IIFYM Not a diet?
Options
Replies
-
I may have missed it, but is IIFYM a diet?
Just kidding.
It's not a diet. It's a lifestyle.............. focused solely on .... diet.
Aren't all foodways a lifestyle?
No, only if you count macros. It can't be a lifestyle without macros. Without macros, it's a diet.0 -
I may have missed it, but is IIFYM a diet?
Just kidding.
It's not a diet. It's a lifestyle.............. focused solely on .... diet.
Aren't all foodways a lifestyle?
No, only if you count macros. It can't be a lifestyle without macros. Without macros, it's a diet.
0 -
IIFYM is not a diet. It's a way to structure a diet. Just like Intermittent Fasting.
Diet: a special course of food to which one restricts oneself.
alternately
Diet: the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person or animal for a special reason.
The act of setting macro limits is what makes IIFYM - however it is individually practiced - a diet.
Food restriction is food restriction.
Except one can bulk on IIFYM. (Stating this again, for the nth time) and the calorie restriction itself isn't IIFYM.
At 3400 cals during a bulk, following IIFYM I'm not restricting.
and this is why the obligatory 80%/20% advice always irks me a little bit. for certain people (i.e. bodybuilders), it's probably fine advice, but for somebody eating 3500 calories a day, you really don't have to eat 2800 calories of nothing but whole, "clean" foods in order to meet your nutritional needs. so i never quote this 80%/20% rule because it's more of a rule for people in certain scenarios, but not a rule that everyone must follow. i think it's sufficient to say "eat a varied diet".
I'm glad to read this. I wondered if if was the only one who felt this way. Many nutrient-dense foods (micros & protein, for example) really aren't that calorie dense.
This is one reason that I don't describe myself as truly "IIFYM"
When I eat 2800 calories a day, I don't have to 2240 of them "clean" to meet my nutritional needs.0 -
Probably one of the most amazing but misunderstood concepts circulating among bodybuilders and fitness enthusiasts in general, is IIFYM.
What started as a phrase from a user named Erik Stevens on bodybuilding.com, quickly caught on and proceeded to cause an uproar of internet stupidity everywhere.
IIFYM stands for "If It Fits Your Macros" and it was originally phrased on the bb.com forums as a fast way to respond to the overwhelming number of questions about whether or not someone could eat a particular food item without having to worry about getting fat, or not gaining muscle, or (insert other negative effect).
Here are some examples of the questions that would come up: "Hey can I eat fruit on a cut?" "Hey is it okay for me to have oatmeal?" "Hey I had a cookie but I still stayed at my calorie and macro goals, is that okay or will that hurt my progress?" (The answer being "Yes, you can eat it if it fits your macros").
IIFYM literally means to hit your calorie and macronutrient targets by end of day choosing foods that you enjoy eating. The concept is completely bastardized because idiots across the internet continually come up with scenarios that don't exist in real life, to try and blow a hole in the idea that IIFYM is a sound practice.
Here are some examples of the strawmen arguments that show up in an attempt to discredit IIFYM: "You're telling me you can just eat straight table sugar for your carbs, and drink olive oil for your fat, and use whey protein and you'll have a good physique?". "Hey have fun eating pizza and donuts all day". "Brb just eating cake, IIFYM".
Good luck with that. (You'll note that you typically can't hit your macros eating chips and donuts all day and if you CAN, your macros are probably horsesh*t to begin with and you've then got bigger problems. The point here is that IIFYM most certainly isn't a disregard for health or nutrient sufficiency, but people will often create and knock down that strawman).
What IIFYM is not:
1) It is not eating cake and chips all day.
2) It is not disregarding micronutrients and fiber and general intelligence with regards to food choice.
3) It is not a specific macro setting. There is a website out there that has the IIFYM label that includes a calorie calculation tool and unfortunately several people on MFP believe that doing "IIFYM" means eating those specific macros. This is false.
IIFYM is a philosophy about food selection with the belief that body composition changes are primarily a function of nutrient intake and energy balance rather than a function of individual food sources.
When practicing IIFYM, it is recommended that you choose mostly whole and nutrient dense foods to comprise the majority of your intake. Fresh vegetables, fruits, meats, fish, etc, and at the same time, leaving some room for a discretionary intake. A common and very reasonable recommendation would be about 80/20. That is to say, that if you've got a calorie target of 2500, you'd eat approximately 2000 calories of whole and nutrient dense foods with a calorie bank of 500 to eat whatever you would like while still hitting your calorie and macronutrient targets by end of day
Source:http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifym
I'm reading that in my SideSteel voice. Love his edge.
12 pages and this, really, is all that is needed to be said. But internet arguing over symantics and negligible variables always supercedes logic and reason.
Pretty much sums it up for me :flowerforyou:
Where is the fun in just doing whatever Sarauk and SideSteel tell you to do?0 -
IIFYM is not a diet. It's a way to structure a diet. Just like Intermittent Fasting.
Diet: a special course of food to which one restricts oneself.
alternately
Diet: the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person or animal for a special reason.
The act of setting macro limits is what makes IIFYM - however it is individually practiced - a diet.
Food restriction is food restriction.
Except one can bulk on IIFYM. (Stating this again, for the nth time) and the calorie restriction itself isn't IIFYM.
At 3400 cals during a bulk, following IIFYM I'm not restricting.
and this is why the obligatory 80%/20% advice always irks me a little bit. for certain people (i.e. bodybuilders), it's probably fine advice, but for somebody eating 3500 calories a day, you really don't have to eat 2800 calories of nothing but whole, "clean" foods in order to meet your nutritional needs. so i never quote this 80%/20% rule because it's more of a rule for people in certain scenarios, but not a rule that everyone must follow. i think it's sufficient to say "eat a varied diet".
I'm glad to read this. I wondered if if was the only one who felt this way. Many nutrient-dense foods (micros & protein, for example) really aren't that calorie dense.
This is one reason that I don't describe myself as truly "IIFYM"
When I eat 2800 calories a day, I don't have to 2240 of them "clean" to meet my nutritional needs.
True dat.
My nutritional needs are often met with "unclean" food.
So when i read, "oh, but it should be 80/20 when doing IIFYM" I think, "ummm... well, since i don't put effort into trying to see if, in fact, that IS my ratio (and WTF is "clean" anyway? To one person, cheddar cheese is "clean", to another it's not), I think, "Well, then that is just too many rules for me."0 -
IIFYM is not a diet. It's a way to structure a diet. Just like Intermittent Fasting.
Diet: a special course of food to which one restricts oneself.
alternately
Diet: the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person or animal for a special reason.
The act of setting macro limits is what makes IIFYM - however it is individually practiced - a diet.
Food restriction is food restriction.
Except one can bulk on IIFYM. (Stating this again, for the nth time) and the calorie restriction itself isn't IIFYM.
At 3400 cals during a bulk, following IIFYM I'm not restricting.
and this is why the obligatory 80%/20% advice always irks me a little bit. for certain people (i.e. bodybuilders), it's probably fine advice, but for somebody eating 3500 calories a day, you really don't have to eat 2800 calories of nothing but whole, "clean" foods in order to meet your nutritional needs. so i never quote this 80%/20% rule because it's more of a rule for people in certain scenarios, but not a rule that everyone must follow. i think it's sufficient to say "eat a varied diet".
I'm glad to read this. I wondered if if was the only one who felt this way. Many nutrient-dense foods (micros & protein, for example) really aren't that calorie dense.
This is one reason that I don't describe myself as truly "IIFYM"
When I eat 2800 calories a day, I don't have to 2240 of them "clean" to meet my nutritional needs.
True dat.
My nutritional needs are often met with "unclean" food.
So when i read, "oh, but it should be 80/20 when doing IIFYM" I think, "ummm... well, since i don't put effort into trying to see if, in fact, that IS my ratio (and WTF is "clean" anyway? To one person, cheddar cheese is "clean", to another it's not), I think, "Well, then that is just too many rules for me."
DP - what are we doing on another one of these threads?
Exactly...
Let's say I have a ham sandwich, chips and green beans for lunch. Is that 80/20?
Is the bread clean?
Is the ham clean?
Mayo probably isn't...
Lettuce and tomato - conventionally grown...clean or not?
Chips, no.
Green beans...if the lettuce is...
Butter - maybe?
Does this lunch fit my macros?
I almost always fulfill my daily protein and fat minimums. I get the calories I need over the course of a week. Do I hit the rest of my macro breakdown 80% of the time? Does it matter?0 -
Holy moly people!!
Just EAT WHATEVER THE $&*% YOU WANNA EAT!!
0 -
IIFYM is not a diet. It's a way to structure a diet. Just like Intermittent Fasting.
Diet: a special course of food to which one restricts oneself.
alternately
Diet: the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person or animal for a special reason.
The act of setting macro limits is what makes IIFYM - however it is individually practiced - a diet.
Food restriction is food restriction.
Except one can bulk on IIFYM. (Stating this again, for the nth time) and the calorie restriction itself isn't IIFYM.
At 3400 cals during a bulk, following IIFYM I'm not restricting.
and this is why the obligatory 80%/20% advice always irks me a little bit. for certain people (i.e. bodybuilders), it's probably fine advice, but for somebody eating 3500 calories a day, you really don't have to eat 2800 calories of nothing but whole, "clean" foods in order to meet your nutritional needs. so i never quote this 80%/20% rule because it's more of a rule for people in certain scenarios, but not a rule that everyone must follow. i think it's sufficient to say "eat a varied diet".
I'm glad to read this. I wondered if if was the only one who felt this way. Many nutrient-dense foods (micros & protein, for example) really aren't that calorie dense.
This is one reason that I don't describe myself as truly "IIFYM"
When I eat 2800 calories a day, I don't have to 2240 of them "clean" to meet my nutritional needs.
True dat.
My nutritional needs are often met with "unclean" food.
So when i read, "oh, but it should be 80/20 when doing IIFYM" I think, "ummm... well, since i don't put effort into trying to see if, in fact, that IS my ratio (and WTF is "clean" anyway? To one person, cheddar cheese is "clean", to another it's not), I think, "Well, then that is just too many rules for me."
DP - what are we doing on another one of these threads?
Exactly...
Let's say I have a ham sandwich, chips and green beans for lunch. Is that 80/20?
Is the bread clean?
Is the ham clean?
Mayo probably isn't...
Lettuce and tomato - conventionally grown...clean or not?
Chips, no.
Green beans...if the lettuce is...
Butter - maybe?
Does this lunch fit my macros?
I almost always fulfill my daily protein and fat minimums. I get the calories I need over the course of a week. Do I hit the rest of my macro breakdown 80% of the time? Does it matter?
Forum addiction.
It's a real thing.
But not ALL forums, actually. I don't binge on the "slap, marry, bang" threads. Just hags like these.
BTW: Do you tell people that you're IIFYM?0 -
most of us in the western world are heavily Vitamin D deficient for one.
My precursory Google search indicates that a few glasses of whole milk is enough Vitamin D. Maybe people should drink their milk like mom told them to do.
it's not. lol0 -
IIFYM is not a diet. It's a way to structure a diet. Just like Intermittent Fasting.
Diet: a special course of food to which one restricts oneself.
alternately
Diet: the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person or animal for a special reason.
The act of setting macro limits is what makes IIFYM - however it is individually practiced - a diet.
Food restriction is food restriction.
Except one can bulk on IIFYM. (Stating this again, for the nth time) and the calorie restriction itself isn't IIFYM.
At 3400 cals during a bulk, following IIFYM I'm not restricting.
and this is why the obligatory 80%/20% advice always irks me a little bit. for certain people (i.e. bodybuilders), it's probably fine advice, but for somebody eating 3500 calories a day, you really don't have to eat 2800 calories of nothing but whole, "clean" foods in order to meet your nutritional needs. so i never quote this 80%/20% rule because it's more of a rule for people in certain scenarios, but not a rule that everyone must follow. i think it's sufficient to say "eat a varied diet".
I'm glad to read this. I wondered if if was the only one who felt this way. Many nutrient-dense foods (micros & protein, for example) really aren't that calorie dense.
This is one reason that I don't describe myself as truly "IIFYM"
When I eat 2800 calories a day, I don't have to 2240 of them "clean" to meet my nutritional needs.
True dat.
My nutritional needs are often met with "unclean" food.
So when i read, "oh, but it should be 80/20 when doing IIFYM" I think, "ummm... well, since i don't put effort into trying to see if, in fact, that IS my ratio (and WTF is "clean" anyway? To one person, cheddar cheese is "clean", to another it's not), I think, "Well, then that is just too many rules for me."
DP - what are we doing on another one of these threads?
Exactly...
Let's say I have a ham sandwich, chips and green beans for lunch. Is that 80/20?
Is the bread clean?
Is the ham clean?
Mayo probably isn't...
Lettuce and tomato - conventionally grown...clean or not?
Chips, no.
Green beans...if the lettuce is...
Butter - maybe?
Does this lunch fit my macros?
I almost always fulfill my daily protein and fat minimums. I get the calories I need over the course of a week. Do I hit the rest of my macro breakdown 80% of the time? Does it matter?
Forum addiction.
It's a real thing.
But not ALL forums, actually. I don't binge on the "slap, marry, bang" threads. Just hags like these.
BTW: Do you tell people that you're IIFYM?
At one point I thought I was and did. At one point I tried to eat "clean" too. I've tried many things.
Right now, according to the research I've read, it's pretty clear what is best for health: maintain a healthy body fat %, exercise, get enough protein, enough fat and meet the RDA of the micros. Once you meet your dietary and exercise minimums, how everything else is balanced is a matter of style.0 -
Holy moly people!!
Just EAT WHATEVER THE $&*% YOU WANNA EAT!!
It doesn't matter what you eat. It matters what you call it.
0 -
Is it ok if I call my diet "Just EAT WHATEVER THE $&*% YOU WANNA EAT!! "0
-
Holy moly people!!
Just EAT WHATEVER THE $&*% YOU WANNA EAT!!
I LedOL.
:laugh:
Well played.0 -
Is it ok if I call my diet "Just EAT WHATEVER THE $&*% YOU WANNA EAT!! "
yep.
The twins say it's okay.0 -
IIFYM is not a diet. It's a way to structure a diet. Just like Intermittent Fasting.
Diet: a special course of food to which one restricts oneself.
alternately
Diet: the kind and amount of food prescribed for a person or animal for a special reason.
The act of setting macro limits is what makes IIFYM - however it is individually practiced - a diet.
Food restriction is food restriction.
Except one can bulk on IIFYM. (Stating this again, for the nth time) and the calorie restriction itself isn't IIFYM.
At 3400 cals during a bulk, following IIFYM I'm not restricting.
"Restriction" is ambivalent on direction - having to eat more than a number is as much a restriction as having to eat less than a number. Dieting to bulk is still dieting.
feel like this is the crux of the issue- people not using the same definitions as the bases for a use of a word.
Knowing that "diet" can be : "the sum of what one eats on average"- vs a "restrictive food plan designed for a goal."
Makes this conversation very difficult.0 -
feel like this is the crux of the issue- people not using the same definitions as the bases for a use of a word.
Knowing that "diet" can be : "the sum of what one eats on average"- vs a "restrictive food plan designed for a goal."
Makes this conversation very difficult.
agreed... a bunch of trolls splitting hairs and making asinine arguments.
When they talk about a tigers diet at the zoo I don't think they are telling me that tiger is in a cutting phase.
Regardless, even by the technical definition of the word "diet", IIFYM is still not a diet. Macros are not specific. If you can eat anything, its not a diet. The diet is what you choose to eat. Thus its a protocol that regulates a diet. Not a diet.
This is a stupid argument. Why? The originators meaning of IIFYM is well known. You cant supplant your own definition and then argue with others. Well, you can, but, it just makes you a ...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 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
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions