IIFYM
SideSteel
Posts: 11,068 Member
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 .
It's a flexible approach, and it works.
Layne Norton on IIFYM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMfaYy2m-iQ
See here for an example of how it could be done: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/925464-fitting-it-in-giggity
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 .
It's a flexible approach, and it works.
Layne Norton on IIFYM:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMfaYy2m-iQSee here for an example of how it could be done: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/925464-fitting-it-in-giggity
Tagged:
0
Replies
-
I love this approach as I hate following a specific diet. I will watch my macros more carefully. Thanks !0
-
Okay, so how domindetermine what the correct macros are for me?0
-
Oh....never mind. I see Sara's post. Duh!0
-
Just realized that I had not tagged this one yet.0
-
guess that means i will put back 10 of these 15 cookies...oops0
-
Saving thread for future! great explanation.0
-
Layne Norton's Vlog "clean" vs IIFYM is up. Very interesting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6H2edyPLU8&list=WL36825C9108E5F7AF 1 -
Layne Norton's Vlog "clean" vs IIFYM is up. Very interestinghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6H2edyPLU8&list=WL36825C9108E5F7AF
I just listened to it - going to add it to the clean eating thread.0 -
bumparoo0
-
Nice post. I think people are all too keen to over complicate things, perhaps partly to make themselves seem more elite that they have succeeded, or as an excuse for why they can/have failed. It is such a simple, well balanced concept.
btw, I enjoy acronyms.
IIFYM FTW!
lol
:bigsmile:1 -
Nice post. I think people are all too keen to over complicate things, perhaps partly to make themselves seem more elite that they have succeeded, or as an excuse for why they can/have failed. It is such a simple, well balanced concept.
btw, I enjoy acronyms.
IIFYM FTW!
lol
:bigsmile:
Tagging to follow.0 -
Nice post. I think people are all too keen to over complicate things, perhaps partly to make themselves seem more elite that they have succeeded, or as an excuse for why they can/have failed. It is such a simple, well balanced concept.
btw, I enjoy acronyms.
IIFYM FTW!
lol
:bigsmile:
Tagging to follow. 0 -
Layne Norton's Vlog "clean" vs IIFYM is up. Very interestinghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6H2edyPLU8&list=WL36825C9108E5F7AF
I just listened to it - going to add it to the clean eating thread.
I can't open you tube from my phone, but is it worth me copying it to the Help Please thread where the new guy was telling everyine they will fail if they drink even a single soda, eat a single candy bar, or eat ice-cream?0 -
Layne Norton's Vlog "clean" vs IIFYM is up. Very interestinghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6H2edyPLU8&list=WL36825C9108E5F7AF
I just listened to it - going to add it to the clean eating thread.
I can't open you tube from my phone, but is it worth me copying it to the Help Please thread where the new guy was telling everyine they will fail if they drink even a single soda, eat a single candy bar, or eat ice-cream?
I would say yes.0 -
Nice post. I think people are all too keen to over complicate things, perhaps partly to make themselves seem more elite that they have succeeded, or as an excuse for why they can/have failed. It is such a simple, well balanced concept.
btw, I enjoy acronyms.
IIFYM FTW!
lol
:bigsmile:
QFT!0 -
Article from Tom Venuto's blog about IIFYM:
http://www.burnthefatblog.com/archives/2012/10/the-if-it-fits-your-macros-iifym-diet.php
I think he frames it pretty sensibly - even discusses the "excluding the middle" crowd.0 -
Article from Tom Venuto's blog about IIFYM:
http://www.burnthefatblog.com/archives/2012/10/the-if-it-fits-your-macros-iifym-diet.php
I think he frames it pretty sensibly - even discusses the "excluding the middle" crowd.
Thanks for posting this.
In some ways I think Tom is attacking a straw-man but at the same time I don't blame him because with anything, there are people who will take a philosophy and bastardize it into something way sh1ttier than it originally was
0 -
Agreed....In some ways I think Tom is attacking a straw-man but at the same time I don't blame him because with anything, there are people who will take a philosophy and bastardize it into something way sh1ttier than it originally was0 -
guess that means i will put back 10 of these 15 cookies...oops
LOL....
and tagging this for later.0 -
-
interesting thread
What is the downside on Whey protein? or should I start another thread for that?0 -
interesting thread
What is the downside on Whey protein? or should I start another thread for that?
None as far as I am aware, assuming no intolerance (which is not that likely as it has very low lactose levels).0 -
interesting thread
What is the downside on Whey protein? or should I start another thread for that?
None as far as I am aware, assuming no intolerance (which is not that likely as it has very low lactose levels).
Cool thanks Sara x0 -
Is it me of has this iifym thing just gone nuts lately, everyone is talking about it ( with varying degrees of understaning/common sense) even the hodge twins have a video promoting iifym/flexible dieting these days!
Pretty amusing for something that started as an off hand forum comment.0 -
yeah, well in the fitness circles anyway. You still have to be a cal/macro tracker to do it though obviously.
There will always be a select few that do the 80/20 thing the wrong way around
0 -
yeah, well in the fitness circles anyway. You still have to be a cal/macro tracker to do it though obviously.
There will always be a select few that do the 80/20 thing the wrong way around
Not counting my ice-cream which is not junk food, I usually go for 90/10 in the week, and end up with 20/80 some days at the weekend...it kind of balances itself out to 80/20
0 -
Example: "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".
but eating pizza and doughnuts all day or more than an occasional small slice of cake will NOT fit my macros. I can't eat that stuff like that and still fit my macros. Are there people that can eat like that and still fit their macros?
right now I have a mental block for carbs. I KNOW KNOW KNOW very good and well they are not bad or evil, my body needs them. yet I can't get past obsessing about them. I have them set at 35%. I am sure I would be just fine with 40 or 43%, but I can't make myself raise that Macro. SO, I add most of my fruits and veggies as Quick Adds for the time being. I know it is not being faithfully accurate in my logging, but I was avoiding fruits and veggies in fear of carbs.
Soon I will mature out of that and be able to eat blueberries and log them correctly.0 -
Example: "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".
but eating pizza and doughnuts all day or more than an occasional small slice of cake will NOT fit my macros. I can't eat that stuff like that and still fit my macros. Are there people that can eat like that and still fit their macros?
right now I have a mental block for carbs. I KNOW KNOW KNOW very good and well they are not bad or evil, my body needs them. yet I can't get past obsessing about them. I have them set at 35%. I am sure I would be just fine with 40 or 43%, but I can't make myself raise that Macro. SO, I add most of my fruits and veggies as Quick Adds for the time being. I know it is not being faithfully accurate in my logging, but I was avoiding fruits and veggies in fear of carbs.
Soon I will mature out of that and be able to eat blueberries and log them correctly.
The part you quoted was an example of how IIFYM is misinterpreted and does not mean that.0 -
I wasn't sure if people were using poor food choices and still meeting their macros or eating whatever they want that didn't fit their macros, but saying it didd. I couldn't imagine why would they say it did fit if it didn't? So I assumed the pizza and doughnuts they ate did fit their macros, but were poor choices.
Example: "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".
but eating pizza and doughnuts all day or more than an occasional small slice of cake will NOT fit my macros. I can't eat that stuff like that and still fit my macros. Are there people that can eat like that and still fit their macros?
right now I have a mental block for carbs. I KNOW KNOW KNOW very good and well they are not bad or evil, my body needs them. yet I can't get past obsessing about them. I have them set at 35%. I am sure I would be just fine with 40 or 43%, but I can't make myself raise that Macro. SO, I add most of my fruits and veggies as Quick Adds for the time being. I know it is not being faithfully accurate in my logging, but I was avoiding fruits and veggies in fear of carbs.
Soon I will mature out of that and be able to eat blueberries and log them correctly.
The part you quoted was an example of how IIFYM is misinterpreted and does not mean that.0 -
I wasn't sure if people were using poor food choices and still meeting their macros or eating whatever they want that didn't fit their macros, but saying it didd. I couldn't imagine why would they say it did fit if it didn't? So I assumed the pizza and doughnuts they ate did fit their macros, but were poor choices.
Example: "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".
but eating pizza and doughnuts all day or more than an occasional small slice of cake will NOT fit my macros. I can't eat that stuff like that and still fit my macros. Are there people that can eat like that and still fit their macros?
right now I have a mental block for carbs. I KNOW KNOW KNOW very good and well they are not bad or evil, my body needs them. yet I can't get past obsessing about them. I have them set at 35%. I am sure I would be just fine with 40 or 43%, but I can't make myself raise that Macro. SO, I add most of my fruits and veggies as Quick Adds for the time being. I know it is not being faithfully accurate in my logging, but I was avoiding fruits and veggies in fear of carbs.
Soon I will mature out of that and be able to eat blueberries and log them correctly.
The part you quoted was an example of how IIFYM is misinterpreted and does not mean that.
Basically, either way is wrong. Some people don't pick up on the if it fits your macros part of the um...if it fits your macros, and others miss the point that it is supposed to be applied with some common sense about food choices i.e. getting a good amount of nutrient dense foods, especially ones with fiber.0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99jPRSgVjg
This discussion has been closed.