My Fitness Pal

[Bosguy]

My doctor recommended this site because it is a calorie counter, diet and exercise journal. It is available on line and/or as a free app. It looks very interesting and appears to be an excellent way of keeping logs of the above 3 categories.

Just wondered if anyone is familiar with it, has or does use it, and your degree of satisfaction.

Thanks

 

Boston Bill

[JT Brooklyn]

IMHO Most will say Forget the Calorie COUNTERS..Get into the Diet & Exercise and you will do Fine!

[+ FreshFluff]

I'm not familiar with that particular site, but there are lots of studies show that keeping track of metrics (like number of steps taken, minutes of exercise, etc) motivates people to exercise more. You can also try something like the Fitbit Flex, a wristband that tracks your activity, which is synced (wirelessly, I think) with a website that shows you lots of graphs etc. It also tracks movement during sleep so you can see how well you're sleeping.

 

There are lots of other other devices, so definitely check out reviews if you go this route.

[leigh.bess.toad]

Bill -- I definitely disagree with Brooklyn Guy. I'm someone who used MFP religiously during my weight loss and I can tell you I couldn't have done what I did without it. First of all, logging everything you eat (and I mean EVERYTHING) makes you accountable for what you take in, and you'll be surprised at how things add up. Then, with MFP, there is a very active and supportive community forum out there that can help you and educate you and support you as well. I learned a lot from them. Little things like the importance of weighing your food versus measuring your food. One example: A serving of oatmeal is a half a cup or 40 grams. But if you weigh a half a cup of oatmeal, it actually is about 49 grams, so instead of 150 calories, you are taking in about 190 calories, or 20%. Measuring your food will frequently give you about 15-20% more calories than weighing your food. Little tricks like that is what you find out on MFP. That plus the accountability to yourself and the friends you form on the forum. There is an LGBT group as well as a group for Bears and Hairy Guys as well. And you never know when a certain friend from Richmond might show up.

 

Email me, text me or PM me if you want more info. But I cannot recommend MFP more highly. I cannot say it enough -- I couldn't have done what I did without it.

[instudiocity]

ACCURATELY counting calories is far more beneficial to weight loss than exercise. You can easily cut 1,000 calories out of your food intake while burning an extra 1,000 calories takes HOURS.

[Lookin]

. . . burning an extra 1,000 calories takes HOURS.

 

Ah, yes, but you'll firm up your tushie and you just never know who you'll run in to. http://www.boytoy.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif

 

http://www.legaljuice.com/files/2013/09/naked-nude-runner-running-jogger-man-person.jpg

[nynakedtop]

ACCURATELY counting calories is far more beneficial to weight loss than exercise. You can easily cut 1,000 calories out of your food intake while burning an extra 1,000 calories takes HOURS.

 

just do keep in mind that all calories are not created equally - important to also examine the quality of the calories you are taking in to ensure that you are getting proper nutrients! ... and if you are working out, pay attention to protein intake!

[instudiocity]

just do keep in mind that all calories are not created equally - important to also examine the quality of the calories you are taking in to ensure that you are getting proper nutrients! ... and if you are working out, pay attention to protein intake!

Hate to disagree, and I'm not being disagreeable when I say, "You can eat all the garbage you want to eat as long as you restrict your calorie intake." That's a direct quote from my endocrinologist.

 

Yes, you can eat table sugar, but you won't be satisfied with the quantity of your intake. You can eat Romaine Lettuce until you can't chew anymore and you're desire to much will be satisfied with almost no calories. The bottom line is 3,600 calories = 1 pound of weight.

 

You want to lose weight, eat 3,600 less calories than your metabolism burns and you'll lose a pound. If you want to gain weight, eat 3,600 more calories than you metabolize and you'll gain weight - as many of us know! But what you eat isn't nearly as important as HOW MUCH you eat.

 

Fruits and veggies are far less calorie dense than other edibles so it's easier to restrict calories while still satisfying the craving to munch. But still, you can walk 3 miles in a hour and burn 250 calories. A Whopper, Fries and Coke is over 1,000 calories - who's up to walking that off?

[+ Funguy]

Hate to disagree, and I'm not being disagreeable when I say, "You can eat all the garbage you want to eat as long as you restrict your calorie intake." That's a direct quote from my endocrinologist.

 

Yes, you can eat table sugar, but you won't be satisfied with the quantity of your intake. You can eat Romaine Lettuce until you can't chew anymore and you're desire to much will be satisfied with almost no calories. The bottom line is 3,600 calories = 1 pound of weight.

 

You want to lose weight, eat 3,600 less calories than your metabolism burns and you'll lose a pound. If you want to gain weight, eat 3,600 more calories than you metabolize and you'll gain weight - as many of us know! But what you eat isn't nearly as important as HOW MUCH you eat.

 

Fruits and veggies are far less calorie dense than other edibles so it's easier to restrict calories while still satisfying the craving to munch. But still, you can walk 3 miles in a hour and burn 250 calories. A Whopper, Fries and Coke is over 1,000 calories - who's up to walking that off?

 

Hate to burst your bubble but the foods do matter. It used to be said that if you burn up more calories than you take in then you would lose weight. Yes, that is ultimately true but adding exercise to the mixture speeds it up the loss and re-sets your metabolism higher. But, the combinations of foods also matters: e.g.. dieters love fruit. However, if you don't add protein to it your insulin production is screwed up. Fruits are sugars and cause a huge rise in insulin. If it is not used up with something else (e.g. cottage cheese) at the same time, it will be broken down and cause fat deposition. You may indeed lose some weight but you increase your fat deposits! Increasing your protein (not red meat), and decreasing your fat, sugars, simple carbs is what you need to do. Also eat more complex carbs as is found in veggies for instance.

[Steven_Draker]

Hate to disagree, and I'm not being disagreeable when I say, "You can eat all the garbage you want to eat as long as you restrict your calorie intake." That's a direct quote from my endocrinologist.

 

It's a little more complicated than what your endocrinologist suggests:

 

Calories from fat

 

The term "calories from fat" refers to the percentage of calories in a serving of food that come from fat rather than from carbohydrates or protein. This figure is listed on nutrition labels for most foods.

 

The percentage of calories a person gets from fat versus carbohydrates makes little difference in terms of weight maintenance or weight loss. However, two studies published in the journal "Obesity" in 2007 suggest that a person who consumes a lot of calories from trans fats may be more likely to gain weight compared with someone who consumes calories from other types of fats or from carbohydrates or proteins.

 

Recommendations

The U.S. Institute of Medicine recommends that Americans consume about 20 to 35 percent of their total calories from fat. Every gram of fat contains nine calories. This means a person who eats 2,000 calories a day should consume fewer than 78 g of fat per day.

 

source: http://www.livestrong.com/article/75564-definition-calories-fat/

 

Are calories in fat worse and harder to burn than calories from carbohydrates?

 

The difference isn't in how the calories are "burned" so much as in how excess calories are stored.

 

Excess carbohydrate calories must be converted to triglycerides before they can be stored as body fat. This process requires over 25% of the energy stored in the food. Thus, if you took in 100 Calories of pure carbohydrate in excess of your body's needs, you'd only store about 75 Calories worth of fat, since you used up some of the energy in the conversion process.

 

Fat, on the other hand, is fat to begin with. It only takes about 3% of the energy in it to put it up on the larder shelf, as it were. Thus, 100 Calories from fat in excess of your body's needs can end up as 97 Calories worth of saddlebag.

 

Remember that we take in nutrients of all sorts together, though - fats, carbs, and proteins. Thus, the most important factor over time is generally the total number of calories. However, if you keep the number of calories in your diet exactly the same and switch from a high-fat to a lower-fat diet you will generally notice a reduction in weight (assuming you were in caloric balance beforehand).

 

Also, what's the difference between fat and saturated fat? Is saturated fat just more calories concentrated?

 

Fats come in several varieties, among them saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated. The saturated fats are named because they have all the hydrogen they can hold (i.e., they are saturated with hydrogen) and contain no double bonds in their chemical structure. The monounsaturated fats have one double bond (which could be broken by adding two hydrogen molecules), and the polyunsaturated fats have more than one double bond.

 

Unfortunately I'm not an expert on the subtleties of fat metabolism, but it has been well established that there is an increased risk of heart disease associated with high-fat diets, in particular those high in saturated fat. Diets high in monounsaturated fat, such as the Mediterranean diet, are thought to have a heart-protective effect, but there is still much research going on in this area.

 

For most healthy individuals, it's recommended that keeping total amounts of dietary fat below 30% (and having saturated fat make up no more than 10% of the total amount of fat consumed) can decrease the risk of heart disease. Individuals with different pre-existing conditions may have different nutritional requirements.

 

Simple sugars can pose a much greater risk to health than fats. It depends on several factors and it can become a very complicated issue - it would take a large book to completly cover this subject.

 

Individuals who are obese, diabetic, or have some form of impaired glucose tolerance may need to watch their ingestion of some foods, but for the general population the primary risks from sugary foods are tooth decay and obesity from an excess of calories.

 

For those who insist that "complex carbohydrates are better" it's important to differentiate among three areas of distinction when making any sort of argument:

 

• The end-products of digestion - complex carbohydrates are broken down into simple carbohydrates before absorption. All carbohydrates are converted to glucose before the body can use them for energy, or they are stored as glycogen or fat.
   
  
• The glycemic index - some carbohydrates are absorbed more quickly than others, and it is not always the foods people think that are absorbed quickest.
  Be careful with the glycemic index, though. It's really most useful in talking about foods in isolation. The truth of the matter is that people tend to eat meals made up of a combination of nutrients, and this can affect absorption time as well.
   
  
• Nutrient density - much of the problem with many "sugary" foods is a lack of nutrient density. For example, a candy cane and an apple might both have the same amount of calories, and both might get most of their calories from simple sugars. However, the apple generally has vitamins and minerals and fiber the candy cane lacks (except for those high-fiber vitamin-fortified candy canes at Bread and Circus ;-) ).
  

 

Your thoughts above are, for the most part, correct. On the subject of which would take longer to 'burn', again, there is no simple answer. If you refer to 'stored' fat and carbs - carbs can be burnt off much quicker than stored fat - also, large amounts of fat can be stored by the body but only a small amount of 'sugar'.

 

Tehnically this is correct, in that the reactions involved in metabolizing carbohydrates can occur faster, but in reality it makes little practical difference, as the shifts in metabolic activity are so dynamic.

 

On the other hand unused sugar is converted into stored fat, very quickly - and the fact that the body stores very little sugar means that if it is not used quickly it will be converted into fat. Also, the body does not store fat unless insulin is released - which only happens when you eat sugar.

 

Insulin is always present in the bloodstream - just in varying amounts. There is no "on/off" switch to insulin, fat metabolism, fat storage, or any of these processes. They all occur simultaneously, with new fat being added to body fat stores while some body fat already stored is being broken down.

 

Fat on the other hand is calorie dense, but it digest much slower than sugars which gives you a time advantage.

 

What sort of time advantage? It is true that ingestion of fat simultaneously with carbohydrate can slow the absorption of carbohydrate into the bloodstream, and may be helpful for some people who have an exaggerated response to pure carbohydrate, but it's really not going to be the miraculous controlling factor in weight management, either.

 

source: http://www.oaktrees.org/fitness/fat.html

[leigh.bess.toad]

None of which gets back to the OP's original question: yes, logging your food can make a huge difference in losing weight, and My Fitness Pal is an effective tool that I have used and swear by. All the other stuff are things that are argued about ad nauseum on the forums on MFP. And there is no one right answer for everyone. It's trial and error. What works diet-wise for me might not for you. I tried a variety of things to keep my body guessing I even did a modified ketogenic diet for a month. But as a general rule, find a good macro split, eat good foods, foods that you like that you would normally eat, eat a reasonable proportion, log everything you eat, exercise regularly, and you'll be on your way. A lot of the rest is arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Calculate your BMR and TDEE regularly to make sure that you are on target with what you are trying to do. Set realistic expectations for how much and how fast to expect to lose weight. Don't go below 1200 calories a day on a routine basis. Don't weigh yourself too often and don't freak out or let the scale be guiding you. It's a tool, not the be all, end all.

 

Just remember, the diet industry is one of the biggest gimmicks out there. It is designed to help people lose weight but not teach them how to keep it off. It's a multi-billion dollar scam, just waiting for the next gimmick, the next new thing. If you succeed in permanent weight loss, they lose. So take most of what they say with an enormous grain of salt. Hell an entire truck load of salt. In many ways, it's you versus them. Slow and steady wins this race. It isn't a diet. It's a lifestyle change and how you view your relationship with food. What you want out of it is up to you entirely. In consultation with your healthcare providers.

[bigvalboy]

None of which gets back to the OP's original question: yes, logging your food can make a huge difference in losing weight, and My Fitness Pal is an effective tool that I have used and swear by. All the other stuff are things that are argued about ad nauseum on the forums on MFP. And there is no one right answer for everyone. It's trial and error. What works diet-wise for me might not for you. I tried a variety of things to keep my body guessing I even did a modified ketogenic diet for a month. But as a general rule, find a good macro split, eat good foods, foods that you like that you would normally eat, eat a reasonable proportion, log everything you eat, exercise regularly, and you'll be on your way. A lot of the rest is arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Calculate your BMR and TDEE regularly to make sure that you are on target with what you are trying to do. Set realistic expectations for how much and how fast to expect to lose weight. Don't go below 1200 calories a day on a routine basis. Don't weigh yourself too often and don't freak out or let the scale be guiding you. It's a tool, not the be all, end all.

 

Just remember, the diet industry is one of the biggest gimmicks out there. It is designed to help people lose weight but not teach them how to keep it off. It's a multi-billion dollar scam, just waiting for the next gimmick, the next new thing. If you succeed in permanent weight loss, they lose. So take most of what they say with an enormous grain of salt. Hell an entire truck load of salt. In many ways, it's you versus them. Slow and steady wins this race. It isn't a diet. It's a lifestyle change and how you view your relationship with food. What you want out of it is up to you entirely. In consultation with your healthcare providers.

 

Mr. LBT is spot on in his analysis....aaahhh voice of reason and sanity.

[corndog]

I think that there is a lot of good advice here, but I think that many people fail to lose weight because they overthink it, or are bombarded with information about how to do it perfectly.

 

An imperfect weight loss plan that you stick to is 100 times better than a perfect, scientifically designed system that you give up on after a week. For example, for me, a weight loss plan that prescribes that I'm never going to eat pizza and drink beer won't ultimately succeed. I don't care how much pineapple and organic soy I'm allowed to eat, if you tell me that I'm giving up my favorite foods FOREVER, I'm destined to fail.

 

Some personality types will succeed by turning nutrition and exercise into their life's passion, but others will succeed with commitment to a simple idea like "eat less, exercise more." I've personally found the food and exercise logging, using systems like MyFitnessPal and FitBit, are very helpful, but everyone's motivational style is different.

 

I've also had some success in the past with Nutrisystem because it takes nearly all the thinking and planning out of your hands... you simply eat the food they provide, in the pre-measured portions, and you're set. Ultimately, however, it isn't a sustainable solution because it's really expensive, boring after a while, and doesn't really help you change your lifestyle.

[instudiocity]

i think that there is a lot of good advice here, but i think that many people fail to lose weight because they overthink it, or are bombarded with information about how to do it perfectly.

 

An imperfect weight loss plan that you stick to is 100 times better than a perfect, scientifically designed system that you give up on after a week. For example, for me, a weight loss plan that prescribes that i'm never going to eat pizza and drink beer won't ultimately succeed. I don't care how much pineapple and organic soy i'm allowed to eat, if you tell me that i'm giving up my favorite foods forever, i'm destined to fail.

 

Some personality types will succeed by turning nutrition and exercise into their life's passion, but others will succeed with commitment to a simple idea like "eat less, exercise more." i've personally found the food and exercise logging, using systems like myfitnesspal and fitbit, are very helpful, but everyone's motivational style is different.

 

I've also had some success in the past with nutrisystem because it takes nearly all the thinking and planning out of your hands... You simply eat the food they provide, in the pre-measured portions, and you're set. Ultimately, however, it isn't a sustainable solution because it's really expensive, boring after a while, and doesn't really help you change your lifestyle.

yup!

[+ FreshFluff]

I think that there is a lot of good advice here, but I think that many people fail to lose weight because they overthink it, or are bombarded with information about how to do it perfectly.

 

An imperfect weight loss plan that you stick to is 100 times better than a perfect, scientifically designed system that you give up on after a week. For example, for me, a weight loss plan that prescribes that I'm never going to eat pizza and drink beer won't ultimately succeed. I don't care how much pineapple and organic soy I'm allowed to eat, if you tell me that I'm giving up my favorite foods FOREVER, I'm destined to fail.

 

Some personality types will succeed by turning nutrition and exercise into their life's passion, but others will succeed with commitment to a simple idea like "eat less, exercise more." I've personally found the food and exercise logging, using systems like MyFitnessPal and FitBit, are very helpful, but everyone's motivational style is different.

 

I agree 100%. I think it's better to start as easily as possible: Cut down portions by 1/3. In restaurants, ask them to put 1/2 the order in a doggy bag (or see if they'll do a half portion). Learn to stop before you're full, which is really tough but possible. If you're still hungry 10 minutes later, eat some more. Try to add fiber (e.g. vegetables) to your meals, preferably before you eat the rest.

 

I think that many people can lose a significant amount weight just by doing the above, and hey, it's free.

 

Just remember, the diet industry is one of the biggest gimmicks out there. It is designed to help people lose weight but not teach them how to keep it off. It's a multi-billion dollar scam, just waiting for the next gimmick, the next new thing. .

 

I think many companies at least try to teach people how to keep the weight off. Hey, if they could guarantee permanent weight loss, they could hike their prices up by a factor of 100.

 

The problem is that keeping weight off takes discipline, and that can't really be taught.

[Lookin]

One thing I've learned for me is that "I'm on a diet" is a dead-end street. As long as I look at it as a project with a beginning and an end, I'm going to fail. I did it three times in my life and, each time, I found myself feeling deprived of something and couldn't wait until the diet was over so I could have just one - or more - of whatever it was I was missing. I hate feeling deprived and I will find a way to make it up to myself by eating enough of whatever I missed to get me right back where I started, plus a little.

 

The only thing that finally worked for me was to make near-permanent changes, whether less frequent enjoyment of a fattening food or more of a regular exercise, that I could stick with for the rest of my life without feeling unduly burdened. As long as I can't wait for something to be over, I know I won't stick with it for the rest of my life, and therefore the weight will come back.

 

Near-permanent doesn't mean saying 'never'. Fr'instance, I'm planning to enjoy a bacon cheeseburger with a friend tomorrow, plus a chocolate malt. But it's been six months since I had the last one and it will probably be at least that long until I have the next one. My mind will say, 'Well that was a treat!' And my body will say 'What the hell was that!?' And then I'll take a nice long hike up to the ridge this weekend. I don't feel at all deprived and I'm not counting the days until my next burger-splurge. It will be something unusual and my body will treat it that way.

 

Another thing that works for me is to look at weight-loss over a very long timeframe. It's not like I need to fit into a prom dress by the end of May. I started losing weight about ten years ago and I've taken my BMI from 30 to 25. It took about five years, and it's been stable for another five years. I'm thinking of going to 24 which, for me, is another seven pounds. I'm in no rush and if it takes a year to do it, that will be fine. The important thing is that, once I'm there, I don't want to creep back up again. So I'm looking for the next permanent change I can make without feeling overburdened. I can't think of any particular food that I want to give up, so it will probably be exercise-related.

 

One final thing I learned is that sex is terrific for weight loss. Unfortunately, that doesn't come around as frequently as it did in the old days. If it did, I might have to invest in a dhoti. http://www.boytoy.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif

 

 

http://www.gandhiserve.org/information/our_photographers/gandhi_trans.jpg