Negative Adjustment below 1200 calories?

Options
CassondraKennedy
CassondraKennedy Posts: 229 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I thought negative adjustments wouldn't work below 1200 calories? Is this a glitch? Usually it just says I've earned "0" extra calories until I reach positive adjustments.

9o4aoa6acygq.png

*Please note, this is not the end of my day and I intend to eat more than 1200 calories today. I am not on a VLCD.*

Just curious about why MFP is allowing my goal to be below 1200 today. Any insight would be much appreciated!

Replies

  • magical_pixie
    magical_pixie Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    you earned -56 extra calories because you exercised, so that gave you that difference in goal
  • girlinahat
    girlinahat Posts: 2,956 Member
    Options
    magical_pixie wrote: »
    you earned -56 extra calories because you exercised, so that gave you that difference in goal

    the opposite - you've earned -56 calories because you HAVEN'T exercised to the level of exercise you'd promised to do.
  • kyubeans
    kyubeans Posts: 135 Member
    Options
    That is weird, OP. I've had negative adjustments due to having a sedentary day but it never adjusted me below 1200....
  • RosieRose7673
    RosieRose7673 Posts: 438 Member
    Options
    kyucifer wrote: »
    That is weird, OP. I've had negative adjustments due to having a sedentary day but it never adjusted me below 1200....

    Me too. I was under the impression that it wouldn't dip below 1200 regardless. Maybe it's a glitch or something.
  • CassondraKennedy
    CassondraKennedy Posts: 229 Member
    Options
    RosieRose7673 wrote: »
    kyucifer wrote: »
    That is weird, OP. I've had negative adjustments due to having a sedentary day but it never adjusted me below 1200....

    Me too. I was under the impression that it wouldn't dip below 1200 regardless. Maybe it's a glitch or something.

    That's what I was thinking. Unless MFP changed their rules about 1200 being the minimum?
  • RosieRose7673
    RosieRose7673 Posts: 438 Member
    Options
    CassondraKennedy wrote: »
    RosieRose7673 wrote: »
    kyucifer wrote: »
    That is weird, OP. I've had negative adjustments due to having a sedentary day but it never adjusted me below 1200....

    Me too. I was under the impression that it wouldn't dip below 1200 regardless. Maybe it's a glitch or something.

    That's what I was thinking. Unless MFP changed their rules about 1200 being the minimum?

    I highly doubt that. So strange!

    OP, maybe try turning off negative adjustments and then turning them back on and see if it still does that.
  • CassondraKennedy
    CassondraKennedy Posts: 229 Member
    Options
    RosieRose7673 wrote: »
    CassondraKennedy wrote: »
    RosieRose7673 wrote: »
    kyucifer wrote: »
    That is weird, OP. I've had negative adjustments due to having a sedentary day but it never adjusted me below 1200....

    Me too. I was under the impression that it wouldn't dip below 1200 regardless. Maybe it's a glitch or something.

    That's what I was thinking. Unless MFP changed their rules about 1200 being the minimum?

    I highly doubt that. So strange!

    OP, maybe try turning off negative adjustments and then turning them back on and see if it still does that.

    Ok, yup, that fixed it. Must have just been a strange glitch... Thanks!
  • Duck_Puddle
    Duck_Puddle Posts: 3,224 Member
    Options
    That is strange. It tells me it won't adjust below 1200. Maybe a glitch? I know that's what you're asking but I thought it might be helpful to have another voice to say that's unexpected (to adjust to below 1200).
  • CassondraKennedy
    CassondraKennedy Posts: 229 Member
    Options
    Duck_Puddle wrote: »
    That is strange. It tells me it won't adjust below 1200. Maybe a glitch? I know that's what you're asking but I thought it might be helpful to have another voice to say that's unexpected (to adjust to below 1200).

    I'd still like to know why/how it happened. Seems like a dangerous glitch for someone who doesn't know that they shouldn't eat below 1200.
  • ezekielsherrard205735
    ezekielsherrard205735 Posts: 42 Member
    Options
    It's unhealthy :ot667hy2gd23.jpg

  • Lillymoo01
    Lillymoo01 Posts: 2,865 Member
    Options
    I have found the whole syncing to be very glitchy this week. Sometimes it will add my steps twice to give me heaps of extra calories, sometimes it will have my BMR calculating considerably higher than what it is which looks like I have overeaten considerably. Sometimes it says I have done additional exercise when I haven't. It hasn't had me expecting to eat below 1200 calories though but that would only be because I am considerably above that to begin with.

    Been driving me nuts.
  • CassondraKennedy
    CassondraKennedy Posts: 229 Member
    Options
    Lillymoo01 wrote: »
    I have found the whole syncing to be very glitchy this week. Sometimes it will add my steps twice to give me heaps of extra calories, sometimes it will have my BMR calculating considerably higher than what it is which looks like I have overeaten considerably. Sometimes it says I have done additional exercise when I haven't. It hasn't had me expecting to eat below 1200 calories though but that would only be because I am considerably above that to begin with.

    Been driving me nuts.

    Interesting... Yesterday morning, MFP was "down for maintenance." Maybe that has something to do with all these weird glitches?

Categories