I believe that IIFYM is a cult

Options
1235711

Replies

  • MireyGal76
    MireyGal76 Posts: 7,334 Member
    Options
    what is the deal with all the cult posts? this is silly and a waste of time to post such silly things. everyone has different things that work for them and different walks of life . just because someone choses a different diet/ lifestyle change doesn't make it a cult. next thing you know someone will post to wear glasses is a cult.

    See topic grouping... Chit-Chat, Fun, and Games...

    Silly. Waste of time.

    Yep... just like Chit-Chat, Fun and Games are.

    As for IIFYM, the actual practice works.
  • IronPlayground
    IronPlayground Posts: 1,594 Member
    Options
    I don't know if there's a standard definition for IIFYM but I would argue that sodium is not a macronutrient but a micronutrient along the lines of other trace chemicals that the body needs - - anything measured in milligrams probably isn't "Macro". Similarly, with fiber, it isn't really nutritive. It's important but so are oxygen and water.

    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    I don't pay too much attention to sugar. I usually save room for around 10-15% of my calories for treats at the end of the day. The rest of my day usually consists of nutritious foods.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,015 Member
    Options
    I don't know if there's a standard definition for IIFYM but I would argue that sodium is not a macronutrient but a micronutrient along the lines of other trace chemicals that the body needs - - anything measured in milligrams probably isn't "Macro". Similarly, with fiber, it isn't really nutritive. It's important but so are oxygen and water.

    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    You do know that sugar is a carb, right?
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Options
    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    True - and as far as I'm aware, sugar is a component of carbohydrates. Based on my understanding, IIFYM logic would argue that limitless sugar is fine - - as long as you don't exceed your overall carbs.

    Don't know what to tell you about the default MFP Macro split except for some reason it is crazy high in carbs by default.

    Your understanding is wrong then. Would you say the same thing about a paleo eater that only ate meat and nothing else. Technically that would fit their diet parameters. No that is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.
  • BurtHuttz
    BurtHuttz Posts: 3,653 Member
    Options
    what is the deal with all the cult posts? this is silly and a waste of time to post such silly things. everyone has different things that work for them and different walks of life . just because someone choses a different diet/ lifestyle change doesn't make it a cult. next thing you know someone will post to wear glasses is a cult.

    Shhhh, come here. Shh. It's okay. It's just for fun. It's not really a cult, none of us think that. Sh-sh-sh-sh.

    tumblr_inline_mh017afp0O1rn7ni2.gif
  • WinnerVictorious
    WinnerVictorious Posts: 4,735 Member
    Options
    I don't know if there's a standard definition for IIFYM but I would argue that sodium is not a macronutrient but a micronutrient along the lines of other trace chemicals that the body needs - - anything measured in milligrams probably isn't "Macro". Similarly, with fiber, it isn't really nutritive. It's important but so are oxygen and water.

    agreed. i only mentioned sodium because it is commonly tracked on MFP by members.
  • etoiles_argentees
    etoiles_argentees Posts: 2,827 Member
    Options
    Wait, changed my mind... I'm in the eat like you want cult. Too much importance on food for health annoys me. Read up on the Roseto studies and such. Or epigenetics
  • beccca1981
    Options
    Hahahahahah!!
  • iulia_maddie
    iulia_maddie Posts: 2,780 Member
    Options
    I thought about joining this cult before, but the initiation is scary.
    There is no way i'm going to allow someone to drag me into a cave by my hair.
    Ohh wait..that was a different cult..
  • Ramberta
    Ramberta Posts: 1,312 Member
    Options
    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    True - and as far as I'm aware, sugar is a component of carbohydrates. Based on my understanding, IIFYM logic would argue that limitless sugar is fine - - as long as you don't exceed your overall carbs.

    Don't know what to tell you about the default MFP Macro split except for some reason it is crazy high in carbs by default.

    Yeah, I just adjusted my ratios and my carbs plummeted and protein skyrocketed. Looks like I'm gonna have to wrap my head around eating more meat.

    I thought sugar turned INTO carbs, but perhaps my naivete is showing. In any case it makes sense that that would fall under the carb category... still though, if you cut out all grains that leaves a lot of room for sugar!
  • BurtHuttz
    BurtHuttz Posts: 3,653 Member
    Options
    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    True - and as far as I'm aware, sugar is a component of carbohydrates. Based on my understanding, IIFYM logic would argue that limitless sugar is fine - - as long as you don't exceed your overall carbs.

    Don't know what to tell you about the default MFP Macro split except for some reason it is crazy high in carbs by default.

    Your understanding is wrong then. Would you say the same thing about a paleo eater that only ate meat and nothing else. Technically that would fit their diet parameters. No that is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.

    You misread - - I didn't say 100% carbs, 0% fat, 0% protein. So we agree that what you're attempting to ascribe to me is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Options
    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    True - and as far as I'm aware, sugar is a component of carbohydrates. Based on my understanding, IIFYM logic would argue that limitless sugar is fine - - as long as you don't exceed your overall carbs.

    Don't know what to tell you about the default MFP Macro split except for some reason it is crazy high in carbs by default.

    Your understanding is wrong then. Would you say the same thing about a paleo eater that only ate meat and nothing else. Technically that would fit their diet parameters. No that is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.

    You misread - - I didn't say 100% carbs, 0% fat, 0% protein. So we agree that what you're attempting to ascribe to me is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.

    NONE of these diet methods have a baseline for micros but we all know that a balanced diet is necessary to get vital nutrients. No one argues that you can only eat olive oil or sugar and still be healthy. Just like a paleo/vegan/.... would never argue you could eat one food source either.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,579 Member
    Options
    We're in a cult? Well then let's play the part:

    Who wants some koolaid?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • Ramberta
    Ramberta Posts: 1,312 Member
    Options
    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    True - and as far as I'm aware, sugar is a component of carbohydrates. Based on my understanding, IIFYM logic would argue that limitless sugar is fine - - as long as you don't exceed your overall carbs.

    Don't know what to tell you about the default MFP Macro split except for some reason it is crazy high in carbs by default.

    Your understanding is wrong then. Would you say the same thing about a paleo eater that only ate meat and nothing else. Technically that would fit their diet parameters. No that is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.

    You misread - - I didn't say 100% carbs, 0% fat, 0% protein. So we agree that what you're attempting to ascribe to me is a ridiculous argument that no one is making.

    NONE of these diet methods have a baseline for micros but we all know that a balanced diet is necessary to get vital nutrients. No one argues that you can only eat olive oil or sugar and still be healthy. Just like a paleo/vegan/.... would never argue you could eat one food source either.

    You're still arguing a point that no one made.
  • Lift_This_
    Lift_This_ Posts: 2,756 Member
    Options
    We're in a cult? Well then let's play the part:

    Who wants some koolaid?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition


    I like grape!!!
  • WinnerVictorious
    WinnerVictorious Posts: 4,735 Member
    Options
    That makes sense. Sugar, however, is measured in grams... and it's true that at least in processed form, as the food pyramid says, there is no daily 'recommended' amount. Still, I'm curious to see if any IIFYMers set a cap or minimum on their sugar intake as well, or whether they just don't care about it or pay attention at all.

    True - and as far as I'm aware, sugar is a component of carbohydrates. Based on my understanding, IIFYM logic would argue that limitless sugar is fine - - as long as you don't exceed your overall carbs.

    Don't know what to tell you about the default MFP Macro split except for some reason it is crazy high in carbs by default.

    Yeah, I just adjusted my ratios and my carbs plummeted and protein skyrocketed. Looks like I'm gonna have to wrap my head around eating more meat.

    I thought sugar turned INTO carbs, but perhaps my naivete is showing. In any case it makes sense that that would fall under the carb category... still though, if you cut out all grains that leaves a lot of room for sugar!

    it doesn't have to be more meat. beans, yogurt, dairy, nuts all have protein. now you'll also see why so many people turn to protein supplement shakes, especially when building muscle.
  • newdaydawning79
    newdaydawning79 Posts: 1,503 Member
    Options
    Don't know what IIFYM is, but I totally read the letters to the beat of "Bad Romance". So what is it anyway?

    Now I'm doing that, thank you!
  • etoiles_argentees
    etoiles_argentees Posts: 2,827 Member
    Options
    We're in a cult? Well then let's play the part:

    Who wants some koolaid?:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    niner, what's in your koolaid?
  • darrensurrey
    darrensurrey Posts: 3,942 Member
    Options
    The oldest living IIFYM'er is 89, the oldest living clean eater is 91, so lets wait for the verdict, shall we?

    And the oldest living "I'm eating all the pies I want" eater is 102. I know her. Might be a lie as I expect there are people older than that who eat what the hell they want. Actually, in the nursing home I volunteer at, they're all between 80 and 102 and don't eat healthily. Salt? Poured on like gravy! :noway:
  • BurtHuttz
    BurtHuttz Posts: 3,653 Member
    Options
    it doesn't have to be more meat. beans, yogurt, dairy, nuts all have protein. now you'll also see why so many people turn to protein supplement shakes, especially when building muscle.

    And eggs! I nommed an absurd quantity of eggs for breakfast (but I'm trying to build muscle.) Bread has protein too believe it or not. I forget which the brands were but for a time I was eating hotdogs with less protein than the buns they were in. Sorta scary when you think about it . . .