powr69 Member

I'm sure there are biological reasons for it, but I just accept it as being what it is. Could be lack of variety in your meal plans, could be a lot of things. Personally, I just try to hold out for a cheat day, or I'll change my plans to fit something from Blaze or MOD Pizza in. It's easier when I am also exercising as the…

Okay, and? That's great for you then. Just because you don't need it doesn't refute or negate my or others personal needs, which includes weighing, etc. MFP clearly can provide a plethora of ways to count your calories. It needs to, you know, actually work. That's my point with this, and there's nothing wrong with me…

Perhaps now part of the issue is just pedantry, but different grapes have different caloric values. Apparently red and green are pretty close to the same, but black apparently are not. I s'pose I could just use the one and not worry about the few calories difference, I just like to be as accurate as I can. I have a feeling…

What exact db entry are you using for that? I ended up using "Fruit - Red/green Seedless Grapes (Usda)" and for 10.6 servings (1oz.) I get 207 calories. I used "Generic - Black Grapes" for those, the default is 1 cup for serving, I used .3 because the ounce options specifically state fluid ounces. Grand total: 243 calories…

I'm curious how this might help me, because it's something I keep running into. For instance, I bought bags of green, red, and black grapes for this week. Servings are generally listed in cups, well a cup is 8oz., so away I go setting up containers each with 5.3oz. of each type of grapes (I wanted to get 2 cups total in…

I think may of us have heard that and believed it. It's proven false though, as many here have already discussed. I'll go ahead and add my own anecdotal evidence to the discussion, I started MFP for the calorie tracking a few years ago, but it wasn't until last year I got serious about it. I went from weighing between 314…

Possibly dumb question time: how? I could google it, but I don't want to have to sift through a ton of possibly not right stuff because I searched the wrong terms or whatever.

That's difficult to assess. If it helps, I work in IT. I do sit a lot, but I constantly have to get up and walk to people's desks and such, and since we're in a 2 story building I go up and down the stairs (2 flights) a few times a day, sometimes more, sometimes less. Stride length will be useless here because I may walk…

Well that kind of puts me back to the mind of not really worrying about it at all. It sounds like the accuracy I was looking/hoping for is not really possible unless I only used the tracker when out on a walk where I don't stop, etc. Simply counting steps and stairs and then guestimating a calorie burn seems kind of…

So basically it seems maybe I'm overthinking the whole thing, and all I really need is something that counts steps and can tell if I've gone up stairs and that's really about as accurate as I'm going to get then?

And therein lies the rub. I don't s'pose there's a known best guesser... And so the only thing that makes any difference is how quickly I walked it and its elevation changes, which HR don't help with at all, yes?

Fair enough, and I'll try using that next time to see how it compares. My next question then, would be why do I get such wildly different calorie burn metrics from MapMyWalk vs logging exercise in MFP using the same info? (pace, how far, how long, etc.) Well, so far it's seeming like monitoring heart rate isn't of much…

Well yes, but GPS is good for distance and seeing your route, I would think that's still got use/worth, or do I overestimate that? I guess my thought here is that in tandem with distance and pace it would help make calorie burn estimates more accurate. Is this not the case? As for how hard I walk, that can still have an…

You might wanna go back and read through from where I joined in. It's more than just 600, there's the instant loss of about that from the donation, and then again from the rebuild, which is the part that you speak of. I've conceded that maybe I'm being a pedant, but to me that instant loss is worth tracking. The slow…

Not at all, that was my choice of words, not yours. No need to apologize. :)

I see where you're coming from in the vein of the calorie loss being a drop in the bucket (no pun intended, but damn if that wasn't a great double!). Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to count it, pedantic as it may be. My body doesn't rely on my arm the way it does blood for nourishment. In that…

I'm glad you agree, it helps me feel a little less like Sisyphus on this subject. I just couldn't fathom how it's literally gone years with this question coming up over and over and no one ever really acknowledging or discussing the instant loss.

That's a good question, which is why I resurrected this thread. Google "blood donation calories". Read all the threads and such all over. You'll note exactly what I did: every discussion is full of people saying they don't log it, the calories lost are via burn over XX days and therefore insignificant. No one counts an…

I don't think I am (this isn't to say I am correct, however). Every discussion I have read is very pointedly discussing *only* gradual burn of replenishing the lost blood, and that's why no one seems to log it. If a single pint of blood has 600 to 650 calories, and the average human has 8 total, then at any given time you…

I can't lie, I was hoping I'd be able to offset more of the breakfast I had, vs. what I'd normally eat. It won't be a huge deal, aside from my sodium being a fair bit over. I still plan on going for a bit of a walk this evening to burn off a few hundred to help as well. Donating blood has never really caused me to not be…

This seems to be the most recent thread on this, so I'll post here. Sorry if thread necro upsets anyone, I figured it'd be less offending than yet another post on the topic. I notice all anyone discusses with regards to this is the burn *after* the donation from replenishing red blood cells etc. No one seems to note the…