
To be honest, I think there's really only one flowchart that makes sense:
The rest is just details.
(Note: Before I get a whole lot of hate comments, please don't take this too seriously. It's meant to be a joke.)
0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Wasn't the first version of this flowchart also hijacked by a user with a medical condition trying to ascribe his way of eating to everyone else? It was so long ago, I don't remember. I'm just not sure why these issues are being suggested 6 MONTHS after the chart was created and given to the community to use. Countless users have stated that it was very useful to them in that time.
Well, it was hijacked by another user. I don't know about him having a medical condition, but he had... let's say an agenda. For want of a better term.
I agree, countless users find it quite helpful.0 -
To be honest, I think there's really only one flowchart that makes sense:
The rest is just details.
(Note: Before I get a whole lot of hate comments, please don't take this too seriously. It's meant to be a joke.)
lol! funny. Maybe include a picture with a plate of food crossed out next to the treadmill runner0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Wasn't the first version of this flowchart also hijacked by a user with a medical condition trying to ascribe his way of eating to everyone else? It was so long ago, I don't remember. I'm just not sure why these issues are being suggested 6 MONTHS after the chart was created and given to the community to use. Countless users have stated that it was very useful to them in that time.
I don't know... that was not a thread I saw.0 -
PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »PeachyCarol wrote: »I think, to just about everyone, since the chart is being used for people who aren't losing weight, that the implication was that people were eating back all of their exercise calories and the recommendation was to eat only 25%-50%.
You are misinterpreting and over-complicating a simple thing here by removing the overall original context.
If you don't find this chart useful, don't use it.
It isn't misinterpreting or over-complicating to believe that "some" could mean any percentage >0% and <100%. If the real intent of that result of the flowchart is for users eating back "all", then it should be labeled as such. Those eating "some" exercise calories back would follow a different path that leads to a response appropriate for those users.
You are acknowledging this flowchart is wrong and arguing that it is fine to be wrong. I agree with you about the former, but disagree about the latter.
What's your agenda here? Would you like us to stop using it? Would you like the OP (who hasn't been around the forums in weeks) to come back and change it? Do you want the thread deleted or no longer bumped? Or are you just here to pick another fight?
I'd really like to know.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 934 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions