Thoughts on IIFYM (If It Fits Your Macros)
coltonweisbrod
Posts: 32 Member
Personally, it's worked for me. I've tried both and seen pretty equivalent results with eating what I want with a mixture of "bro foods". Now of course if you choose to do IIFYM then of course you are gonna eat "bro foods" cause those "favorite" foods of yours are gonna take up a ton of calories. Therefore you gotta make up for it with eating those healthy clean foods that are low in calories. There's pros and cons to both sides. Just curious as to who else out there enjoys their Oreo's and Pizza's on a weekly basis by fitting them into the diet 
0
Replies
-
My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.0
-
For me, it works.0
-
galgenstrick wrote: »My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.
People who do that aren't really doing IIFYM. It's pretty hard to hit your macros without also hitting your micros, and most people here stress that micros are part of it. IIFYM doesn't translate to 'just eat pizza/twinkies/ice cream so long as you stick to your calories'.
#TeamModeration0 -
^^ works for me.
#TeamEatWell
#Variety
#LotsofVeggiesFruitsandStuff
I prefer my IIFYMM (Macros and Micros) to be low convenience, high local and regional produce with the added dose of daily whatevers ...
(Edit: I don't eat Oreos and pizza is rare - well, I was in Italy last week... but my "bro" foods are chocolate, ice cream, wine and sugar cookies)0 -
galgenstrick wrote: »My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.
I can see that. The weight loss period only makes it worse, because there is less food from which to get the micros.0 -
Great for me down 26lbs in 12 weeks I have a maintance day once a week and a 1500 surplus cheat day once every 3 month I hit my macros n micros but I do enjoy reeeses and so on lol0
-
My preferred foods are savory, or only inherently sweet (like pumpkin), so it works for me. I don't have a lot of calories to play with, so my treats are small, but satisfying, and I usually use them to fill my fat macro. Talenti is great for this.0
-
What's "bro" food?0
-
-
-
-
galgenstrick wrote: »My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.
Well those people aren't serious about being healthy if they truly use it as an excuse to over eat on the foods high in calories. Know what I mean?
0 -
I've just started following IIFYM loosely a few days ago, because I'm working towards new fitness/body composition goals for the summer months and I'm curious to see if certain macros ratios will help. I'm pretty neutral on the whole thing so far, though it's a lot more work than I thought it would be. Before I just tracked calories and could plan out my day in a couple minutes. Now I'm spending half my morning trying to get those darn macros numbers to fit together
Everyone says it gets easier, we shall see! 0 -
0
-
To me it seems like another label that is as pointless as many others and a way to avoid looking at the big picture and health as a whole. I've seen people obsess over getting the last gram of protein to hit there macros under the delusion that they have to hit these goals. In reality I probably eat this way as I keep an eye on my Macros but I don't obsess over them and try and look at my lifestyle goals as a whole. If your happy to have that label on your eating that's fine but health is far more than a catchy trendy anacronym.
I just go for a varied diet based in wholefoods and keep an overall view on my Macros but there is far more than just hitting your macros to overall health.
Too many people like to overcomplicate things0 -
I am going through a phase where I eat a ton of junk and sugar, but I am doing this, while keeping within my calories (take a deep breath before viewing my open diary puritans - we are talking condensed milk for dinner).
The way I look at it - before, I used to go through junk phases and NOT keep within my calories, which is why I gained weight. If my food offends you now, imagine how dreadful it would be if you double or triple the quantities!
I am happy to win the main war (the weight war) while losing the occasional battle (eating perfectly all the time).
I will cycle back into wanting soup and veggies all day in a couple of days or weeks, so I do not see it as a big issue. I am not beating myself up over this stuff as this is what makes this sustainable for me.
I lose weight every week (0.4 to 0.6kg) and eat to 1200.0 -
I think the variety helps me feel like I can do this forever. We had bacon cheeseburgers last night. Instead of fries we had celery, thin buns...huge slice of tomato.0
-
not a fan of oreo cookies but cadbury milk chocolate yes.
Do I watch my micros..some of them yes...like iron because I have to...other stuff not so much as based on my intake I know I am getting those in....just based on what I am eating...the only thing I struggle with is fiber....
I enjoy my "bro foods" everyday....chocolate mainly unless I am too tired...*don't ask*
My diary is set @1500 right now but I average 1800 gross calories a day so it's pretty easy to hit my macros/micros and still have room for that stuff.0 -
What's "bro" food?
In my favorite grocery store there's an aisle I call the men's department.*** On one side is a huge cooler with all kinds of beer and a freezer full of pizza. Facing that are all the chips and dips and nuts and popcorn.
***This was immediately what I thought of when "bro food" was mentioned. I suppose it's a foul stereotype of men to say that that's what they would prefer to eat if they cared nothing about their health. Based on my lurking in the forums, the men of MFP are highly attentive to good nutrition.
0 -
I think its good, although my definition of "macros" includes (roughly in order of importance): calories, freshness/nutritiousness, protein, water content, fiber... Carbs/fat/protein is not the be all and end all, but its a good place to start if you're a noob.0
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »galgenstrick wrote: »My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.
People who do that aren't really doing IIFYM. It's pretty hard to hit your macros without also hitting your micros, and most people here stress that micros are part of it. IIFYM doesn't translate to 'just eat pizza/twinkies/ice cream so long as you stick to your calories'.
#TeamModeration
And/or folks are emphasizing the low quality foods in their posts, and not emphasizing the nutrient dense ones. If it's this, it's problematic from an educational standpoint but nothing more, if it's the former, then it's more problematic.
I think it's the latter, though one of the biggest IIFYM supporters here eats virtually no plant foods (except the occasional potato), as evidenced by his diary.
But yes, micros are essential to health, and we need to be sure we aren't suggesting otherwise (or that protein is the only thing that matters) to new users.0 -
galgenstrick wrote: »My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.
I can't understand how someone can think they are eating healthy WITHOUT attempting to hit macro goals. Isn't that what a "balanced" diet is? True, the actual macro portions required will vary from person to person, but someone losing weight and only counting calories has a better chance of being deficient in something than those who aim for specific amounts of protein, fat, and carbs.
I know this is the easiest time I have ever had losing weight and it is because I actually feel better and stronger and less hungry than other times. I also have not had issues with things like shedding hair and dry, crepey skin and I really believe it is because I aim each day for a balance of nutrients.
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »I've just started following IIFYM loosely a few days ago, because I'm working towards new fitness/body composition goals for the summer months and I'm curious to see if certain macros ratios will help. I'm pretty neutral on the whole thing so far, though it's a lot more work than I thought it would be. Before I just tracked calories and could plan out my day in a couple minutes. Now I'm spending half my morning trying to get those darn macros numbers to fit together Everyone says it gets easier, we shall see!
I'm having trouble with this, too. I'm going through a phase where I'm questioning everything I'm doing nutrition and exercise-wise, so I decided to try and pay more attention to my macros. I find I'm not getting enough protein, but because I have a small calorie budget, I end up sacrificing other nutritious foods I like more (such as oatmeal or fruit) to increase protein. It's both time consuming to work out my food plan for the day as well as it's making me less happy with my food choices.
As with other things I've been questioning lately, I'm coming around to not worrying about it too much. I have to eat pretty nutritiously to get enough volume of food within my calorie goal, and I don't have athletic or body comp ambitions, so it probably doesn't matter a whole lot for me.
0 -
lthames0810 wrote: »Sarasmaintaining wrote: »I've just started following IIFYM loosely a few days ago, because I'm working towards new fitness/body composition goals for the summer months and I'm curious to see if certain macros ratios will help. I'm pretty neutral on the whole thing so far, though it's a lot more work than I thought it would be. Before I just tracked calories and could plan out my day in a couple minutes. Now I'm spending half my morning trying to get those darn macros numbers to fit together Everyone says it gets easier, we shall see!
I'm having trouble with this, too. I'm going through a phase where I'm questioning everything I'm doing nutrition and exercise-wise, so I decided to try and pay more attention to my macros. I find I'm not getting enough protein, but because I have a small calorie budget, I end up sacrificing other nutritious foods I like more (such as oatmeal or fruit) to increase protein. It's both time consuming to work out my food plan for the day as well as it's making me less happy with my food choices.
As with other things I've been questioning lately, I'm coming around to not worrying about it too much. I have to eat pretty nutritiously to get enough volume of food within my calorie goal, and I don't have athletic or body comp ambitions, so it probably doesn't matter a whole lot for me.
Yeah this morning I wanted to throw the whole thing out the window grrrr Finally did get it sorted out so I hit my protein and fat goals (the two that I'm focusing on right now), but it seriously took almost 45 minutes to get it to work sigh.....
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »galgenstrick wrote: »My gripe with IIFYM is a lot of people completely disregard their micros and therefor their health. If you do it in such a way where you eat the majority of your foods from nutrient dense sources, and fit in the things you like in small amounts, then that's probably a great and sustainable plan for most people.
People who do that aren't really doing IIFYM. It's pretty hard to hit your macros without also hitting your micros, and most people here stress that micros are part of it. IIFYM doesn't translate to 'just eat pizza/twinkies/ice cream so long as you stick to your calories'.
#TeamModeration
And/or folks are emphasizing the low quality foods in their posts, and not emphasizing the nutrient dense ones. If it's this, it's problematic from an educational standpoint but nothing more, if it's the former, then it's more problematic.
I think it's the latter, though one of the biggest IIFYM supporters here eats virtually no plant foods (except the occasional potato), as evidenced by his diary.
But yes, micros are essential to health, and we need to be sure we aren't suggesting otherwise (or that protein is the only thing that matters) to new users.
diary shaming?
0 -
Yea exactly mate to much bs out there diets don't work life style changes docoltonweisbrod wrote: »
0 -
Yeah. I like whole Snickers.isulo_kura wrote: »I just go for a varied diet based in wholefoods and keep an overall view on my Macros but there is far more than just hitting your macros to overall health.
Too many people like to overcomplicate things
0 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »^^ works for me.
#TeamEatWell
#Variety
#LotsofVeggiesFruitsandStuff
I prefer my IIFYMM (Macros and Micros) to be low convenience, high local and regional produce with the added dose of daily whatevers ...
(Edit: I don't eat Oreos and pizza is rare - well, I was in Italy last week... but my "bro" foods are chocolate, ice cream, wine and sugar cookies)
I like that! That is how I do it too, aim to hit my macros and micros, then fill in some treats.
Ps. You were in Italy last week.. so so so jealous
0 -
FWIW, if people are using a site that doesn't track all but 4 micros to begin with, they probably aren't all that concerned about them, whether they use IIFYM or not.0
-
I'm a big fan. I feel like it provides a framework for a balanced diet. I also like the emphasis on strength training and body composition that seems to go hand in hand with the IIFYM lifestyle.
I don't really feel like IIFYM drives anyone to eat any worse than calorie counting does. Its actually easier to eat less nutritionally dense food if you're not tracking macros. With IIFYM, you have to eat an awful lot of chicken breast and protein shakes to fit that donut in.
For anyone who's having a hard time with it, it helps to aim to hit your proteins first. Then, your other macro numbers are much more manageable. I only meal planned for the first month or two. Now I pretty much know what's in the food I eat regularly and I can hit my numbers without too much effort.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions