IIFYM opinions

rankinsect

Well, I would say I'm sort of an IIFYM person, but by this I mean:

1. I have a calorie goal I consider very important to come at or under
2. I have a protein goal I consider moderately good to come in at or above
3. I don't care about the rest.

Sure, if you went neurotically overboard with IIFYM you'd end up in a bad place, but I think it's better than trying to worry if a potato is "good" or "bad".

senecarr

smnarine624 wrote: »

senecarr wrote: »

ndj1979 wrote: »

smnarine624 wrote: »

Does it lead to results? Or eating disorders? What're your guys opinions?

what eating disorder could IIFYM possibly lead to????

Some individuals get just as rigid about their macros as other people do about foods being clean or unclean. Think of every thread we've seen someone that is afraid of eating at a restaurant because they won't be able to weigh their food. That's disordered thinking about food shoved into an IIFYM world.

That said, I think IIFYM is probably less likely to lead to disordered eating for most people. At the very least, it removes moralizing terms like clean from the discussion of food.

Thank you for clearing that up for everybody!

No problem. If a person has issues with foods, IIFYM's is a dieting plan for body composition, not a therapist or other mental health professional. People can and do use all kinds of things to justify and hide bad relationships with food: some anorexics become vegan to hide their not eating, some people call some foods addictive and try to follow a lifetime elimination similar to drug and alcohol rehab, some people think foods are unclean because of some kind of processing but that it would be ok if they did the same cooking to it themselves at home, and some people follow IIFYM and worry about how to cut a peanut in half to meat a fat macro.

lynn_glenmont

kwtilbury wrote: »

If you actively use MFP's food diary, then you're following IIFYM to some extent. It's worked pretty well for me.

Not necessarily. You can use MFP's diary to track what you eat, without worrying about meeting macro goals.

I use MFP's food diary to track what I eat, but I think the idea of eating a set percentage of your calories from each macro is pretty silly. I need a certain number of grams of protein per day, and the number of grams doesn't change depending on whether I'm trying to stick to 1500 or 1600 calories gross to create a bigger cushion for a major holiday feast in a few days (if anything, research suggests my protein grams should go up during those lower-calorie periods to conserve muscle mass, while IIFYM theory would suggest I eat less protein on those days, because 20% of 1500 is less than 20% of 1900) And when I'm eating however many calories on the day of the holiday feast (something north of 2800, almost certainly), I don't suddenly need 20% of my 2800 calories to be protein. I like turkey and ham and roast beef, but that's not what's getting me to (and past) 2800 calories on Christmas.

Same for fat--I need a certain number of grams, regardless of how much I'm eating. I don't particularly worry about that, since the days when I don't go over what I consider my minimum fat goal by dinner time are pretty rare.

And I absolutely don't care how many carb grams I get. It tends to be between 150 and 300, but I don't waste any time worrying about it.

I focus on calories, and hitting gram targets for protein and fiber. At the end of the day, I usually check my micronutrients, and I might take a multivitamin if things don't look good.

I guess you do have to not be bothered by an app scolding you with red numbers. Doesn't worry me. MFP isn't my doctor, my priest, my boss, or my mother.

LolBroScience

lynn_glenmont wrote: »

kwtilbury wrote: »

If you actively use MFP's food diary, then you're following IIFYM to some extent. It's worked pretty well for me.

Not necessarily. You can use MFP's diary to track what you eat, without worrying about meeting macro goals.

I use MFP's food diary to track what I eat, but I think the idea of eating a set percentage of your calories from each macro is pretty silly. I need a certain number of grams of protein per day, and the number of grams doesn't change depending on whether I'm trying to stick to 1500 or 1600 calories gross to create a bigger cushion for a major holiday feast in a few days (if anything, research suggests my protein grams should go up during those lower-calorie periods to conserve muscle mass, while IIFYM theory would suggest I eat less protein on those days, because 20% of 1500 is less than 20% of 1900) And when I'm eating however many calories on the day of the holiday feast (something north of 2800, almost certainly), I don't suddenly need 20% of my 2800 calories to be protein. I like turkey and ham and roast beef, but that's not what's getting me to (and past) 2800 calories on Christmas.

Same for fat--I need a certain number of grams, regardless of how much I'm eating. I don't particularly worry about that, since the days when I don't go over what I consider my minimum fat goal by dinner time are pretty rare.

And I absolutely don't care how many carb grams I get. It tends to be between 150 and 300, but I don't waste any time worrying about it.

I focus on calories, and hitting gram targets for protein and fiber. At the end of the day, I usually check my micronutrients, and I might take a multivitamin if things don't look good.

I guess you do have to not be bothered by an app scolding you with red numbers. Doesn't worry me. MFP isn't my doctor, my priest, my boss, or my mother.

Or you can just use grams instead of a percentage of calories to determine fat and protein goals for the day.

Sabine_Stroehm

senecarr wrote: »

Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »

kwtilbury wrote: »

If you actively use MFP's food diary, then you're following IIFYM to some extent. It's worked pretty well for me.

Even if low carbbing.

Low carbing, when tracking foods, is a form of macro tracking. It wouldn't be following the normal guidelines most IIFYM's guides recommend, and a person might not follow most IIFYM's recommendations of starting with a whole / minimally processed foods base.

Any macro tracking approach could or could not follow most IIFYM recommendations, tbh.

senecarr

Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »

senecarr wrote: »

Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »

kwtilbury wrote: »

If you actively use MFP's food diary, then you're following IIFYM to some extent. It's worked pretty well for me.

Even if low carbbing.

Low carbing, when tracking foods, is a form of macro tracking. It wouldn't be following the normal guidelines most IIFYM's guides recommend, and a person might not follow most IIFYM's recommendations of starting with a whole / minimally processed foods base.

Any macro tracking approach could or could not follow most IIFYM recommendations, tbh.

Yeah, it could or it could not, that's a basic binary statement C3P0, but does it hold true in Bacchi?

mattyc772014

lol @senecarr That really made me laugh.