IIFYM? Does it make a difference?

feathers1981
feathers1981 Posts: 69 Member
edited November 22 in Health and Weight Loss
I’ve come back to MFP after another failed attempt at Weight Watchers (I don’t do well with the unlimited fruit!). I only have 7 pounds to lose so I know I need to be more strict to get those off.

I’ve been reading about IIFYM, which sound interesting. Has anybody tried this?

It seems like it might be quite time consuming to get your calories distributed to the right amounts between protein, fat and carbs. If I just eat 1500 calories will this have the same effect or do you think the make-up of the calories really makes a difference?

Also, I’ve just started marathon raining again. On long run days or days when I do really hard speed work with my athletics club I’ll need to eat more carbs so want to make sure that whatever I do works taking into consideration the running I do. I only run 4 times a week – I do a bit of strength/conditioning training twice a week but only to compliment my running say 30 mins max.
K

Replies

  • kommodevaran
    kommodevaran Posts: 17,890 Member
    edited October 2017
    Setting and tracking macros should make weightloss easier, not harder. IIFYM means that you find a good personal macro split. This will help you with satiety, and thus adherence to calorie goal. Calories in/out regulates weight. There isn't one "right" split for everybody, and possibly many "right" splits for any given individual.

    A more organized carb cycling plan can be something for you.
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    edited October 2017
    I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.
    filbo132 wrote: »
    IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.

    If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
  • Unknown
    edited October 2017
    This content has been removed.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    filbo132 wrote: »
    I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.
    filbo132 wrote: »
    IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.

    If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).

    I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.

    I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.
  • goldthistime
    goldthistime Posts: 3,213 Member
    filbo132 wrote: »
    I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.
    filbo132 wrote: »
    IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.

    If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).

    I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.

    Sorry, I was unclear. I quoted you because I agreed with your statement, and thought that point was particularly worthy of discussion.

  • Unknown
    edited October 2017
    This content has been removed.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    filbo132 wrote: »
    filbo132 wrote: »
    I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.
    filbo132 wrote: »
    IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.

    If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).

    I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.

    I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.

    There are people believe it or not who do IIFYM by eating garbage food. The website itself had to put a note about it. Unfortunately there are people who do one extreme to another. If you ever watched Maxx Chewning (a youtuber), he tends to eat a lot of processed food in one day and he doesn't even care and says so. They do exist.

    I don't even know how they can... unless they get all their protein from shakes...? I can hardly fit a chocolate bar in a normal day!
  • GrumpyHeadmistress
    GrumpyHeadmistress Posts: 666 Member
    I love IIFYM. For me protein has to be high (more than 1g per lb) to keep me full. I watch dietary fibre, try to get at least half my fat goal and let the rest fall where they may. Which sometimes means chicken breast, a protein shake, Greek yoghurt and a Mars bar for dinner! Nom.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    filbo132 wrote: »
    filbo132 wrote: »
    I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.
    filbo132 wrote: »
    IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.

    If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).

    I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.

    I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.

    There are people believe it or not who do IIFYM by eating garbage food. The website itself had to put a note about it. Unfortunately there are people who do one extreme to another. If you ever watched Maxx Chewning (a youtuber), he tends to eat a lot of processed food in one day and he doesn't even care and says so. They do exist.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "garbage food," but you can find eating people all kinds of ways. Just because you can find someone eating a certain way doesn't mean that there are people actively advocating for that type of diet -- that's what I mean, I don't see people promoting IIFYM and, at the same time, telling people that it doesn't matter what they eat and that nutritional needs are some sort of myth. I tend not to get my nutrition and fitness advice from YouTube, so if there are people there who are saying that you don't need to meet your nutritional needs . . . I'll have to take your word for it.

    That said, the places I've seen IIFYM advocated, I've never seen anybody argue that it isn't necessary to meet your nutritional needs.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    edited October 2017
    I’ve come back to MFP after another failed attempt at Weight Watchers (I don’t do well with the unlimited fruit!). I only have 7 pounds to lose so I know I need to be more strict to get those off.

    I’ve been reading about IIFYM, which sound interesting. Has anybody tried this?

    It seems like it might be quite time consuming to get your calories distributed to the right amounts between protein, fat and carbs. If I just eat 1500 calories will this have the same effect or do you think the make-up of the calories really makes a difference?

    Also, I’ve just started marathon raining again. On long run days or days when I do really hard speed work with my athletics club I’ll need to eat more carbs so want to make sure that whatever I do works taking into consideration the running I do. I only run 4 times a week – I do a bit of strength/conditioning training twice a week but only to compliment my running say 30 mins max.
    K

    Your macro composition isn't really going to so much impact weight loss as it will satiety, possibly body composition, and performance. There is no one size fits all macro composition...an endurance athlete is going to have a different macro profile than a body builder for example.

    IIFYM isn't really a "diet"...it is an eating philosophy. It also isn't that website...that website is just capitalizing on the philosophy but has default macros for everyone as if it's universal...it's not.

    Calories are what is important for weight management...focus on those first and get that down...then you can start getting into the whole macro thing if you wish.
  • This content has been removed.
  • mlsh1969
    mlsh1969 Posts: 138 Member
    filbo132 wrote: »
    filbo132 wrote: »
    filbo132 wrote: »
    I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.
    filbo132 wrote: »
    IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.

    If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).

    I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.

    I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.

    There are people believe it or not who do IIFYM by eating garbage food. The website itself had to put a note about it. Unfortunately there are people who do one extreme to another. If you ever watched Maxx Chewning (a youtuber), he tends to eat a lot of processed food in one day and he doesn't even care and says so. They do exist.

    I'm not sure what you mean by "garbage food," but you can find eating people all kinds of ways. Just because you can find someone eating a certain way doesn't mean that there are people actively advocating for that type of diet -- that's what I mean, I don't see people promoting IIFYM and, at the same time, telling people that it doesn't matter what they eat and that nutritional needs are some sort of myth. I tend not to get my nutrition and fitness advice from YouTube, so if there are people there who are saying that you don't need to meet your nutritional needs . . . I'll have to take your word for it.

    That said, the places I've seen IIFYM advocated, I've never seen anybody argue that it isn't necessary to meet your nutritional needs.

    I agree with you, if you go on the IIFYM website, they encourage you to eat healthy, but a lot of people don't go on that website and read that part, that's what I am saying. I am not putting blame on IIFYM, I am just saying that there are people who don't read what IIFYM is really all about, they conclude that it's just an excuse to eat whatever they want.

    This 100%
  • LynnJ9
    LynnJ9 Posts: 414 Member
    This thread is really confusing when you have no idea, like me, what iifym is. Lol. What is iifym?
  • Aarjono
    Aarjono Posts: 228 Member
    filbo132 wrote: »
    I do IIFYM, but remember that IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight. It just means that you still have to eat healthy, but if you can incorporate a food of your liking whether it's junk food or not, then go ahead and eat it. I list my priorities in this order when I plan my meals for the day:
    1) Make sure I don't go over my calories
    2) Hit my minimum protein
    3) Get as much micro-nutrients as I can
    4) High Fiber foods
    5) Any food I like regardless if they are poor nutritionally.


    This is sort of what I do. The things I watch the most are fiber, sodium, and calories.
  • feathers1981
    feathers1981 Posts: 69 Member
    Thanks so much for all the feedback! The reason I failed at WW was because of the no limits, so I would just sit eating fruit all day (which actually never fills me up and just makes me more hungry!). I know that I work better with a clear limit on what I can eat which is why I've ended up coming back to MFP.

    ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).

  • GrumpyHeadmistress
    GrumpyHeadmistress Posts: 666 Member
    LynnJ9 wrote: »
    This thread is really confusing when you have no idea, like me, what iifym is. Lol. What is iifym?

    If It Fits Your Macros
This discussion has been closed.