busybee1976

I noticed that when I input the %rda value for vitamins and such that they do not translate over to the daily report without changing.

I tested it out by entering only 1 food with practically 25% RDA for all of the vitamins and minerals but when I look at my daily report it gives a wide range. some are above 25% and some are less. There doesn't seem to be any consistency or a pattern that I can see. Am I just not understanding what the report is telling me?

WiFiWiMax

I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing this. I've created a few custom foods, added the %RDA and found that the system changed the data after saving. I can't justify buying the software(which I want to do) if something as rudimentary as this does not work properly.

Old Data Processing (precursor to I.T.) saying: "GIGO - Garbage In Garbage Out".

kate.bastow

I have noticed issues just with using the database foods. I entered 1 cup skim milk, 1 cup Froot Loops, and 3 cubic inches of pineapple, raw, all found by searching in the database (no custom foods) and the nutrition report said I had 142% of my RDA B12, but if you look at each food individually it's only about 50 or 60%.

Clearly this feature is not working properly and really needs to be fixed. I like fit day and I have months of data invested here but if this isn't being calculated correctly I'll have to go to another site.

Can someone let us know if this is being worked on?

Thanks,
Kate

kate.bastow

There seems to be no correlation between the %'s shown on the nutrition tab and the %'s given for each food item in my list for the day.

Why provide a tab to keep track of RDA % of nutrients if all the information is wrong? I've been using this for months now thinking that I'm good for my nutrients and so don't have to take a multi-vitamin. Fitday consistently OVERCOUNTS my nutrients so in fact I'm not getting as much as it says I am!

Has this always been the case? Or is this a recent break in the system?

Attached are screen shots of my morning food and the nutrition fitday reports I'm getting. The numbers just don't match up. I'm assuming the %'s given for nutrients in each food item are RDA %s. Is this not the intention?

I've loaded a fitday page at least 20 times per day, every day, for the last few months. With a large user base you don't need pay-users to have significant revenue, but how do expect people to flock to this site if the nutrition information is wrong?

I need to know, is this issue being taken care of? Or do I look for a new site?

Kate

kate.bastow

When I use the nutrition tab to see my daily total %s of my nutrients the totals don't seem to be the same as if I look at each individual food and calculate the totals manually.

Is anyone else having this problem? I've checked out several other calorie counting sites and I like Fitday's interface best, but if the data tracking isn't correct I'll have to use one of the other one's (which I don't really want to do).

Anyone else having this problem?

Is anyone working on fixing this?

An example is attached. (Froot Loops, 1 cup, + 1 cup skim milk.)

B12: 35% + 22% = 142% ??
Vit A: 10% + 10% = 41% ??
Vit C: 24% + 0% = 19% ??
Vit D: 9% + 25% = 69% ??

Sometimes the totals are correct, sometimes more than double, sometimes less than what it should be. It seems totally messed up.

Kate

ibobi

Hi all,

I have merged this thread with the one called "nutritional information" because they are the same issue.

Here is the response from the tech side of the site:

Daily Value is the standard that's used on food labels. It is not keyed to age/gender. It is the same for everyone because you can't customize a food label per-person. %RDA is published by the government for specific age/gender groups.

FitDay's uses these numbers to customize %RDA for each individual. The numbers are perhaps more accurate than our users are expecting.

Best,

Paul

kate.bastow

Thank you very much Paul for getting an answer for this, and for the quick reply.

I'm still not sure about the numbers. Please bear with me for a bit:

The nutrition tab says my custom intake of Vit A should be 700ug. That's the same as the FDA recommended amount for a woman of my age, so I'm guessing that may be the same info the tech uses. link.

This report also says that any male over 14 should get 900ug.

Assuming that the RDA the food labels use is based on an average male or female, the %s on the food label should be based on a number between 700ug and 900ug. The biggest it can be is 900ug.

Then the largest amount of Vitamin A I had in my previous example is 20% of 900 = 180ug. But the nutrition tab says I have 289.5ug which is much more.

How does the site calculate 289.5ug of Vit A from food labels that total 20% the RDA? Can you reference the source that the food label RDAs is taken from?

I really appreciate your help in this. I'm sorry if I'm being difficult. I like this site and I'd like to understand the numbers I'm seeing.

Thanks,
Kate

Esofia

I'd imagine that they're inaccurate, yep. I'm using the PC version, and the Calendar function, which I have set to view calories eaten vs. burned, is meant to give a weekly average for calories eaten, calories burned, and the calorie deficit. It consistently gives the wrong number for the average burned and deficit. I just checked it for this morning, and the average deficit was 60 calories out, which is quite a lot considering that it's a lower number due to my not having eaten more than breakfast yet today. I've seen other calculating errors. It's annoying, as I use the weekly average to help me even out eating a bit more one day and a bit less another day. You just have to ignore some of the functions, or else use other software.

kate.bastow

Just trying to keep this question alive. I entered foods that said I had 20% the RDA vitamin A. The tables I've found say 900ug is the max rda across ages/genders. 20% of 900 = 180ug, yet the site computed that I had taken in 289.5ug of vitamin A. This number has to be too high, does it not?

It would be great if we could see the heuristics being used to create the individual daily nutrient charts.

Why can't the calculations being used be made public? If time is the issue perhaps a chunk of the code could be cut and paste and we could decipher it for ourselves?

That's an easy statement to make without any justification.