What are you doing with this setting?

I use the MFP weight-management method (base calorie goal doesn't include exercise, and I add carefully-estimated exercise separately). Therefore, I have "adjust my calorie goal" turned on, as shown in your screen grab.

I figure my macronutrient goals in grams based on my bodyweight, and I don't vary those goals when I have more calories. Therefore, I have "custom percentage" turned on.

My macro goals consist of a protein minimum and a fats minimum. I literally don't care how many carbs I eat, they just fall where they may as needed to support my calorie goal. I'm happy to be over my protein goal, or my fats goal (though I try to keep the fats slanted more toward MUFA/PUFA less toward sat fats). Consequently, I have the exercise calories to go 100% into carbs (which I then ignore, as long as I'm at/over both fats and protein.

I hope that's clear, as a thought process.

Other setups can work. For example, it's OK to get a calorie goal from an outside TDEE calculator. (Used as designed, those average in planned exercise to give you the same calorie goal daily, regardless of exercise, which works better for some people.) In that case, if a person wanted to log exercise in MFP, it might be good to not let exercise calories be added. However, if using a TDEE method but synching a fitness tracker, it would make sense to have "adjust calorie goal" turned on, plus enable negative adjustments (not on this page).

There are lots of viable variations. Some combinations of settings make sense, other combinations maybe don't.

This approach has been working fine for me, through weight loss (just under a year of that) and 6+ years of weight maintenance since. YMMV.

Side note, for people who may not've seen these settings: I think they're a premium feature.

avatiach wrote: »

Side note, for people who may not've seen these settings: I think they're a premium feature.

What are the advantages of premium? Is it worth the money and why?

I don't think there's a generic answer.

For many/most people, free MFP works just fine. If so, why pay for premium?

After that, it's individualized: If a person needs one or more of the premium functions enough to pay for it, it's worth it. (There's documentation of what Premium offers.)

One of the things Premium offers is more granular control over nutrition and calories, and the features above are one example. I used Premium to set macro goals in grams, for example, instead of using 5% increments. I like that I can click on a nutrient (in the phone/tablet app) and find out which foods contribute most to that nutrient in my regular eating (helps on days when I'm short on something, for example).

Premium has more plans (eating, exercise, others) and workout routines (phone/tablet app only), if people like more structure. I don't use those. Premium has a net carbs feature. I don't care about carbs. I'm not sure what-all else it may have.

Some people with slow internet connections like Premium because it loads faster without the advertisements. I've seen some people say they pay for premium because they're more faithful users of something they pay for vs. something free, or that they appreciated free MFP so much because of the good it did them that they want to pay for some of the costs of providing it.

I don't know how to answer that question . . . if you want better answers, I'd suggest posting a thread to ask, with a clear title line. It's sort of a digression from this thread, I just mentioned premium in case someone who doesn't have premium wondered what the OP question was about, why they couldn't use it, etc.

Yeh, what sijomial said. I have a goal in grams for my macros and although exercise changes that in the FOOD diary, I just hit the goals I set and then eat the exercise calories in whatever combination I want.

I don't have Premium. I had Premium on a complimentary promotion deal for a while and didn't see the benefit. The free version of this site gives me everything I need.