IIFYM. If you don't know what this means, GIH
Replies
-
Good post! Forget the lettuce and broccoli and eat some food!
You can actually eat all the lettuce and broccoli that you want as long as it fits your macros.
0 -
Which you would have to eat almost a metric ton of to go over your macros! And not to mention how full you'd feel eating so many good veggies..Good post! Forget the lettuce and broccoli and eat some food!
You can actually eat all the lettuce and broccoli that you want as long as it fits your macros.0 -
Theory is sound, I tend to fill in extra calories with tasty foods, but my macros and deficit pretty much make me stay on a more normal diet path. Good luck getting all the needed macro/micro nutrients on 1k defecit a day, while eating enough low cal foods so you aren't plagued by hunger all day. If you can do it eating junk, more power to you, but I do prefer to fill my day in with foods that are more beneficial to my overall health.
I agree...i would rather worry about eating foods that are good for me than worrying how i can fit a big mac into my macros.0 -
Both of you demonstrate a complete misunderstanding of IIFYM. Don't feel bad, it happens every time this topic is discussed. Read SideSteel's explanation of it here: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/817188-iifymTheory is sound, I tend to fill in extra calories with tasty foods, but my macros and deficit pretty much make me stay on a more normal diet path. Good luck getting all the needed macro/micro nutrients on 1k defecit a day, while eating enough low cal foods so you aren't plagued by hunger all day. If you can do it eating junk, more power to you, but I do prefer to fill my day in with foods that are more beneficial to my overall health.
I agree...i would rather worry about eating foods that are good for me than worrying how i can fit a big mac into my macros.0 -
Next time you decide to steal someone else's blog post be a doll and give them credit!!!!!!!
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=133160853&highlight=Iifym.+don't+means0 -
Next time you decide to steal someone else's blog post be a doll and give them credit!!!!!!!
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=133160853&highlight=Iifym.+don't+means
LOL. Busted.0 -
HAH!
now THAT'S amazing.0 -
Definitely EAT ...... thanks !0 -
Next time you decide to steal someone else's blog post be a doll and give them credit!!!!!!!
0 -
The first thing I told my dietician when I started this journey was, I HAVE TO BE ABLE TO EAT THINGS I LIKE.
And I do. :drinker:0 -
:flowerforyou: ..no more flower for you :devil:
0 -
Next time you decide to steal someone else's blog post be a doll and give them credit!!!!!!!
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=133160853&highlight=Iifym.+don't+means
0 -
Awesome, post! Everything in moderation! :flowerforyou:0
-
I use lettuce in place of the buns.. it's filing but yummy tooawesome...now lets all make bacon burgers minus the buns!!!!0 -
I use lettuce in place of the buns.. it's filing but yummy tooawesome...now lets all make bacon burgers minus the buns!!!!
Lettuce is filling?
IMHO, there is no more worthless "vegetable" than lettuce.
I am decidedly anti-lettuce....so much so that I consider this site to be MyFitnessPAL, where PAL = People Against Lettuce.0 -
I've only looked at the first page but I can't help but notice all the in shape people replying to this thread...Perhaps it's a sign :P
Edit: I'm still holding out that completely different looking guy is the same guy in the mfp profile....0 -
I've only looked at the first page but I can't help but notice all the in shape people replying to this thread...Perhaps it's a sign :P
I don't want to spoil it for you, but there's an interesting twist on page two. I hope you keep reading.0 -
Well, at least he plagiarized/stole something that makes good sense. :bigsmile:I've only looked at the first page but I can't help but notice all the in shape people replying to this thread...Perhaps it's a sign :P
I don't want to spoil it for you, but there's an interesting twist on page two. I hope you keep reading.0 -
Well, at least he plagiarized/stole something that makes good sense. :bigsmile:I've only looked at the first page but I can't help but notice all the in shape people replying to this thread...Perhaps it's a sign :P
I don't want to spoil it for you, but there's an interesting twist on page two. I hope you keep reading.
Why would you WANT me to read that, now I'm full of disappointment
And yes, at least he plagiarized good advice, not like those other ones lol.0 -
Well, at least he plagiarized/stole something that makes good sense. :bigsmile:I've only looked at the first page but I can't help but notice all the in shape people replying to this thread...Perhaps it's a sign :P
I don't want to spoil it for you, but there's an interesting twist on page two. I hope you keep reading.
Why would you WANT me to read that, I thought you were my friend, and now I'm full of dissapointment
And yes, at least he plagiarized good advice, not like those other ones lol.
I just checked the list. Nope. You're not on it.
ETA: :flowerforyou:0 -
It's worked for me..0
-
Good post! Forget the lettuce and broccoli and eat some food!
But lettuce and broccoli are foods... and can be quite delicious ones if done up right. :P0 -
My two cents to this thread: Whether it was plagiarized or not, thank you for explaining IIFYM. A lot of people throw that acronym around and it was nice to read a (mostly) non-condescending explanation.
However, the whole point of IIFYM is "if". That one word means this-- IF someone chooses NOT to follow the IIFYM lifestyle, that does not make them a health snob. That doesn't mean they don't believe in "everything in moderation". And in fact, that phrase alone does not mean that you should eat some of -every- food available to you, just because it is. I have no issue with eventually cutting fast food out of my life completely, except on very rare occasions (less than once a month at most), because that food is like limp, iceberg lettuce-- worthless for your body. And so are a lot of processed foods, including donuts, TV dinners, and Kraft Mac 'n Cheese. I enjoy eating those foods on occasion, but looking back, the times in my life that I felt crappiest were the times where I ate whatever I wanted and didn't give a damn about nutritional content. (That doesn't mean I was always binging, by the way, which is my other beef with IIFYMers always assuming that a binge is imminent for someone attempting to have a truly healthy diet, and never is imminent for someone following IIFYM. That logic makes no sense to me whatsoever.)
The wonderful curse of our current age is that so many foods are made for convenience rather than health. And those foods may be tasty, and you may feel satisfied eating them, but why would you settle for eating those for the rest of your life? Wouldn't the ultimate goal be to reach a food diet that not only is healthy for you and gives you lots of nutrients and energy (and also doing things like reducing your risk for various diseases and strengthening your immune system), but is ALSO satisfying to your tastebuds? Produce is delicious. There are so many more fruits and vegetables available to us than are in most "regular" foods. And yes, they may be more expensive and harder to find than your basic apples and carrots, but when a sandwich at a fast food place is approaching $4 a la carte, you can work it in. And yes, it does require a lot more effort to cook a meal with few processed items than to go through the drive-through, but guess what? Being healthy takes work!!
Think of it this way, people who are going to flame me: You're a parent. You do your best to prepare your child and support them through school, but despite your best promptings, they barely pass through their classes with C's and D's. "But that's average," they say, "That's all I want to be. I want to enjoy my childhood, and stressing out over grades simply isn't going to cut it for me." Would you just sit back and be okay with that reasoning, if you knew in your heart that they could easily do better?0 -
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of IIFYM. It does not mean "eat whatever and don't give a damn about nutritional content". SideSteel sums it up nicely in his IIFYM thread/discussion:...but looking back, the times in my life that I felt crappiest were the times where I ate whatever I wanted and didn't give a damn about nutritional content...
I don't see how this advocates "eat what I want and don't give a damn about nutritional content"....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.
Which again totally misstates the concept of IIFYM. The idea isn't to cram as much junk as possible down your hole while meeting absolute minimal nutrition standards. The idea is to have a healthy diet comprised of mostly whole, nutritious foods while not being orthorexic and obsessive about the occasional splurge. To use your schoolkid analogy, it's like being happy about your kid getting A's the vast majority of the time without flying into a screaming rage and beating them within an inch of their life when they occasionally come home with a C or D.The wonderful curse of our current age is that so many foods are made for convenience rather than health. And those foods may be tasty, and you may feel satisfied eating them, but why would you settle for eating those for the rest of your life? Wouldn't the ultimate goal be to reach a food diet that not only is healthy for you and gives you lots of nutrients and energy (and also doing things like reducing your risk for various diseases and strengthening your immune system), but is ALSO satisfying to your tastebuds? Produce is delicious. There are so many more fruits and vegetables available to us than are in most "regular" foods. And yes, they may be more expensive and harder to find than your basic apples and carrots, but when a sandwich at a fast food place is approaching $4 a la carte, you can work it in. And yes, it does require a lot more effort to cook a meal with few processed items than to go through the drive-through, but guess what? Being healthy takes work!!
Think of it this way, people who are going to flame me: You're a parent. You do your best to prepare your child and support them through school, but despite your best promptings, they barely pass through their classes with C's and D's. "But that's average," they say, "That's all I want to be. I want to enjoy my childhood, and stressing out over grades simply isn't going to cut it for me." Would you just sit back and be okay with that reasoning, if you knew in your heart that they could easily do better?
Every time IIFYM comes up, there are people who enter the discussion with this type of polarized "all or nothing" thinking. Lyle McDonald wrote a piece titled "Excluding the Middle" which sums it up perfectly. Basically, it says that people who engage in this thinking can only fathom two extremes - you either are completely obsessive about your food choices 100% of the time and never let anything "bad" pass your lips, or you wallow in fast foods and junk all day, every day. There's plenty of middle ground between the two extremes and it's entirely possible to have a healthy, wholesome diet without resorting to orthorexia.0 -
Every time IIFYM comes up, there are people who enter the discussion with this type of polarized "all or nothing" thinking. Lyle McDonald wrote a piece titled "Excluding the Middle" which sums it up perfectly. Basically, it says that people who engage in this thinking can only fathom two extremes - you either are completely obsessive about your food choices 100% of the time and never let anything "bad" pass your lips, or you wallow in fast foods and junk all day, every day. There's plenty of middle ground between the two extremes and it's entirely possible to have a healthy, wholesome diet without resorting to orthorexia.
^ Excellent.
Said article is here and many would benefit by reading it: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/excluding-the-middle.html0 -
I actually knew what IIFYM means, but silly me had to google GIH. I totally count it as my "learn one new thing each day" item!0
-
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of IIFYM. It does not mean "eat whatever and don't give a damn about nutritional content". SideSteel sums it up nicely in his IIFYM thread/discussion:...but looking back, the times in my life that I felt crappiest were the times where I ate whatever I wanted and didn't give a damn about nutritional content...
I don't see how this advocates "eat what I want and don't give a damn about nutritional content"....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.
Which again totally misstates the concept of IIFYM. The idea isn't to cram as much junk as possible down your hole while meeting absolute minimal nutrition standards. The idea is to have a healthy diet comprised of mostly whole, nutritious foods while not being orthorexic and obsessive about the occasional splurge. To use your schoolkid analogy, it's like being happy about your kid getting A's the vast majority of the time without flying into a screaming rage and beating them within an inch of their life when they occasionally come home with a C or D.The wonderful curse of our current age is that so many foods are made for convenience rather than health. And those foods may be tasty, and you may feel satisfied eating them, but why would you settle for eating those for the rest of your life? Wouldn't the ultimate goal be to reach a food diet that not only is healthy for you and gives you lots of nutrients and energy (and also doing things like reducing your risk for various diseases and strengthening your immune system), but is ALSO satisfying to your tastebuds? Produce is delicious. There are so many more fruits and vegetables available to us than are in most "regular" foods. And yes, they may be more expensive and harder to find than your basic apples and carrots, but when a sandwich at a fast food place is approaching $4 a la carte, you can work it in. And yes, it does require a lot more effort to cook a meal with few processed items than to go through the drive-through, but guess what? Being healthy takes work!!
Think of it this way, people who are going to flame me: You're a parent. You do your best to prepare your child and support them through school, but despite your best promptings, they barely pass through their classes with C's and D's. "But that's average," they say, "That's all I want to be. I want to enjoy my childhood, and stressing out over grades simply isn't going to cut it for me." Would you just sit back and be okay with that reasoning, if you knew in your heart that they could easily do better?
Every time IIFYM comes up, there are people who enter the discussion with this type of polarized "all or nothing" thinking. Lyle McDonald wrote a piece titled "Excluding the Middle" which sums it up perfectly. Basically, it says that people who engage in this thinking can only fathom two extremes - you either are completely obsessive about your food choices 100% of the time and never let anything "bad" pass your lips, or you wallow in fast foods and junk all day, every day. There's plenty of middle ground between the two extremes and it's entirely possible to have a healthy, wholesome diet without resorting to orthorexia.
Everything here.
Very good response.0 -
After doing the BMR and TDEE calculations, I came up with 700 calories over what MFP has me at. To be honest, going up to this calorie level scares the *kitten* out of me. I'm starting to see progress after a week and a half at 1,200 calories per day (I go up by the amount I burned on days that I work out, which are most days out of the week, and can be anywhere from 200-400 calories). I don't even have a scale (at least for now), so I'm trying to focus on how I look and feel rather than on a number on the scale. But I still feel really worried about eating 1900 calories a day (to lose one pound per week), though the increased protein levels would be WONDERFUL. (I'm ~165 pounds, 22% body fat, 127 lbs LBM.) I feel like that's how much I was eating before MFP and gaining weight...
Part of my concern is that I know it's going to be difficult for me to eat as much fresh, whole food as I should. I'm in law school and on a really strict budget - every time I have to drive across town to get to a supermarket where I can actually afford the produce, I cringe at the gas I'm using. The shops around where students tend to live take advantage of our limited time and mobility by price-gouging. And as we get further into the semester, I'll still have time to cook, but not necessarily to grocery shop every week.
So, any success stories to make me feel better about upping my calorie intake? Any suggestions about keeping produce good for longer than a few days so I can stock up when I'm at Kroger?0 -
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of IIFYM. It does not mean "eat whatever and don't give a damn about nutritional content". SideSteel sums it up nicely in his IIFYM thread/discussion:...but looking back, the times in my life that I felt crappiest were the times where I ate whatever I wanted and didn't give a damn about nutritional content...
I don't see how this advocates "eat what I want and don't give a damn about nutritional content"....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.
Which again totally misstates the concept of IIFYM. The idea isn't to cram as much junk as possible down your hole while meeting absolute minimal nutrition standards. The idea is to have a healthy diet comprised of mostly whole, nutritious foods while not being orthorexic and obsessive about the occasional splurge. To use your schoolkid analogy, it's like being happy about your kid getting A's the vast majority of the time without flying into a screaming rage and beating them within an inch of their life when they occasionally come home with a C or D.The wonderful curse of our current age is that so many foods are made for convenience rather than health. And those foods may be tasty, and you may feel satisfied eating them, but why would you settle for eating those for the rest of your life? Wouldn't the ultimate goal be to reach a food diet that not only is healthy for you and gives you lots of nutrients and energy (and also doing things like reducing your risk for various diseases and strengthening your immune system), but is ALSO satisfying to your tastebuds? Produce is delicious. There are so many more fruits and vegetables available to us than are in most "regular" foods. And yes, they may be more expensive and harder to find than your basic apples and carrots, but when a sandwich at a fast food place is approaching $4 a la carte, you can work it in. And yes, it does require a lot more effort to cook a meal with few processed items than to go through the drive-through, but guess what? Being healthy takes work!!
Think of it this way, people who are going to flame me: You're a parent. You do your best to prepare your child and support them through school, but despite your best promptings, they barely pass through their classes with C's and D's. "But that's average," they say, "That's all I want to be. I want to enjoy my childhood, and stressing out over grades simply isn't going to cut it for me." Would you just sit back and be okay with that reasoning, if you knew in your heart that they could easily do better?
Every time IIFYM comes up, there are people who enter the discussion with this type of polarized "all or nothing" thinking. Lyle McDonald wrote a piece titled "Excluding the Middle" which sums it up perfectly. Basically, it says that people who engage in this thinking can only fathom two extremes - you either are completely obsessive about your food choices 100% of the time and never let anything "bad" pass your lips, or you wallow in fast foods and junk all day, every day. There's plenty of middle ground between the two extremes and it's entirely possible to have a healthy, wholesome diet without resorting to orthorexia.
Okay, perhaps I didn't explain the point I actually wanted to explain properly. My main beef with the IIFYM ideology is that it argues for including any and every food in your day to day diet, so long as the rest of what you're eating is nutritious. I don't see anything wrong with allowing yourself to eat foods that are "junky" once in a while, such as chips, ice cream, etc. I myself still am at a point where I overindulge on the "bad" stuff, and it will be a process to get to the point where I'm satisfied with my diet. But there ARE certain overprocessed foods that I think I could happily live without, and yet I don't think that makes me orthorexic. I think that you can eliminate certain foods from your scope of culinary enjoyment (white rice/bread, pancakes, hash browns, just to name a few) without going to "extremes" and without limiting your diet so much that it feels like a chore. After all, there are literally billions of foods to be made and tried. And yet try to say that fast food or frozen meals should be avoided and you get your *kitten* scorched from being flamed so hard. It just doesn't make sense to me that on a site where we are all (supposedly) trying to improve our health, that we continue to argue for the right to eat foods that do nothing for our bodies...?
0 -
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of IIFYM. It does not mean "eat whatever and don't give a damn about nutritional content". SideSteel sums it up nicely in his IIFYM thread/discussion:...but looking back, the times in my life that I felt crappiest were the times where I ate whatever I wanted and didn't give a damn about nutritional content...
I don't see how this advocates "eat what I want and don't give a damn about nutritional content"....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.
Which again totally misstates the concept of IIFYM. The idea isn't to cram as much junk as possible down your hole while meeting absolute minimal nutrition standards. The idea is to have a healthy diet comprised of mostly whole, nutritious foods while not being orthorexic and obsessive about the occasional splurge. To use your schoolkid analogy, it's like being happy about your kid getting A's the vast majority of the time without flying into a screaming rage and beating them within an inch of their life when they occasionally come home with a C or D.The wonderful curse of our current age is that so many foods are made for convenience rather than health. And those foods may be tasty, and you may feel satisfied eating them, but why would you settle for eating those for the rest of your life? Wouldn't the ultimate goal be to reach a food diet that not only is healthy for you and gives you lots of nutrients and energy (and also doing things like reducing your risk for various diseases and strengthening your immune system), but is ALSO satisfying to your tastebuds? Produce is delicious. There are so many more fruits and vegetables available to us than are in most "regular" foods. And yes, they may be more expensive and harder to find than your basic apples and carrots, but when a sandwich at a fast food place is approaching $4 a la carte, you can work it in. And yes, it does require a lot more effort to cook a meal with few processed items than to go through the drive-through, but guess what? Being healthy takes work!!
Think of it this way, people who are going to flame me: You're a parent. You do your best to prepare your child and support them through school, but despite your best promptings, they barely pass through their classes with C's and D's. "But that's average," they say, "That's all I want to be. I want to enjoy my childhood, and stressing out over grades simply isn't going to cut it for me." Would you just sit back and be okay with that reasoning, if you knew in your heart that they could easily do better?
Every time IIFYM comes up, there are people who enter the discussion with this type of polarized "all or nothing" thinking. Lyle McDonald wrote a piece titled "Excluding the Middle" which sums it up perfectly. Basically, it says that people who engage in this thinking can only fathom two extremes - you either are completely obsessive about your food choices 100% of the time and never let anything "bad" pass your lips, or you wallow in fast foods and junk all day, every day. There's plenty of middle ground between the two extremes and it's entirely possible to have a healthy, wholesome diet without resorting to orthorexia.
Okay, perhaps I didn't explain the point I actually wanted to explain properly. My main beef with the IIFYM ideology is that it argues for including any and every food in your day to day diet, so long as the rest of what you're eating is nutritious. I don't see anything wrong with allowing yourself to eat foods that are "junky" once in a while, such as chips, ice cream, etc. I myself still am at a point where I overindulge on the "bad" stuff, and it will be a process to get to the point where I'm satisfied with my diet. But there ARE certain overprocessed foods that I think I could happily live without, and yet I don't think that makes me orthorexic. I think that you can eliminate certain foods from your scope of culinary enjoyment (white rice/bread, pancakes, hash browns, just to name a few)
What benefit do you suppose you are providing by eliminating white rice, bread, pancakes, or hash browns?without going to "extremes" and without limiting your diet so much that it feels like a chore.
Making food eliminations in situations that they aren't necessary or even beneficial is detrimental. Even if it doesn't feel like a chore, the individual should try to keep dietary adherence high. Arbitrarily eliminating white rice for example, when it can be EASILY included into a nutrient dense diet without detriment, is simply a silly practice that doesn't do anything productive.
Rewording this so the anti-moderation crew doesn't get their jimmies rustled: If you don't enjoy white rice, obviously don't eat it. Same with pancakes. Same with anything. I'm not arguing that you SHOULD include every possible enjoyable food into your diet. I'm simply trying to convey that it's important to understand that individual food items in isolation are not inherently lipogenic, and you don't have to view certain foods as bad or off limits if you are able to fit them into a diet that is otherwise nutrient dense and of the appropriate total intake.After all, there are literally billions of foods to be made and tried. And yet try to say that fast food or frozen meals should be avoided and you get your *kitten* scorched from being flamed so hard. It just doesn't make sense to me that on a site where we are all (supposedly) trying to improve our health, that we continue to argue for the right to eat foods that do nothing for our bodies...?
Are you implying that frozen foods do nothing for your body? What about fast food?
Perhaps I am still misunderstanding you.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions