Message Boards Debate: Health and Fitness
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

What commonly given MFP Forum advice do you personally disagree with?



  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Member Posts: 7,604 Member Member Posts: 7,604 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    Well, maybe my biases and projections and experiences are stronger influences for me than I realize. I've made what I believe to be a reasonable point. I also see (and respect) the counter points being made by most of you - they certainly hold water. I enjoy good, thoughtful discussions like these, and I will try to be more cognizant of my own tendencies going forward... thank you for your thoughts.

    Edit: we cross-posted, so maybe this is moot now, but in furtherance of possible conversation I'll leave it.

    Are you saying that you believe that you are constantly told by MFP that you should ignore nutrition?

    I'm curious how your biases -- as mentioned by you -- come into this.

    From what you'd said here -- and forgive me if I get this wrong, I'm trying to be accurate to what I recall -- you don't eat the greatest diet and realize that, but struggle with food choice for reasons other than knowledge (emotional issues, habit, stuff like that). How does the advice on MFP play into that? I would agree that people are often told that if they are struggling and need to lose that just focusing on calories is a way to lose (which is different from saying that nutrition does not matter).

    I personally think nutrition is very important, it's easier for me to focus on that than calories, and easier for me to control calories if I am already focusing on nutrition and exercise. But I recognize that we all come to this from different places and that I enjoy thinking about nutrition and cooking and love vegetables and don't really like fast food isn't the case for everyone (or the be-all, end-all about nutrition), and so making baby steps can be helpful, or even just focusing on calories (which will naturally tend to cause people to gravitate to lower cal and more filling foods, IMO). Experimenting with what causes you to not be hungry, things like that, using common sense about meeting protein and other macros, getting in vegetables.

    I have a friend who lost about 100 lbs some years ago, and when she started she was very clear that she had no intention of changing her diet (which was pretty bad, mostly fast food). It was something of a rebellious thing -- I don't want to cook, I want to eat this way. She did lose a bunch doing that, although making better choices at the fast food places, and then increasingly got interested in cooking and changed more. I think -- and I think she'd acknowledge -- that she had food issues and being nagged about how she didn't eat right made it harder for her. Deciding she could do it her way, and didn't have to conform to norms, made it easier, at did focusing on just one change rather than feeling like she had to give up all the foods she loved.

    I didn't do it that way -- in my late 20s I realized I was getting fat because I'd stopped exercising, ate lots of high cal restaurant food we could get free at work, and then stuff that was free around the office. I decided I needed to find a way to cook my food and have a schedule, and did that, and started exercising again, and didn't count calories at all, and that worked for me then. But people have different things that work for them (and I managed to find a way in my late 30s to gain again while still eating a basically home-cooked, healthy diet).
    edited December 2018
  • walktalkdogwalktalkdog Member Posts: 101 Member Member Posts: 101 Member
    I have occasionally read on here the suggestion to those who are not losing as quickly as they hoped, or are stalled that they "need to to eat more to lose weight". Huh? That one I don't understand, nor agree with.

    Well, there's an underlying kernel of truth to that statement under specific circumstances, but as general advice goes, it's not good to bandy about.

    A scenario could play out wherein someone is over-restricting for a long period of time, their energy levels plummet, they become more lethargic, their exercise is less effective and burns less calories, they have less involuntary movement throughout the day, and their TDEE plummets. They may even struggle with compliance and have occasional binges.

    In a scenario like that, eating more to the point where they're still in a deficit but properly fueling themselves so they have better energy, get their TDEE back up and start burning more calories, and are able to remain compliant with their diet? It's good advice to eat more.

    Of course you can't fit all of that into a pithy statement.

    Thank you; I guess that makes sense for some people. Not for me, so that's why I can't wrap my head around it.
  • tigerbluetigerblue Member Posts: 1,623 Member Member Posts: 1,623 Member
    There is some really good stuff in this thread! Brings back my confidence in MFP!
  • AnnPT77AnnPT77 Member, Premium Posts: 21,877 Member Member, Premium Posts: 21,877 Member
    I joined MFP in the first place to get more specific in my food logging. I'd
    UsE a fOoD ScALe

    why do you disagree with this?

    Because most people here believe its the be all end all of weight loss. Haven't weighted a single ounce of food in 6 months and doing just fine.

    Maybe for skinny people trying to "lose weight" it may help but those of us with a ton to drop its unnecessary and a waste of time. As long as your mindful of portion sizes it does the same job.

    I agree with you that it isn't essential for everyone (even said that explicitly on a thread I started about food scale time-saving tips, among other places).

    That said, I joined MFP after losing about halfway to what turned out to be goal weight (28 pounds down of 50-60 needed). I'd been eyeballing portions and estimating calories, which worked great . . . until it didn't. My weight loss slowed way down, and it wasn't clear to me where/how to make changes and still maintain really good nutrition.

    I figured I needed to track more accurately to keep the scale moving in my desired direction, so it was natural for me to start using a food scale and treat the process like a fun science-fair project. I'm just guessing, but I probably could've gotten along OK for another 10 pounds or so with better logging plus eyeballing. After that, I think it would've been much less manageable.

    I agree that there's sometimes an over-prescription of food scales, but the data one gets from accuracy is helpful in some ways (even when not strictly necessary), and I think it's 100% appropriate to suggest a food scale to someone who's complaining of plateaus or stalls or "unexplained" regain. It clarifies the picture.

    IMO, it can be a barrier that people who've never learned to use a food scale (efficiently) think it's going to be much more fussy, time-consuming and instrusive than it actually is. For sure, it's less time-consuming than a heavy reliance on cups/spoons measuring. More time-consuming than eyeballing, though.
Sign In or Register to comment.