Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Replies
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »When overweight people claim "I'm trying to eat 1500 calories but I'm just omg so full at 1100" on MFP I simply don't believe me. There's no way you became obese or overweight because you feel like you're stuffing your face on 1100-1300 calories
While in some cases this can be a humble brag of some sorts (look how dainty I am and how little I eat, it must be my metabolism), in many cases they truly can be full eating a low calorie diet because the types of food some people consider "diet foods" are pretty large in volume, not to mention the honeymoon phase of dieting.
When it comes to women, there is a long association between limited food consumption and notions of virtue/purity. The less you eat, the more truly feminine you are.
And when I look at things like juice fasts and certain diet plans, it doesn't seem like we're free of that association yet.
15 -
janejellyroll wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »When overweight people claim "I'm trying to eat 1500 calories but I'm just omg so full at 1100" on MFP I simply don't believe me. There's no way you became obese or overweight because you feel like you're stuffing your face on 1100-1300 calories
While in some cases this can be a humble brag of some sorts (look how dainty I am and how little I eat, it must be my metabolism), in many cases they truly can be full eating a low calorie diet because the types of food some people consider "diet foods" are pretty large in volume, not to mention the honeymoon phase of dieting.
When it comes to women, there is a long association between limited food consumption and notions of virtue/purity. The less you eat, the more truly feminine you are.
And when I look at things like juice fasts and certain diet plans, it doesn't seem like we're free of that association yet.
So absolutely true. Every time I go out to eat with girlfriends, they all barely pick at their food and loudly exclaim how full they are. It's so demoralizing as I watched my calories closely all day so I could eat my whole meal. Which is exactly what I do even though I sure don't look as "dainty" as the rest of them.
I'm pretty sure they all take their leftovers and scarf them down in private anyway. I know I would!12 -
janejellyroll wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »When overweight people claim "I'm trying to eat 1500 calories but I'm just omg so full at 1100" on MFP I simply don't believe me. There's no way you became obese or overweight because you feel like you're stuffing your face on 1100-1300 calories
While in some cases this can be a humble brag of some sorts (look how dainty I am and how little I eat, it must be my metabolism), in many cases they truly can be full eating a low calorie diet because the types of food some people consider "diet foods" are pretty large in volume, not to mention the honeymoon phase of dieting.
When it comes to women, there is a long association between limited food consumption and notions of virtue/purity. The less you eat, the more truly feminine you are.
And when I look at things like juice fasts and certain diet plans, it doesn't seem like we're free of that association yet.
Yeah, I totally agree. I think it's also related to the idea that saying you must have eaten more than your TDEE to gain = insulting, which I see on MFP, or people insisting they gained by eating too little, or certainly the idea that one should eat as low calorie as possible.4 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »When overweight people claim "I'm trying to eat 1500 calories but I'm just omg so full at 1100" on MFP I simply don't believe me. There's no way you became obese or overweight because you feel like you're stuffing your face on 1100-1300 calories
While in some cases this can be a humble brag of some sorts (look how dainty I am and how little I eat, it must be my metabolism), in many cases they truly can be full eating a low calorie diet because the types of food some people consider "diet foods" are pretty large in volume, not to mention the honeymoon phase of dieting.
To me, I think when people say they can't eat more often they mean they are not sure whether they SHOULD eat more. They are surprised they are not really unpleasantly hungry (which can be the case early on even on low cals if you are eating a filling diet) and wonder if they don't think they NEED to eat if they really should, or if it's better not to. I think that's one problem with people saying "don't eat if not hungry" early on. Many people have messed up hunger signals and no idea how they should feel, weird as that may sound. That was me at first, and I'm glad I had a number to look to in order to see if what I was eating was reasonable or not. After a while I felt more comfortable trusting myself.
I'd differential this from people saying "I cannot possibly figure out a way to eat more." I felt content on 900 for a while and wasn't sure (until I thought about it and after I'd been logging) that I SHOULD eat more, but it wasn't at all hard to figure out a way to add more calories to get to 1250 when I decided I should. And I wouldn't have felt like I was stuffing myself to get to 1250 no matter what.
If someone says they can't possible eat more than 1000 or some such number, that it would make them feel sick, I think there's something more going on. Possibly nothing serious that will go away after a week or so, possibly talking themselves into a very low number they have decided they WANT to eat at, possibly (and I think this is common) that they are eating only foods they don't really enjoy so they have no desire to eat more.3 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »So absolutely true. Every time I go out to eat with girlfriends, they all barely pick at their food and loudly exclaim how full they are. It's so demoralizing as I watched my calories closely all day so I could eat my whole meal. Which is exactly what I do even though I sure don't look as "dainty" as the rest of them.
I'm pretty sure they all take their leftovers and scarf them down in private anyway. I know I would!
I am this person now and I feel kind of bad about it.
For one, I just can't eat as much as I used to without feeling sickeningly full. It's also hard for me to make a full restaurant meal fit into my calories so it's either eat a portion, make substitutions, or get a lower calorie dish that I don't really want. I could always go over my calories, but I try not to let myself get into the mindset of doing that just because I'm eating out because years of doing that is what made me obese in the first place.
But I'm very self conscious of being that woman now while everyone around me is indulging.1 -
I see a big difference between deciding to eat only a portion of a meal (especially some of the huge meals, although there are restaurants, especially fine dining, with more reasonable portions), and making a big thing about how you CANNOT POSSIBLY eat all that and are SO FULL when friends are eating more.
I do the former all the time, and try not to do the latter, as it's obnoxious IMO.
Then again, if questioned "didn't you like it" by the server because I have a lot left over, I might say "yes, but just couldn't eat any more" and see that as something different.
Mostly I try not to care and to remember that people are often weird about food.7 -
OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...9 -
Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
Only two pages to go...3 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »When overweight people claim "I'm trying to eat 1500 calories but I'm just omg so full at 1100" on MFP I simply don't believe me. There's no way you became obese or overweight because you feel like you're stuffing your face on 1100-1300 calories
While in some cases this can be a humble brag of some sorts (look how dainty I am and how little I eat, it must be my metabolism), in many cases they truly can be full eating a low calorie diet because the types of food some people consider "diet foods" are pretty large in volume, not to mention the honeymoon phase of dieting.
When it comes to women, there is a long association between limited food consumption and notions of virtue/purity. The less you eat, the more truly feminine you are.
And when I look at things like juice fasts and certain diet plans, it doesn't seem like we're free of that association yet.
So absolutely true. Every time I go out to eat with girlfriends, they all barely pick at their food and loudly exclaim how full they are. It's so demoralizing as I watched my calories closely all day so I could eat my whole meal. Which is exactly what I do even though I sure don't look as "dainty" as the rest of them.
I'm pretty sure they all take their leftovers and scarf them down in private anyway. I know I would!
I actually feel bad for those people who do that...imagine all the joy they are missing out on..
Seriously...I am in the camp of "whomever gets to eat the most and hit their goals wins"...
I love the fact I can go to the pub and eat whatever I want...keep in mind I can't eat as much as I used to tho...but the comments are usually along the lines of "I don't know how you pack it all away and stay your size" or "you are living the dream...eating all the food and not gaining"
Keep in mind I would my butt off lifting, running, biking, kayaking, climbing etc to be able to do all that.11 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »When overweight people claim "I'm trying to eat 1500 calories but I'm just omg so full at 1100" on MFP I simply don't believe me. There's no way you became obese or overweight because you feel like you're stuffing your face on 1100-1300 calories
While in some cases this can be a humble brag of some sorts (look how dainty I am and how little I eat, it must be my metabolism), in many cases they truly can be full eating a low calorie diet because the types of food some people consider "diet foods" are pretty large in volume, not to mention the honeymoon phase of dieting.
To me, I think when people say they can't eat more often they mean they are not sure whether they SHOULD eat more. They are surprised they are not really unpleasantly hungry (which can be the case early on even on low cals if you are eating a filling diet) and wonder if they don't think they NEED to eat if they really should, or if it's better not to. I think that's one problem with people saying "don't eat if not hungry" early on. Many people have messed up hunger signals and no idea how they should feel, weird as that may sound. That was me at first, and I'm glad I had a number to look to in order to see if what I was eating was reasonable or not. After a while I felt more comfortable trusting myself.
I'd differential this from people saying "I cannot possibly figure out a way to eat more." I felt content on 900 for a while and wasn't sure (until I thought about it and after I'd been logging) that I SHOULD eat more, but it wasn't at all hard to figure out a way to add more calories to get to 1250 when I decided I should. And I wouldn't have felt like I was stuffing myself to get to 1250 no matter what.
If someone says they can't possible eat more than 1000 or some such number, that it would make them feel sick, I think there's something more going on. Possibly nothing serious that will go away after a week or so, possibly talking themselves into a very low number they have decided they WANT to eat at, possibly (and I think this is common) that they are eating only foods they don't really enjoy so they have no desire to eat more.
Yes to all of this.
As a corollary to the bolded, I'd explicitly add that I think "feeling great" and "having plenty of energy" are not proof positive that current calories or nutrition are adequate.
I got my calories too low at first (because MFP substantially underestimates my NEAT). I felt just fine . . . until I didn't. It's slower/harder to recover from that than it would've been to avoid it.
In my case, I literally didn't know, until I saw that I was losing too fast (I had been eating back pretty much all exercise, for example) . . . and when I saw, I ate more, even before experiencing the full fatigue/weakness, which came a short time after I'd already acted correctively.
But I when I see posts about people intentionally creating riskily high deficits, plus exercising and not eating any back; or simply having a riskily high weight loss rate for their size . . . it worries me, and I tell them why.8 -
Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
3 -
It does not matter. More activity is more activity and that's a good thing whether you log it or not, whether it pushes you into a higher activity bracket or not.
Log whatever you'd like, however you'd like and you'll do just fine as long as you're consistent and make adjustments based on your results.10 -
Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I have a question about this. I normally average in the range of 14k step a day, but that includes my runs 4 times/wk. I occasionally lift weight or do some other type of workout, but 90% of it is only running or walking at steep incline. Outside of the gym, I get probably about 3-4k steps/day. Considering that I'm burning much more running than I would otherwise walking, should I classify myself as sedentary+exercise or highly active?
This is more of a curiosity question than anything; I custom set my calorie goals based off of averaged TDEE -20% and don't eat calorie adjustment that MFP gives me, so I'm not trying to figure out the correct setting on the site.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I see the quoted all the time but this is not the standard MFP uses. It starts at 2500 for sedentary and goes up in 2500 increments. I know this because I am (in combination with my tracker missing lots of pottering round the flat steps because i'm not exactly striding in a 1 bed flat) and after about 2500 I start getting extra calories.5 -
Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I have a question about this. I normally average in the range of 14k step a day, but that includes my runs 4 times/wk. I occasionally lift weight or do some other type of workout, but 90% of it is only running or walking at steep incline. Outside of the gym, I get probably about 3-4k steps/day. Considering that I'm burning much more running than I would otherwise walking, should I classify myself as sedentary+exercise or highly active?
This is more of a curiosity question than anything; I custom set my calorie goals based off of averaged TDEE -20% and don't eat calorie adjustment that MFP gives me, so I'm not trying to figure out the correct setting on the site.
Sedentary + exercise.
I'm in a similar boat. I'm sedentary outside of exercise, but can hit 12-15K steps on big run days. But if using MFP, I'm sedentary and then add in the exercise. I use a tracker so it will give me calories on non-run days that I get off my butt and do "things". I've hit 10K just wandering Home Depot / Rona figuring out what I want to do for renos. I eat those calories as well as running calories. There are just less of them to eat vs. running.
I'm not consistent enough for TDEE to work for me. But I'm kinda targeting 2K cals per day.
3 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I have a question about this. I normally average in the range of 14k step a day, but that includes my runs 4 times/wk. I occasionally lift weight or do some other type of workout, but 90% of it is only running or walking at steep incline. Outside of the gym, I get probably about 3-4k steps/day. Considering that I'm burning much more running than I would otherwise walking, should I classify myself as sedentary+exercise or highly active?
This is more of a curiosity question than anything; I custom set my calorie goals based off of averaged TDEE -20% and don't eat calorie adjustment that MFP gives me, so I'm not trying to figure out the correct setting on the site.
Sedentary + exercise.
I'm in a similar boat. I'm sedentary outside of exercise, but can hit 12-15K steps on big run days. But if using MFP, I'm sedentary and then add in the exercise. I use a tracker so it will give me calories on non-run days that I get off my butt and do "things". I've hit 10K just wandering Home Depot / Rona figuring out what I want to do for renos. I eat those calories as well as running calories. There are just less of them to eat vs. running.
I'm not consistent enough for TDEE to work for me. But I'm kinda targeting 2K cals per day.
I've tried adjusting calories on non-workout days and it's just too hard for me, lol. I like TDEE because it allows me to track by the week, not the day. I pretty much eat the same amount day to day, or at least try to get an average for the week in a sane range. I keep a fairly detailed excel tracker with data, and since 28 June, my average intake has been 1993, average calories out are 381 (purposeful exercise only, not including any variations to NEAT from day to day; average includes '0' values for non-exercise days), and average net is 1612. That data encompasses days as low as ~1200 (when I was sick) and as high as ~3400 (meals out + alcohol).
I keep both weekly averages and a long term running average and as time goes on, try to get that long term net average to go down.1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I see the quoted all the time but this is not the standard MFP uses. It starts at 2500 for sedentary and goes up in 2500 increments. I know this because I am (in combination with my tracker missing lots of pottering round the flat steps because i'm not exactly striding in a 1 bed flat) and after about 2500 I start getting extra calories.
I would be curious how you know that MFP uses 2500 increments?
I've looked and the settings don't use numbers per say....is there somewhere they published this information?
The article above is on pubmed so I would take that over some arbitrary number MFP uses anyway.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »I see a big difference between deciding to eat only a portion of a meal (especially some of the huge meals, although there are restaurants, especially fine dining, with more reasonable portions), and making a big thing about how you CANNOT POSSIBLY eat all that and are SO FULL when friends are eating more.
I do the former all the time, and try not to do the latter, as it's obnoxious IMO.
Then again, if questioned "didn't you like it" by the server because I have a lot left over, I might say "yes, but just couldn't eat any more" and see that as something different.
Mostly I try not to care and to remember that people are often weird about food.
Having been on both sides now I think it's more of a perception thing than anything else. When I was obese and ate all the things without caring if one of my girlfriends didn't finish their food or commented on being full while I was still eating I felt self conscious about it. I don't think it was ever meant as a personal slight to me or meant to be obnoxious, but I always felt self conscious about it.
Now that I'm the woman who usually doesn't finish her food I've had a few friends come out and ask, "you're full?" or "you aren't going to finish that?" I usually brush it off and minimize it, but I think people want you to indulge when they indulge and when you don't they feel weird about it regardless of whether you say something about it or not.
There probably are women who do this type of thing though just to slight the other person.1 -
Great. Thanks, you guys. I've gotten into my sixties without ever knowing this is a thing, to worry about what other women are eating or not eating.
Really? I am supposed to worry about that? *Puppy* that.6 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »OMG I'm never going to get to the end of this thread! I's taken me weeks, and i am now at the end of page 133
I just wanted to quickly weigh in on the counting every little activity as exercise thing.
I have a fitbit, and the days i do heavy cleaning, gardening whatever, these activities have not even made a blip on my overall calorie count/award for the day. So therefore I'm in the camp of only counting actual exercise as exercise.
If you're going to reply to this please give me a month to get to the end of the thread until I'm able to read it and reply...
and I guess this is part of my point by saying to the question "should I log this" as "no"...
and then there is this part.
Per this article
1) <5000 steps.d (sedentary);
2) 5000-7499 steps.d (low active);
3) 7500-9999 steps.d (somewhat active);
4) > or =10,000-12,499 steps.d (active); and
5) > or =12,500 steps.d (highly active)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715035
Per this...people are still considered sedentary pre 5k steps a day...and if at some point people are doing "extra life activity" if it doesn't bring them over the threshold of sedentary or even low active it should not be logged.
I see the quoted all the time but this is not the standard MFP uses. It starts at 2500 for sedentary and goes up in 2500 increments. I know this because I am (in combination with my tracker missing lots of pottering round the flat steps because i'm not exactly striding in a 1 bed flat) and after about 2500 I start getting extra calories.
I would be curious how you know that MFP uses 2500 increments?
I've looked and the settings don't use numbers per say....is there somewhere they published this information?
The article above is on pubmed so I would take that over some arbitrary number MFP uses anyway.
Self tested and forum observation. If I start getting credited with extra calories after only 2500 steps then it starts there as the minimum level. Then we have people who have reported setting themselves as very active with the cited 12'500 steps above and losing too quickly. And it wouldn't make sense for it start at 2500 then increase each level at more than that.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 895 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions