The joys of office broscience - misguided food/nutrition advice
Options
Replies
-
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
that's not how this works.
That's not how ANY of this works.
facepalm0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Question... what do you even eat on a 0 carb diet? Totally serious. EVERYTHING YUMMY HAS CARBS!
I think there is also a different between "don't want to do it" and "don't NEED to do it". Low-carb is not necessary for everyone. For example, friends with refractory epilepsy, it has worked well for some and not others. Friends who are lazy and not willing to just try CICO, probably not the first option I would recommend haha.
Meat. Some will include hard cheese or eggs since they're <1g per serving. Basically, the flip side of a vegan diet. There are some people in the LC group who do it, and even insist it's easier than keto. Personally, I'm not interested. I have no interest in giving up my avocado.
Where people get fed up with the "don't need to" argument is that it's usually condescending. People may mean well, and even think they're helping, but they obviously haven't put much thought into it before saying it. If LC posters thought everyone needed to do it, they wouldn't ask if anyone else was doing it, they'd assume everyone else was doing it. Telling someone they don't need to is like patting them on the head and calling them an idiot. It's especially grating when it comes hand in hand with legit broscience to try and back up the anti-LC stance. These are some of the other assorted things I've been told, just on MFP:
You'll get brain damage if you do it more than a few weeks
Your kidneys will stop functioning
Your body can't digest protein without carbs, you need at least 100g a day to survive
You have to eat sugar
I took a nutrition class in college that says you'll die without carbs
If you do that, you'll get ketoacidosis
You'll gain it all back as soon as you eat a carb (this is my favorite, apparently transitioning from low carb to regular carb makes CICO no longer exist)
It's all water weight (tell that to the guy with the stickied thread in success stories who lost over 300 lbs)
You are just an N=1, and just because it works for you doesn't mean it works for anyone else
LC only works if you're sedentary (/r/ketogains would like to have a word)
Forgot my favorite: It's not sustainable long term. I keep asking how long is long term, since it's already been 15 years, and they never answer.
0 -
Kimberly_Harper wrote: »Yesterday one of my coworkers told me she has to eat every two hours because she is RAVENOUS after two hours.
Does she know the definition of ravenous?
0 -
Kimberly_Harper wrote: »Yesterday one of my coworkers told me she has to eat every two hours because she is RAVENOUS after two hours.
She's probably literally starving!
(Ducking and running.)0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Question... what do you even eat on a 0 carb diet? Totally serious. EVERYTHING YUMMY HAS CARBS!
I think there is also a different between "don't want to do it" and "don't NEED to do it". Low-carb is not necessary for everyone. For example, friends with refractory epilepsy, it has worked well for some and not others. Friends who are lazy and not willing to just try CICO, probably not the first option I would recommend haha.
Meat. Some will include hard cheese or eggs since they're <1g per serving. Basically, the flip side of a vegan diet. There are some people in the LC group who do it, and even insist it's easier than keto. Personally, I'm not interested. I have no interest in giving up my avocado.
I hope you don't mind me just addressing this part... I've seen some people freak out over snipped quotes.
I've never liked meat enough to ever be able to do this. I don't actually like any one particular thing enough to do this, I don't think. It kinda makes me queasy thinking about it.
But I know someone who does who has a lot of weight to lose. This way of eating would be sustainable to him, even if it isn't to me.
I think this gets lost in translation a lot while people are searching for the One True Way(TM), to borrow the phrase.
0 -
Our infamous High Level bridge.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Kimberly_Harper wrote: »Yesterday one of my coworkers told me she has to eat every two hours because she is RAVENOUS after two hours.
She's probably literally starving!
(Ducking and running.)
hahahahaha!!! I think she even said that exact thing, too
0 -
I don't deny that lots of silly things--even brosciency things--are said about low carb on this board at times.
I personally have said "you don't have to do that" occasionally, but that's because sometimes there are posters who seem to think that cutting WAY back on carbs is necessary and to be quite uninformed (often they seem not to understand what carbs are). At least in my circles people today seem likely to think of carbs like people used to think of fat, back when I was a teenager, so I see "you don't have to do that" as no different than me saying that to someone who seemed to be assuming that one had to go super low fat when dieting (which you still see here).
What I find odd about the discussion of NO carbs is that there are a few posters who seem to promote it who are also really into talking about how the SAD is unhealthy and eating carbs is unhealthy, yadda, yadda. (And a broader subset of low carb posters who really do seem to believe that everyone should be low carb.) IMO, macro ratios are pretty individual and different ones work better for different people, but it bugs me to be lectured about how unhealthy my potatoes are from someone who has chosen a diet that precludes vegetables and gets some huge percentage of calories from coconut oil or eats basically all red meat all the time. If you go out on a limb about how you are healthier than others, then you make your own choices fair game. I am generally skeptical that it's healthy to choose a diet that excludes veggies (NOT standard keto or low carb, I understand the net carb thing and all that) absent a specific medical condition and doctor monitoring.
Mostly, though, I figure people will figure out for themselves what works for them, and if someone thinks this is what will work for them to lose the weight and get back into it, I'm cool with that. Just don't then tell me I'm unhealthy because I had a processed Quest bar or some apple pie or the dreaded low fat dairy or some such.0 -
Why are you so threatened by other people being successful differently than you?
Because it is a risky dietary practice and I don't advocate risky. Even if it is popular. I'm not threatened by it any more than I am threatened by people who engage in other risky behaviours like bungee jumping, driving too fast, or recreational drug use. It's bro science.
Medically prescribed now = bro science, just because your individual doctor didn't prescribe it to you/
Well doctors don't actually prescribe a diet eliminating carbs. The ketogenic diet (if that is still what you are referring to) is a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. I think thats where I got confused, the words "eliminate" and "low" are two very different things when it comes to diet and nutrition. Also, ketogenic diets are most commonly used to treat refractory epilepsy (occasionally other medical issues as well). Low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss or as a lifestyle choice are considered different in the medical field.
**I promise I'm not pulling that out of my butt. I work in a hospital and the two diets are coded differently. One is a prescribed diet, the other is a recommendation for the patient.
No, I've been keto for 15 years, prescribed and set up by an RD. I understand completely how it works. I just question people who constantly chime in that it's somehow all scary and smoke and mirrors, when they clearly don't really understand how it works in the first place. As for low vs no, more and more people are trying 0 carb to identify issues. Not my thing, but also not my place to start clutching pearls and tell them they're wrong just because I personally don't want to do it, any more than it's my place to go to the XGames and tell them they're doing it wrong just because I personally can't ride a skateboard.
Question... what do you even eat on a 0 carb diet? Totally serious. EVERYTHING YUMMY HAS CARBS!
I think there is also a different between "don't want to do it" and "don't NEED to do it". Low-carb is not necessary for everyone. For example, friends with refractory epilepsy, it has worked well for some and not others. Friends who are lazy and not willing to just try CICO, probably not the first option I would recommend haha.
Meat. Some will include hard cheese or eggs since they're <1g per serving. Basically, the flip side of a vegan diet. There are some people in the LC group who do it, and even insist it's easier than keto. Personally, I'm not interested. I have no interest in giving up my avocado.
I hope you don't mind me just addressing this part... I've seen some people freak out over snipped quotes.
I've never meat enough to ever be able to do this. I don't actually like any one particular thing enough to do this, I don't think. It kinda makes me queasy thinking about it.
But I know someone who does who has a lot of weight to lose. This way of eating would be sustainable to him, even if it isn't to me.
I think this gets lost in translation a lot while people are searching for the One True Way(TM), to borrow the phrase.
Me, too. I'm not one of those nomnomnom bacon people. If it wasn't for eggs and yogurt I'd probably never get close to my protein most days. I finally ordered some Quest bars for the days I'm not hungry at all.0 -
Aquarius must only drink water and make own food then think it over before eating it0
-
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)0 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »Has anyone heard of this before? Nightshade vegetables worsening ailments and pain?! A friend sent me this today...
http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/nightshade-vegetables-can-worsen-pain/
I've asked a few rheumatologists; all of them have said not to worry about it because there's no evidence it makes any difference. Which is good, because tomatoes, garlic, and onions make up the fourth food group in the Acrylics house-- pasta sauce.
That's good to know you asked. I never bothered. The joys of a summer tomato are something I would never give up, no matter what. Also? Potatoes. A life without potatoes is a life that I don't want. Besides, exercise does nicely to relieve my pain.
0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes and very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
Please stop now.0 -
Kimberly_Harper wrote: »andympanda wrote: »I once heard never stick with one diet more that a month so one's body doesn't have time to adapt to the diet.
I thought the blood type diet was a Transylvania thing, or is that just eating certain blood types.
That must be the Borg diet. Change tactics before you are assimilated.
Love this!! Shame so few of my colleagues watch Star Trek, otherwise this could really catch on!0 -
Not at the office, but at the kid's athletic fields - parents (who otherwise seem diligent, loving, and intelligent) insisting that their 4yr to 7yr old child NEEDS a large (32oz) Gatorade during practice instead of plain water or they'll lose all their sodium and potassium. Note - this is a half hour practice in 60 to 70 degree weather - no one, not even I as an obese soccer coach was breaking any kind of sweat at all. (And of course, Gatorade has NO calories, and is fully beneficial - no way it could contribute to childhood obesity *sigh*)
FTR - my real objection to Gatorade on the field was it was so sticky when it spilled in my soccer bag
I suspect they're also the people who need energy drinks after 30mins on the tredmill?
I can cycle 15miles with water after a decent meal.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
It's really not that hard mate. That's The big mac, a meal with marinated chicken breast, potato and veggies, 50 grams of chocolate and a good amount of Quark (that's like high protein cottage cheese), flavored with jam and milk to be like yoghurt as snacks. Feel free to substitute the ebil chocolate or jam for something else, like fruit and more veggies.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
I really have no idea what you think IIFYM is if you can't fit a Big Mac in your macros. I'm seriously puzzled. But no, I'm not going to waste 20 minutes making up some diet just to prove my point.
Hint though - fat and protein are considered a MINIMUM with IIFYM.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
I really have no idea what you think IIFYM is if you can't fit a Big Mac in your macros. I'm seriously puzzled. But no, I'm not going to waste 20 minutes making up some diet just to prove my point.
Hint though - fat and protein are considered a MINIMUM with IIFYM.
Didn't even took me 5 to make up a day where it fits.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
I really have no idea what you think IIFYM is if you can't fit a Big Mac in your macros. I'm seriously puzzled. But no, I'm not going to waste 20 minutes making up some diet just to prove my point.
Hint though - fat and protein are considered a MINIMUM with IIFYM.
Didn't even took me 5 to make up a day where it fits.
Lol yes, probably not, but I'm tired. And lazy.0 -
upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »upgradeddiddy wrote: »
Don't blame IIFYM on stupid people. 34g of fat, 47g of carbs and 24 g or protein doesn't fit nobody's macros haha
I suggest you go ask some of the IIFYM proponents around here who brag about how they always make room for McDonald's, ice cream, cheesecake, and anything else they want.
I will say this, yes you can portion control ice cream and etc to meet your daily requirement and yes it allows you to not completely give up the foods you love but come on! 34 g of fat! Even if you followed 40-40-30 carbs/protein/fat, most have already blown through a third if not half of their daily fat intake on the Big Mac alone while only getting maybe a tenth of protein and maybe, MAYBE a quarter of carbs. You would have to eat nothing but pure rice and the leanest of meat for the rest of the day to meet your macros after a Big Mac.
Don't get me wrong, my weekends are full of cheat meals and I do my best to follow IIFYM, but I also know that if I plan to down a pizza and some wine, I better be only drinking protein shakes, lean beef and spinach or else that's day is a fail for IIFYM. Same goes for this Big Mac and diet cola discussion.
Get butt hurt all you want but Big Macs are typically too big for IIFYM, just call it what it is, a cheat day
Sorry to latch on your response JPW, not directed at you. More so at everyone else who loves disgusting Big Macs. And FYI, I usually eat 20% fat on at 2500 calrorie diet which is 500 calories of fat a day, which equates to 56 g of fat a day. Even if I did the basic 30% for maintenance I would only be allotted 83 g.
Instead of a Big Mac 34 g in one sitting if rather have some 10 oz herbed seasoned chicken, triple the protein and less than half the fat or even better...get off my lazy *kitten* and cook a REAL burger for similar stats of the chicken.
#realiifym
I think you may have misinterpreted the Y in IIFYM.
If I wanted to fit a Big Mac into my daily intake -- and I certainly could -- I would be doing it such that it fits my macros, not yours. It would still be "real" IIFYM, whatever that is; it wouldn't be a "cheat meal" or a "cheat day" or whatever you would like to call it.
(And I don't even like Big Macs. I'm a Jalapeno Double kind of guy, on the rare occasion I go to McD's.)
More power to ya, I just provided my stats to prove my point, the math behind and show that it Big Macs don't typically fit (I'm a bigger dude too, 6'2" 232 lbs. Also Jalapeño doubles are awesome and are a better substitute for a Big Mac, similar protein, 11 less g of fat and 12 less g of carbs). My main point is, a Big Mac barely fits or if it does you have more sacrifices for the rest of your meals to make up for it. There are far better cheat options than a Big Mac that give you more bang for macros.
OK, to be honest, I cannot figure this out. I could have a Big Mac and still hit my macros with no problem. No cheat involved. And I'm a 40 yr old 5' 2" woman. I guess you must have a really significant deficit going on or something.
I do agree that if I want a higher cal/fat meal, a Big Mac is about the last thing I'd choose. Much tastier options out there. There's a fried chicken sandwich that a local place makes, for example. Probably half again as many calories as a Big Mac. I mean the things are ginormous with at least 10 oz of chicken breast fried perfectly crispy plus the mayo, the buttered and toasted rolls (and lettuce and tomato). But oh, so, worth it.
Until someone gives shows me numbers where a Big Mac can fit in your macros (where fat is between 20-30%) and still hit both carbs and protein then arguing with me is really pointless. I have already given everyone my diet numbers (2500 calories on average 40-40-20) and although I could make it fit (need two protein shakes, very lean beef and spinach to do it, like I said in my 2nd post which led to my secondary point of why do all that sacrifice for a Big Mac?) I just don't see it fitting. Till then my point is closed
(Why everyone is defending a Big Mac is beyond me. And added was still off 5 g based on my original argument but still, just don't see it)
Alright, because I'm stuck here for another two hours and bored out of my mind-
You could have:
1 Big Mac
3 100 calorie tubs Fage fat free w/ 2 C strawberries
Salad w/ 3 C mixed baby greens, 8 oz raw weight boneless skinless chicken breast, 3 T light northern italian dressing, 1/2 C sliced onions, 1 C chopped tomatoes, 1 C peeled chopped cucumber and 1 whole wheat pita pocket
4 yellow corn tortillas w/ 6 oz raw weight boneless skinless chicken, 3/4 C black beans, 1 oz cheddar cheese, 1 C fat free cottage cheese and 6 T salsa verde
plus 2 C 1% milk to use throughout the day as you see fit
This would leave you with a few calories to do whatever with and you could even get your fat under 20% if you went with fat free milk. Not a single protein shake in there, but I do believe it hits all the day's requirements for protein, plus 12 servings of fruits and veggies, legumes, and plenty of whole grains with 31 g of fiber total for the day.
Now, if you wanted a Big Mac on a 1200 calorie a day diet with a "standard" 30% daily fat and macros 40/30/30, you could have:
1 Big Mac
6 oz fat free Greek yogurt w/ 1/2 C strawberries
Salad w/ 2 C mixed baby greens, 1 C chopped tomatoes, 1 C peeled chopped cucumbers, 1/4 C onions, 3 oz raw weight chicken breast and 2 T light northern italian dressing
2 corn tortillas w/ 3 oz raw weight chicken breast, 1/3 C black beans, 2 T shredded cheddar and 3 T salsa verde
So, it can be done with your parameters, it can be done at 1200 calories per day and many other people have said it can be done with their macros, too.
Thanks for helping me waste the last half hour!
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 996 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions