IIFYM week 1 trying to fix metabolism

dieselbyte

IMO, if you are following IIFYM, your protein is too low. You should be at a minimum of 1g per pound of body weight

Why?

Gu
Normally you would go higher fat and lower carb, or lower fat and higher carb.

Why?

If weight loss is what you seek, I suggest increasing protein to 1.25 body weight and decreasing carbs

Why?

IIFYM sets the base for protein at 1g per pound of body weight (not lean body weight). All those that say a calorie is a calorie are just a little off. One has to look at the thermogenic effect of burning food ingested. Protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body than any other macronutrient. Meaning, your body burns more calories digesting protein than it does carbs or fats. Higher protein diets tend to help the body burn more fat while maintaining muscle, therefore helping to increase metaboblism.

I say usually you would go higher fat/lower carb or lower fat/higher carb because dietary fat is more likely to be stored as adipose tissue (fat storage) when ingested above maintenance levels. Studies have been done on this. Carbs have a lot less thermogenic effect than protein, and fat has the lowest thermogenic effect on the body. Basically, if you aren't buring off the carbs and excess dietary fat, dietary fat will most likely be stored as adipose tissue (fat stores) for later energy use, leading to an increase or maintenance of weight and body fat.

I recommended 1.25 grams of protein, so that you have some wiggle room. You don't need to be exactly at 1.25, but it gives you more of a chance that overall your protein intake will be above 1 gram per pound of body weight.

So basically, @wffolkes macro breakdown for his caloric intake may be the reason he isn't seeing much weight loss - if that is his goal.

With that being said, I noticed our friend @wffolkes is from England. I understand that protein prices are high there, and these ratios may not work for your budget. However, there are high protein foods that don't require you to eat egg whites all day.

"IIFYM" is a philosophy, not a rigidly defined system.

Why 1 gram per lb bodyweight? Why not 1.5? Why not 0.75? Why not 1 g per lb of lbm? What science backs up 1 gram per lb bodyweight?

Why not moderate fat/moderate carb instead of making one high?

Why did you finish your recommendations with 1.25 g protein per lb bodyweight when you started with 1 g?

Exactly! IIFYM is a philosophy. You can eat what you want as long as it fits your macros... The main part is fitting macros. That's the only rigid part off IIFYM. I don't even want to call it rigid, but the point is to stay within 5-15 grams of protein and carbs, and 5 grams within fats really (and don't forget fiber).

Look, everyone has their views. I'm not trying to impose mine on anyone, I was just making a recommendation. But if you had honestly read my reply, you would see the reason I said 1.25 was so that he could still be flexible and hopefully hit at least 1 gram per body pound. And why 1gram?? Read studies or ask the inventors of IIFYM. From my RESEARCH and RESULTS, that just seems to be the number for my goals.

Also, I wasn't saying to do high fat low carb or low fat high carb. Moderate both is fine. What I was referring to was the fact that both his fats and carbs seemed high.

jonnythan

IMO, if you are following IIFYM, your protein is too low. You should be at a minimum of 1g per pound of body weight

Why?

Normally you would go higher fat and lower carb, or lower fat and higher carb.

Why?

If weight loss is what you seek, I suggest increasing protein to 1.25 body weight and decreasing carbs

Why?

IIFYM sets the base for protein at 1g per pound of body weight (not lean body weight). All those that say a calorie is a calorie are just a little off. One has to look at the thermogenic effect of burning food ingested. Protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body than any other macronutrient. Meaning, your body burns more calories digesting protein than it does carbs or fats. Higher protein diets tend to help the body burn more fat while maintaining muscle, therefore helping to increase metaboblism.

I say usually you would go higher fat/lower carb or lower fat/higher carb because dietary fat is more likely to be stored as adipose tissue (fat storage) when ingested above maintenance levels. Studies have been done on this. Carbs have a lot less thermogenic effect than protein, and fat has the lowest thermogenic effect on the body. Basically, if you aren't buring off the carbs and excess dietary fat, dietary fat will most likely be stored as adipose tissue (fat stores) for later energy use, leading to an increase or maintenance of weight and body fat.

I recommended 1.25 grams of protein, so that you have some wiggle room. You don't need to be exactly at 1.25, but it gives you more of a chance that overall your protein intake will be above 1 gram per pound of body weight.

So basically, @wffolkes macro breakdown for his caloric intake may be the reason he isn't seeing much weight loss - if that is his goal.

With that being said, I noticed our friend @wffolkes is from England. I understand that protein prices are high there, and these ratios may not work for your budget. However, there are high protein foods that don't require you to eat egg whites all day.

"IIFYM" is a philosophy, not a rigidly defined system.

Why 1 gram per lb bodyweight? Why not 1.5? Why not 0.75? Why not 1 g per lb of lbm? What science backs up 1 gram per lb bodyweight?

Why not moderate fat/moderate carb instead of making one high?

Why did you finish your recommendations with 1.25 g protein per lb bodyweight when you started with 1 g?

Exactly! IIFYM is a philosophy. You can eat what you want as long as it fits your macros... The main part is fitting macros. That's the only rigid part off IIFYM. I don't even want to call it rigid, but the point is to stay within 5-15 grams of protein and carbs, and 5 grams within fats really (and don't forget fiber).

Look, everyone has their views. I'm not trying to impose mine on anyone, I was just making a recommendation. But if you had honestly read my reply, you would see the reason I said 1.25 was so that he could still be flexible and hopefully hit at least 1 gram per body pound. And why 1gram?? Read studies or ask the inventors of IIFYM. From my RESEARCH and RESULTS, that just seems to be the number for my goals.

Please link to the studies you reference that support 1 gram protein per lb of body weight.

Thanks.

dieselbyte

IMO, if you are following IIFYM, your protein is too low. You should be at a minimum of 1g per pound of body weight

Why?

Normally you would go higher fat and lower carb, or lower fat and higher carb.

Why?

If weight loss is what you seek, I suggest increasing protein to 1.25 body weight and decreasing carbs

Why?

IIFYM sets the base for protein at 1g per pound of body weight (not lean body weight). All those that say a calorie is a calorie are just a little off. One has to look at the thermogenic effect of burning food ingested. Protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body than any other macronutrient. Meaning, your body burns more calories digesting protein than it does carbs or fats. Higher protein diets tend to help the body burn more fat while maintaining muscle, therefore helping to increase metaboblism.

I say usually you would go higher fat/lower carb or lower fat/higher carb because dietary fat is more likely to be stored as adipose tissue (fat storage) when ingested above maintenance levels. Studies have been done on this. Carbs have a lot less thermogenic effect than protein, and fat has the lowest thermogenic effect on the body. Basically, if you aren't buring off the carbs and excess dietary fat, dietary fat will most likely be stored as adipose tissue (fat stores) for later energy use, leading to an increase or maintenance of weight and body fat.

I recommended 1.25 grams of protein, so that you have some wiggle room. You don't need to be exactly at 1.25, but it gives you more of a chance that overall your protein intake will be above 1 gram per pound of body weight.

So basically, @wffolkes macro breakdown for his caloric intake may be the reason he isn't seeing much weight loss - if that is his goal.

With that being said, I noticed our friend @wffolkes is from England. I understand that protein prices are high there, and these ratios may not work for your budget. However, there are high protein foods that don't require you to eat egg whites all day.

"IIFYM" is a philosophy, not a rigidly defined system.

Why 1 gram per lb bodyweight? Why not 1.5? Why not 0.75? Why not 1 g per lb of lbm? What science backs up 1 gram per lb bodyweight?

Why not moderate fat/moderate carb instead of making one high?

Why did you finish your recommendations with 1.25 g protein per lb bodyweight when you started with 1 g?

Exactly! IIFYM is a philosophy. You can eat what you want as long as it fits your macros... The main part is fitting macros. That's the only rigid part off IIFYM. I don't even want to call it rigid, but the point is to stay within 5-15 grams of protein and carbs, and 5 grams within fats really (and don't forget fiber).

Look, everyone has their views. I'm not trying to impose mine on anyone, I was just making a recommendation. But if you had honestly read my reply, you would see the reason I said 1.25 was so that he could still be flexible and hopefully hit at least 1 gram per body pound. And why 1gram?? Read studies or ask the inventors of IIFYM. From my RESEARCH and RESULTS, that just seems to be the number for my goals.

Please link to the studies you reference that support 1 gram protein per lb of body weight.

Thanks.

Lol... another "please show me the research" guy. I'm well aware of research that supports 1 gram per lb, as well as research that refutes it and states that there is no advantage to consuming as little as .37grams and as much as .82grams per lb (although, if you could, may you direct me to a study of lower than .82 grams that was conducted for longer than 2 weeks?) I'm merely making a recommendation to the OP. I'm using my experience, and for me, a lower calorie diet with an increase in my protein intake not only helped with fat loss, it kept me satiated (which should be a goal while in a caloric defict).

Unfortunately, you and I going back and forth really doesn't help the OP. So I'm curios... do you have any recommendations for him?

jonnythan

Lol... another "please show me the research" guy. I'm well aware of research that supports 1 gram per lb, as well as research that refutes it and states that there is no advantage to consuming as little as .37grams and as much as .82grams per lb (although, if you could, may you direct me to a study of lower than .82 grams that was conducted for longer than 2 weeks?) I'm merely making a recommendation to the OP. I'm using my experience, and for me, a lower calorie diet with an increase in my protein intake not only helped with fat loss, it kept me satiated (which should be a goal while in a caloric defict).

Unfortunately, you and I going back and forth really doesn't help the OP. So I'm curios... do you have any recommendations for him?

If you claim that your recommendation is based on scientific research, then link to the research.

ramonafrincu

HE WAS JUST GIVING ADVICE!!! Help the OP or back off! :explode:

dieselbyte

Lol... another "please show me the research" guy. I'm well aware of research that supports 1 gram per lb, as well as research that refutes it and states that there is no advantage to consuming as little as .37grams and as much as .82grams per lb (although, if you could, may you direct me to a study of lower than .82 grams that was conducted for longer than 2 weeks?) I'm merely making a recommendation to the OP. I'm using my experience, and for me, a lower calorie diet with an increase in my protein intake not only helped with fat loss, it kept me satiated (which should be a goal while in a caloric defict).

Unfortunately, you and I going back and forth really doesn't help the OP. So I'm curios... do you have any recommendations for him?

If you claim that your recommendation is based on scientific research, then link to the research.

Yes, because I keep links saved just for when something like this happens... I did my research, and I made a decision on how I wanted to proceed. I try to give back based on my experience. Nothing more. I'm not spouting "holier than thou" information. But at least I'm trying help. Yet, now I'm even more curious. What "advice" would you give?

jonnythan

Lol... another "please show me the research" guy. I'm well aware of research that supports 1 gram per lb, as well as research that refutes it and states that there is no advantage to consuming as little as .37grams and as much as .82grams per lb (although, if you could, may you direct me to a study of lower than .82 grams that was conducted for longer than 2 weeks?) I'm merely making a recommendation to the OP. I'm using my experience, and for me, a lower calorie diet with an increase in my protein intake not only helped with fat loss, it kept me satiated (which should be a goal while in a caloric defict).

Unfortunately, you and I going back and forth really doesn't help the OP. So I'm curios... do you have any recommendations for him?

If you claim that your recommendation is based on scientific research, then link to the research.

Yes, because I keep links saved just for when something like this happens... I did my research, and I made a decision on how I wanted to proceed. I try to give back based on my experience. Nothing more. I'm not spouting "holier than thou" information. But at least I'm trying help. Yet, now I'm even more curious. What "advice" would you give?

I'm asking a pretty simple question. I guess you just don't have any research to back up the claim.

The research I have read, and I've read a fair bit, indicates that about 1.5 grams per kg of LBM - 0.7 grams per lb of LBM - is generally sufficient for non-training people losing weight.

I've seen some research to indicate that people training, and athletes, who are losing weight need a bit more than that, on the order of 2 grams per kg of LBM. That's just under 1 gram per lb of LBM.

Note that these numbers are for *lean body mass* not total body mass. I know Lyle McDonald basically says "eating more than that can't hurt" but I haven't seen him point to any kind of research indicating more than that is helpful.

There is some research to indicate that extremely lean individuals who are training and losing weight could benefit from a bit more than 1 g per lb of LBM. However, the OP is not extremely lean.

So my recommendation for the OP, as it is for most people losing weight and lifting, is 1 gram of protein per lb of LBM. Yes, I have links to original peer-reviewed research and meta-analysis to support that recommendation.


And by the way, as much as you're harping on me for not giving the OP advice..... he didn't ask for advice.

dieselbyte

Lol... another "please show me the research" guy. I'm well aware of research that supports 1 gram per lb, as well as research that refutes it and states that there is no advantage to consuming as little as .37grams and as much as .82grams per lb (although, if you could, may you direct me to a study of lower than .82 grams that was conducted for longer than 2 weeks?) I'm merely making a recommendation to the OP. I'm using my experience, and for me, a lower calorie diet with an increase in my protein intake not only helped with fat loss, it kept me satiated (which should be a goal while in a caloric defict).

Unfortunately, you and I going back and forth really doesn't help the OP. So I'm curios... do you have any recommendations for him?

If you claim that your recommendation is based on scientific research, then link to the research.

Yes, because I keep links saved just for when something like this happens... I did my research, and I made a decision on how I wanted to proceed. I try to give back based on my experience. Nothing more. I'm not spouting "holier than thou" information. But at least I'm trying help. Yet, now I'm even more curious. What "advice" would you give?

I'm asking a pretty simple question. I guess you just don't have any research to back up the claim.

The research I have read, and I've read a fair bit, indicates that about 1.5 grams per kg of LBM - 0.7 grams per lb of LBM - is generally sufficient for non-training people losing weight.

I've seen some research to indicate that people training, and athletes, who are losing weight need a bit more than that, on the order of 2 grams per kg of LBM. That's just under 1 gram per lb of LBM.

Note that these numbers are for *lean body mass* not total body mass. I know Lyle McDonald basically says "eating more than that can't hurt" but I haven't seen him point to any kind of research indicating more than that is helpful.

There is some research to indicate that extremely lean individuals who are training and losing weight could benefit from a bit more than 1 g per lb of LBM. However, the OP is not extremely lean.

So my recommendation for the OP, as it is for most people losing weight and lifting, is 1 gram of protein per lb of LBM. Yes, I have links to original peer-reviewed research and meta-analysis to support that recommendation.


And by the way, as much as you're harping on me for not giving the OP advice..... he didn't ask for advice.

Nicely stated. And no, I won't ask for links to back up your recommendation. In the end, as you no doubt experienced, there has been a fair amount of research on this subject. Some recommendations call for under 1gram per lb of LBM, others recommend between 1 - 1.8 grams per kg of LBM (Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation. Phillips SM, Van Loon LJ. J Sports Sci. 2011;29 Suppl 1:S29-38.), others, Lyle McDonald included, recommend 1-1.5 grams per lb, not LBM. In the end I think we both can agree that you have to pick a number and go with it. If you see favorable results, great. If not, go back to the drawing board. And I wasn't harping on you for not giving advice to the OP. I was merely curious as to what YOUR advice would be. I'm always open to learning something new.

wffolkes

IMO, if you are following IIFYM, your protein is too low. You should be at a minimum of 1g per pound of body weight

Why?

Normally you would go higher fat and lower carb, or lower fat and higher carb.

Why?

If weight loss is what you seek, I suggest increasing protein to 1.25 body weight and decreasing carbs

Why?

IIFYM sets the base for protein at 1g per pound of body weight (not lean body weight). All those that say a calorie is a calorie are just a little off. One has to look at the thermogenic effect of burning food ingested. Protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body than any other macronutrient. Meaning, your body burns more calories digesting protein than it does carbs or fats. Higher protein diets tend to help the body burn more fat while maintaining muscle, therefore helping to increase metaboblism.

I say usually you would go higher fat/lower carb or lower fat/higher carb because dietary fat is more likely to be stored as adipose tissue (fat storage) when ingested above maintenance levels. Studies have been done on this. Carbs have a lot less thermogenic effect than protein, and fat has the lowest thermogenic effect on the body. Basically, if you aren't buring off the carbs and excess dietary fat, dietary fat will most likely be stored as adipose tissue (fat stores) for later energy use, leading to an increase or maintenance of weight and body fat.

I recommended 1.25 grams of protein, so that you have some wiggle room. You don't need to be exactly at 1.25, but it gives you more of a chance that overall your protein intake will be above 1 gram per pound of body weight.

So basically, @wffolkes macro breakdown for his caloric intake may be the reason he isn't seeing much weight loss - if that is his goal.

With that being said, I noticed our friend @wffolkes is from England. I understand that protein prices are high there, and these ratios may not work for your budget. However, there are high protein foods that don't require you to eat egg whites all day.

@dieselbyte - Thanks this gives me a better understanding of why higher protein would be better. I will keep this in mind if nothing is changing and increase protein to see what happens.

I always promote healthy debates and keeping an open mind.

I based my protein knowledge from this website which I have found the most usesful from the mine field of information
http://www.builtlean.com/2013/02/04/high-protein-diet/

wffolkes

Thought id update this thread as its been a while.

Its been a long journey that im still on.

Ok where do I start, I think I fixed my metabolism this was by consuming what I thought was my TDEE for around 4 weeks I gained around 2lbs. This was while I was also doing insanity, which left me very fit.

I dropped my calories to TDEE - 15% and finished insanity, during my rest week I dropped 2-3lbs back to my start weight before starting insanity.

Next up was SL5x5 prior to starting I had a body pod which gave me a surprising but accurate bf% which was 25%. Higher than expected but I was happy it was accurate. My fat distribution is weird as I have visible upper abs, my problem area is around triceps, lower back and lower belly fat.


I used iifym.com to plan my numbers which are now

2117kcals (TDEE -15%)
153g Protein (1g per lbs of lean body mass)
81g Fat
209g carbs

ive lost 1lb over the 4weeks ive been doing it but today measured my waist and lost 1.5 inches so far. Im going to add cardio x3 a week to help speed up fat loss.

Ive learned a hell of a lot getting to this point and hopefully the next 2 -3 months are successful.