IIFYM Not a diet?

jonnythan

As it was specified earlier, you can not make indulgent foods fit your macros if you do not eat at 80% of your diet in whole foods. That is going to be at least 4 servings a fruit and veggie a day.

Do you really need it all spelled out for you what you can and cannot eat? Can't you use your own best judgment about your own nutrition?

I certainly can. Most on this board CAN'T... which is why they're here.

But they learn to over time... and they don't learn that by being afraid of food. They learn how to use good judgment about their diet by educating themselves about nutrition, and practicing moderation.

Your "clean-eating" mantra generates fear and causes people to distance themselves from food rather than learning about it.

I think it has been established time and time again, on the forums, and particularly with you, that "clean-eaters" and IIFYM'ers are essentially eating by a similar method (80% whole foods/20% processed or "dirty"). IIFYM'ers just simply take a different approach with consideration to the psychological component, or the relationship with food.

We don't fear eating food... we just make certain it doesn't get out of line!

Time and time again you guys paint me with your own brush - not mine. I repeatedly state that you shouldn't cut out foods you enjoy. I don't advocate strict clean eating. You're manipulating just as much as you think I am.

Oh okay, sure.

So if a poster came here and started a thread because they really wanted to eat a piece of cake at a kid's birthday party, your response would be what exactly?

go for it. it's no biggie. it's one slice of cake - it will have zero effect on your weight loss. enjoy it and have fun at the party. :happy:

Cool.

So how exactly is that different than suggesting someone plan their meals around that piece of cake?


And what if someone wanted a piece of cake every day?

your way sounds like way more work tbh.

So what if someone wants cake every day? Is that bad? Should they not do it? Is it OK to plan your entire day around having that piece of cake every day?

tennisdude2004

Yes please I wish to be enlightened - please direct me to the source!

There is no one source. IIFYM does not come from IIFYM.com any more than organic farming comes from organic.org. It's a grassroots movement. It's a philosophy that has grown organically from the cumulative practices and research of many, many people over the years.

So consider yourself educated: IIFYM is not a diet, and it is not about restricting calories. It is about setting nutrient goals particular to your goals, whether that is weight loss, weight maintenance, or weight gain.

Someone must have come up with the buzz word IIFYM and term 'If It Fits Your Macros' - surely it didn't just happen.

Coining a buzzword does not give someone permanent total control of the meaning of a word. Meaning comes from usage. (That would be why 'diet' and so many other words have multiple meanings.)

Language: the ultimate democracy.

Thanks, agreed - my definition of IIFYM will be flexible dieting (I think that's the term Layne Norton uses) and I think it sums it up quite well.

a_stronger_me13

As it was specified earlier, you can not make indulgent foods fit your macros if you do not eat at 80% of your diet in whole foods. That is going to be at least 4 servings a fruit and veggie a day.

Do you really need it all spelled out for you what you can and cannot eat? Can't you use your own best judgment about your own nutrition?

I certainly can. Most on this board CAN'T... which is why they're here.

But they learn to over time... and they don't learn that by being afraid of food. They learn how to use good judgment about their diet by educating themselves about nutrition, and practicing moderation.

Your "clean-eating" mantra generates fear and causes people to distance themselves from food rather than learning about it.

I think it has been established time and time again, on the forums, and particularly with you, that "clean-eaters" and IIFYM'ers are essentially eating by a similar method (80% whole foods/20% processed or "dirty"). IIFYM'ers just simply take a different approach with consideration to the psychological component, or the relationship with food.

We don't fear eating food... we just make certain it doesn't get out of line!

Time and time again you guys paint me with your own brush - not mine. I repeatedly state that you shouldn't cut out foods you enjoy. I don't advocate strict clean eating. You're manipulating just as much as you think I am.

Oh okay, sure.

So if a poster came here and started a thread because they really wanted to eat a piece of cake at a kid's birthday party, your response would be what exactly?

go for it. it's no biggie. it's one slice of cake - it will have zero effect on your weight loss. enjoy it and have fun at the party. :happy:

Cool.

So how exactly is that different than suggesting someone plan their meals around that piece of cake?


And what if someone wanted a piece of cake every day?

your way sounds like way more work tbh.

Lol, wut?

a_stronger_me13

Yes please I wish to be enlightened - please direct me to the source!

There is no one source. IIFYM does not come from IIFYM.com any more than organic farming comes from organic.org. It's a grassroots movement. It's a philosophy that has grown organically from the cumulative practices and research of many, many people over the years.

So consider yourself educated: IIFYM is not a diet, and it is not about restricting calories. It is about setting nutrient goals particular to your goals, whether that is weight loss, weight maintenance, or weight gain.

Someone must have come up with the buzz word IIFYM and term 'If It Fits Your Macros' - surely it didn't just happen.

Coining a buzzword does not give someone permanent total control of the meaning of a word. Meaning comes from usage. (That would be why 'diet' and so many other words have multiple meanings.)

Language: the ultimate democracy.

Thanks, agreed - my definition of IIFYM will be flexible dieting (I think that's the term Layne Norton uses) and I think it sums it up quite well.

So how's that Paleo working out for you?

cwsreddy

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

UsedToBeHusky

As it was specified earlier, you can not make indulgent foods fit your macros if you do not eat at 80% of your diet in whole foods. That is going to be at least 4 servings a fruit and veggie a day.

Do you really need it all spelled out for you what you can and cannot eat? Can't you use your own best judgment about your own nutrition?

I certainly can. Most on this board CAN'T... which is why they're here.

But they learn to over time... and they don't learn that by being afraid of food. They learn how to use good judgment about their diet by educating themselves about nutrition, and practicing moderation.

Your "clean-eating" mantra generates fear and causes people to distance themselves from food rather than learning about it.

I think it has been established time and time again, on the forums, and particularly with you, that "clean-eaters" and IIFYM'ers are essentially eating by a similar method (80% whole foods/20% processed or "dirty"). IIFYM'ers just simply take a different approach with consideration to the psychological component, or the relationship with food.

We don't fear eating food... we just make certain it doesn't get out of line!

Time and time again you guys paint me with your own brush - not mine. I repeatedly state that you shouldn't cut out foods you enjoy. I don't advocate strict clean eating. You're manipulating just as much as you think I am.

Oh okay, sure.

So if a poster came here and started a thread because they really wanted to eat a piece of cake at a kid's birthday party, your response would be what exactly?

go for it. it's no biggie. it's one slice of cake - it will have zero effect on your weight loss. enjoy it and have fun at the party. :happy:

Cool.

So how exactly is that different than suggesting someone plan their meals around that piece of cake?


And what if someone wanted a piece of cake every day?

your way sounds like way more work tbh.

Maybe it is more work (though it is relatively easier than you think), but if an individual wanted to do that, then what exactly is wrong with planning their meals to allow for indulgences? Honestly, how is that any different than the clean-eating 80/20 method that you are referring to? And futhermore, you claim IIFYM'ers don't pay attention to their micronutrients, but how can that be if they are putting so much more effort (than you) into planning nutritious meals for the day to offset one less-than nutritious, calorie-dense meal?

tennisdude2004

Yes please I wish to be enlightened - please direct me to the source!

There is no one source. IIFYM does not come from IIFYM.com any more than organic farming comes from organic.org. It's a grassroots movement. It's a philosophy that has grown organically from the cumulative practices and research of many, many people over the years.

So consider yourself educated: IIFYM is not a diet, and it is not about restricting calories. It is about setting nutrient goals particular to your goals, whether that is weight loss, weight maintenance, or weight gain.

Someone must have come up with the buzz word IIFYM and term 'If It Fits Your Macros' - surely it didn't just happen.

Coining a buzzword does not give someone permanent total control of the meaning of a word. Meaning comes from usage. (That would be why 'diet' and so many other words have multiple meanings.)

Language: the ultimate democracy.

Thanks, agreed - my definition of IIFYM will be flexible dieting (I think that's the term Layne Norton uses) and I think it sums it up quite well.

So how's that Paleo working out for you?

Great thanks lost over 2 stone and have constant energy (and it's primal by the way). But I'm not here to compare diets I'm here to get more info on IIFYM - I think it is permitted to learn stuff on MFP.

UsedToBeHusky

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

Yes, I do find that to be absolutely true. I'm not there yet myself either.

My point is that the two different approaches to nutrition and diet are exactly the same, but are called different things for different reasons.

SezxyStef

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

I want chocolate everyday and add it to my diary when I prelog before I log my lunch and dinner....

I have yet to stall...ever...5lbs from maintenance...potentially 11lbs from BF% goals...

Not sure I follow your logic...

cwsreddy

Maybe it is more work (though it is relatively easier than you think), but if an individual wanted to do that, then what exactly is wrong with planning their meals to allow for indulgences? Honestly, how is that any different than the clean-eating 80/20 method that you are referring to? And futhermore, you claim IIFYM'ers don't pay attention to their micronutrients, but how can that be if they are putting so much more effort (than you) into planning nutritious meals for the day to offset one less-than nutritious, calorie-dense meal?

sustainability comes down to how easy something is to maintain. if your method is easy for you then awesome. do it. my method is easy for me because it's not about planning ahead - it's about logging after the fact, seeing where things stack up so far for the day, and making my food choices based on that information in the moment. Many of us have also gotten to the point where we know instinctively how many calories are in XYZ just from looking at the size/portion/ingredients. But if you haven't reached that point, eating primarily whole foods makes the job a helluva lot easier than dealing with processed foods that can contain lord knows how many or few calories based on the millions of ingredients therein.

Sarauk2sf

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

You may not be able to fit a piece of cake in your diet everyday to get to a very low BF%, especially if you are a smaller female, however, it is definitely do'able for people to be able to do it, be lean, and to perform to a high level. Also, if you are extremely active, it makes it easier.

cwsreddy

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

I want chocolate everyday and add it to my diary when I prelog before I log my lunch and dinner....

I have yet to stall...ever...5lbs from maintenance...potentially 11lbs from BF% goals...

Not sure I follow your logic...

right. I'm talking about BEYOND those goals. are you an athlete? would you consider your athletic performance "elite"?

SezxyStef

I've never heard anyone say that IIFYM is a free pass to eat whatever you want. Didn't have time to watch the video.

I see it from "clean" folks around these forums. But then, I've never heard people outside of MFP talk about IIFYM or "clean eating."

you are lucky then...I have to endure the "clean eating" talk everytime someone sees me eating a cookie or a chocolate bar...

I get so sick of it to be honest...

"you can't eat that, you are getting healhty or are on a diet or are lifting or it's processed it make you fat..."

Try not to let their negativity get you down. I eat chocolate and cookies all the time and It hasnt affected my diet. The occasional treat is part of what makes the change to a healthy lifestyle a success.

Oh I try...most of the time I just smile and take a bite...a big huge bite...because I am still losing weight, getting healthy and not a big ole b*tch cause I get my cookies and chocolate...life is good.

cwsreddy

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

You may not be able to fit a piece of cake in your diet everyday to get to a very low BF%, especially if you are a smaller female, however, it is definitely do'able for people to be able to do it, be lean, and to perform to a high level. Also, if you are extremely active, it makes it easier.

agreed.

UsedToBeHusky

Maybe it is more work (though it is relatively easier than you think), but if an individual wanted to do that, then what exactly is wrong with planning their meals to allow for indulgences? Honestly, how is that any different than the clean-eating 80/20 method that you are referring to? And futhermore, you claim IIFYM'ers don't pay attention to their micronutrients, but how can that be if they are putting so much more effort (than you) into planning nutritious meals for the day to offset one less-than nutritious, calorie-dense meal?

sustainability comes down to how easy something is to maintain. if your method is easy for you then awesome. do it. my method is easy for me because it's not about planning ahead - it's about logging after the fact, seeing where things stack up so far for the day, and making my food choices based on that information in the moment. Many of us have also gotten to the point where we know instinctively how many calories are in XYZ just from looking at the size/portion/ingredients. But if you haven't reached that point, eating primarily whole foods makes the job a helluva lot easier than dealing with processed foods that can contain lord knows how many or few calories based on the millions of ingredients therein.

And that's the only real difference between the two. One approach is preemptive, the other isn't.

SezxyStef

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

I want chocolate everyday and add it to my diary when I prelog before I log my lunch and dinner....

I have yet to stall...ever...5lbs from maintenance...potentially 11lbs from BF% goals...

Not sure I follow your logic...

right. I'm talking about BEYOND those goals. are you an athlete? would you consider your athletic performance "elite"?

Never said I was...and most here aren't either. So planning for the chocolate seems to be a reasonable thing for most...

You may strive for it...elite performance in your chosen sport etc...but most are here to acheive weight/BF%/ Body comp goals...so applying what you do for your performance to the masses doesn't seem to be appropriate...

Hence my not following your logic...

Sarauk2sf

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

You may not be able to fit a piece of cake in your diet everyday to get to a very low BF%, especially if you are a smaller female, however, it is definitely do'able for people to be able to do it, be lean, and to perform to a high level. Also, if you are extremely active, it makes it easier.

agreed.

Now I am confused. I was disagreeing with you - and you are agreeing with me.

cwsreddy

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

So the advice given by others will only work for the vast majority of people, and your philosophy applies only to the elite athletes of the world, of which you are not a member.


So noted.

huh? did you not read the first line? how is my advice not suited to the majority?

also why are my goals are less legitimate than anyone else's?

BrainyBurro

daaaamn you beat me to it. yes. if chocolate cake is your vice, and you desperately need to have it every day, and if having it every day will help you eat whole foods and stay on track, then by all means chow down.

for the average person looking to lose weight it's about sustainability to reach a healthier place than they're currently at.

my philosophy has always been that. I just ALSO feel that once you reach a certain point, your health/weight/body fat % will stall unless you get more meticulous. Most people aren't interested in moving beyond that plateau, and they don't need to be. I'm talking about athletic, extremely active people looking to perform at an (dare I say it) elite level.

I'm not there yet, and I want to be.

So the advice given by others will only work for the vast majority of people, and your philosophy applies only to the elite athletes of the world, of which you are not a member.


So noted.