Calling out all of you IIFYM Preachers
Replies
-
No they don't bother chasing the Mcdonald's cheeseburger or the snickers bar.
They usually just pick it out of the trash.
But I do have a couple of questions . . .
When you see a puddle of mud do you get on all fours and drink out of it?
Do you stop and nibble on your neighbors bird feeder?
When you eat worms do you wait for a rainy day and then pick them up off the ground or do you go digging for them?
If you do dig for them is that included in your TDEE or are those factored into your exercise calories?
arent rats, even pets rats
infamous for getting cancer? lol0 -
i'd kick the **** out of him. haha I'm small but scrappy. I'm like... like a rabid squirrel
A rabid squirrel?
Lol.
I've got nothing to add because the OP is ascribing a behavior to IIFYM people that just isn't true for most of us, but I saw this post and laughed.
Squirrel is nice. Do you think it fits into IIFYM?0 -
I have to agree with alot of this. IIFYM wouldn't get under my skin near as much as it does if the people who promoted it would admit that there is a diet change happening. Many act like they eat pizza and donuts all day every day, and belittle the people who are eating "cleaner." Or they get there feathers ruffled if you say that eating a whole food is better for you than eating Mickey D's. Come on... just be honest here.
I will. I eat probably 85% "clean" (working on getting better)... yesterday, I ate a pizza from Subway- and it fit in my macros... I can do this without feeling bad because its the exception.. not the rule.
I agree with this. I have read plenty of threads where there is always some that come in and promote eating fast food or talk about how they eat it daily and such, but don't bother to mention that the other 80% of their diet is good whole foods. For people that are new to this site or clueless about dieting may not understand the concept, think they are doing it right and then just eat what they want without really paying attention to the nutrients, more for the fact they "think" they are eating in moderation. I personally would not call doing something daily moderation, but that is me. There are a lot of confused people thinking they are doing IIFYM, but they really are not.
And this argument is not about weight loss, I wish people would realize that. They are arguing over the difference between whole foods and processed food. Every thread I see like this it is completely obvious, but then it turns into, well I am losing weight eating this that and the other. No one has ever argued that the only way to lose weight is eating whole foods. It is more for healthy reasons and ridding your diet of unnessesary things that don't belong in your body. This is like the whole McWrap thread from yesterday. The point trying to be made it seems is fast food chains add tons of unneccesary ingredients to their foods in the form of chemicals and additives (not singling out mcdonalds, just all in general), where as when you go grocery shopping and make things yourself, you have the choice to pick what products you buy. There are multiple options for almost every single thing in the grocery store, and I bet if you look at most they have different ingredients. I can either buy a peanut butter that has a list a mile long with a bunch of things I can't pronounce, or I can buy the one that is peanuts and salt. I choose the latter.
I think most people have the common sense to know that eating whole foods is healthier. That doesn't mean everyone has to eat 100% clean and never eat any junk food. But to say that isn't true is just ignorant. You are obviously going to get more nutrients from produce and things in their whole form, considering that is pretty much what they are loaded with. Are additives and preservatives nutrient dense? NO. So I think that is the point some try to make, but I think the problem lies in the others talking mostly about the junk they eat and not specifying that they eat good wholesome foods the majority. And I think people get to crazy trying to prove their point, which doesn't help the argument at all lol
Side steel and sara (not sure her full screen name) are ones I always see discuss both and I think they are good examples of this approach and are very kind to help other understand what this entails.
Also, I wish some people would stop acting like if you choose not to eat something you are depriving yourself. That may be the case for some, but not for all. I have to eat low carb for medical reasons, and though I have to cut out food groups, I do not feel deprived at all. I just find other options that keep me satisfied and still eat good food. Junk food is not the only good food out there. And there are a lot of ways to make junk food with healthier options by preparing it yourself. Not understanding why people who choose to eat healthier and voice that get bashed for it.
Not singling anyone out, just things I have noticed from reading the threads for so long lol don't really know why anyone has to bash anyone's dietary choices, what they choose to do is on them, and if eating some junk once day as opposed to all day like they used to is working for them and helping them stay on track, then what is wrong with that? No one is the same. Some people can stay away from sweets and "bad" foods easier than others. Doesn't make you superior for not eating not so good foods. But I think everything goes back to either you are a completely whole foods clean eater, or you really don't pay attention to those things and eat what you want without worrying about the crap added in. And then there are some in the middle. But when you go one view point strongly against another, obviously there will be debating
0 -
Exactly... so why don't you see as much promotion for a balanced diet as you do for "junk?" If IIFYMers eat chicken breast and veggies a good bit of the time (my guess is most of the time) then why aren't they promoting that as much as they do eating things like pizza? Cause no one wants to high-five over chicken and veggies?
Or...because they want to emphasize that living a healthy life doesn't have to mean deprivation or a fanatical adherence to any particular eating plan.
In other words, it's doable.0 -
I think that most people understand that IIFYM doesn't mean they will be eating donuts and pork rinds to fill their nutrition goals every day.
I think the concept you are talking about is DCA.0 -
why aren't they promoting that as much as they do eating things like pizza? Cause no one wants to high-five over chicken and veggies?
Correct! It's much more fun to talk about the fact that you can still eat cookies or ice cream or poptarts and still lose weight. It's not a new concept to eat plain grilled chicken and steamed veggies to lose weight...it's a given. For people who don't do well with the word "diet" (myself included) it's encouraging to hear and see that you can be successful in your weight loss goals and not be stuck eating nothing but "rabbit food" the rest of your life.0 -
0 -
Except there is no trans fat: http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/nutritionfacts.pdf
It's cooked with a liquid margarine product that has some partially hydrogenated oil in it, so there's some trans fat in the product. Labeling guidelines allow you to list 0g trans fat if it has less than half a gram per serving.
It's insignificant for normal people.0 -
Look at all the diseased feral cats? I have rabid racoons in my neighborhood. When I lived in Idaho, there would be several mule deer dead of starvation over the winter all over the place.0 -
Or...because they want to emphasize that living a healthy life doesn't have to mean deprivation or a fanatical adherence to any particular eating plan.
In other words, it's doable.
Alot of different diets are "doable." I think that the word deprivation is somewhat dramatic, and by trying so hard to avoid the dreaded "clean eating," people end up promoting the dramatic opposite- whether it is intentional or not.0 -
Exactly... so why don't you see as much promotion for a balanced diet as you do for "junk?" If IIFYMers eat chicken breast and veggies a good bit of the time (my guess is most of the time) then why aren't they promoting that as much as they do eating things like pizza? Cause no one wants to high-five over chicken and veggies?
We do see that. I promote that. All those other people promote it too. No one is going into threads where someone asks for how to eat saying "just eat pizza and donuts." Literally no one does that. Yes, some people high five each other over pop tarts and ice cream, because they can. But they're not saying anyone should base their diet around that.
What they're saying by high-fiving over ice cream is "there's nothing inherently wrong with ice cream; enjoy it if you want to and can fit it into your macros."0 -
I never heard of this IIFYM thing. I keep it simple 3 meals 2-3 snacks spaced every few hours keep in my calorie range.0
-
HAHAHA0 -
A rabid squirrel?
Lol.
I've got nothing to add because the OP is ascribing a behavior to IIFYM people that just isn't true for most of us, but I saw this post and laughed.
Squirrel is nice. Do you think it fits into IIFYM?
I have a recipe for squirrel ravioli. It calls for 3 large squirrels. I also have a recipe for squirrely "baby backs". That need 16 squirrel loins.0 -
Alot of different diets are "doable." I think that the word deprivation is somewhat dramatic, and by trying so hard to avoid the dreaded "clean eating," people end up promoting the dramatic opposite- whether it is intentional or not.
"Doable" is a short term word. Yes, Atkins is doable for a few weeks, but then someone goes to a birthday party and frets over having a piece of cake and ends up getting a slice saying "I'm being so BAD!!!" The fact that they feel anything but freaking happy about a piece of cake is pretty much evidence to me that their diet isn't really doable.
On the other hand, I can wake up the morning of the party and have an egg and veggie scramble. And have a banana for a snack. Lunch would be spinach salad with chicken and a small amount of bleu cheese dressing. After which, I would head to the party and enjoy a piece of cake, guilt free. For dinner, I could have a chicken and rice dish, with some roasted veg on the side. Before bed, I might have a small bowl of cereal or some yogurt and fruit.
That's doable. No negative emotion, no fretting, no freaking out. Just eating good food, enjoying a piece of cake and a birthday party and still losing weight. That's why people talk about the cake. To make everyone else see that their fits of being bad/good over food is silly. And honestly, we've all done it or witnessed it before. It's sad and no one should have to feel like that about FOOD.0 -
Im sure you know quite a bit about nutrition considering you said micros and macros are the same.
Lol you make it sound like I cant even lift.
Strong talk from a guy hiding behind bert
ill cut down to 120 and post shirtless pick hold please.0 -
It's cooked with a liquid margarine product that has some partially hydrogenated oil in it, so there's some trans fat in the product. Labeling guidelines allow you to list 0g trans fat if it has less than half a gram per serving.
It's insignificant for normal people.
There are small amounts of naturally occurring trans fats in butter (and most meat) as well. Life is complex enough without freaking about small stuff.0 -
ill cut down to 120 and post shirtless pick hold please.
I am wondering how much you think I weigh0 -
I am wondering how much you think I weight
How long is it?
Lol, you guys are funny with your e-posturing and e-wrestling.
0 -
If It Fits Your Macros. The idea is to set macro goals - typically calories, protein, fat, carbs, fiber - and to eat pretty much whatever you want to achieve those goals every day.
Is that the goal? I don't follow it, but what I've read on MFP that is not the goal, though some misinterpret it that way (which I think is the point of the OP).
The "point" as I understand it (strictly from MFP, as I've never heard of it anywhere else) is that the meeting micronutrients is implied. I think the OP is spot on, that it should be more than implied. It should be emphasized.0 -
Is that the goal? I don't follow it, but what I've read on MFP that is not the goal, though some misinterpret it that way (which I think is the point of the OP).
The "point" as I understand it (strictly from MFP, as I've never heard of it anywhere else) is that the meeting micronutrients is implied. I think the OP is spot on, that it should be more than implied. It should be emphasized.
According to Layne Norton, an incredibly brilliant guy with a PhD in nutrition, if you're hitting appropriate macro goals it's tough not to also have good micro intake. I agree with this. Sure, if you're eating nothing but protein powder and olive oil and sugar and fiber supplements to meet your macro goals you're not going to be doing well.
But, IMO, if you eat like a normal human being and are eating veggies 2-3 times a day, you really have nothing to worry about.0 -
While I used to be a side-miscer. most of them have no knowledge over nutrition and bash broscientists. They dont even realize 90% of them are spreading false information. Most of them dont even read the studies or scholarly journals by the nutritionists they preach. Everytime they step into the nutrition section on the bodybuilding forums they get assraped0 -
I frequently watch the wild animals that roam my backyard. I don't believe any of them have ever captured a fleeing McDonalds cheeseburger or sprinting Snickers bar. They don't seem riddled with disease or cancer and diabetes from eating naturally and are lean and strong. So I personally will choose to continue eating like them, but it is a personal choice.
The sick and diseased animals...of which I can assure you there are many...are killed off fairly quickly by predators.
I, for one, am mostly happy that we as humans do not generally follow the same approach.0 -
According to Layne Norton, an incredibly brilliant guy with a PhD in nutrition, if you're hitting appropriate macro goals it's tough not to also have good micro intake. I agree with this. Sure, if you're eating nothing but protein powder and olive oil and sugar and fiber supplements to meet your macro goals you're not going to be doing well.
But, IMO, if you eat like a normal human being and are eating veggies 2-3 times a day, you really have nothing to worry about.
"and are eating veggies 2-3 times a day"
That is not going to equate to "eat pretty much whatever you want" for many people.0 -
Why worry so much about what other people are doing? And better yet, why do you feel a need to label the way you eat by saying that you "Do IIFYM" or "Paleo" or "clean" or any of that? Just eat what you personally feel like eating and let others do the same. Who cares if someone else isn't eating the way that YOU think they should be eating based on a silly description?
I could say that I also do IIFYM or that I eat 95% "clean" unprocessed foods, blah blah blah... but it's unnecessary and exhausting to try to fit into a box like that. Heaven forbid that I say I eat "clean" and then I decide one day on a whim to have a Coke Zero because I'm really in the mood for one. Oh no! My whole identity is wrapped up in my dietary doctrine and now I'm not longer a true "clean eater"!
I'm being a bit facetious but you see my point; labels are silly, and worrying about OTHER people's dietary labels and whether or not they give something a 'bad name' is just a waste of your energy, don't you think? You didn't invent the term "IIFYM" so I don't see why you have such a personal sense of pride regarding the subject.
YAY, THANK YOU!
:flowerforyou: :flowerforyou: :flowerforyou: 0 -
"and are eating veggies 2-3 times a day"
That is not going to equate to "eat pretty much whatever you want" for many people.
That's why when people ask for diet advice, I specifically advise them to eat veggies and the occasional fruit.0 -
OP.
Here, you'll feel better.
But, but, there is clean food touching the dirty food! Does that make the clean food no longer clean?0 -
-
The sick and diseased animals...of which I can assure you there are many...are killed off fairly quickly by predators.
I, for one, am mostly happy that we as humans do not generally follow the same approach.
There is currently an overpopulation of animals in our area. There are several diseases starting to spread and many of the animals are no longer looking so healthy. Just because they never ate McD or Snickers doesn't make them super healthy. There are plenty of domestic pets that don't eat at those places and are plenty sick as well.0 -
The sick and diseased animals...of which I can assure you there are many...are killed off fairly quickly by predators.
I, for one, am mostly happy that we as humans do not generally follow the same approach.
ETA:
Catching up, I see that someone else already said it better/more thoroughly than I did:Know why? Those critters are dead not long after showing symptoms, not frolicking about. I promise you that wild animals get cancer, have strokes, contract infectious diseases, yadda, yadda. Not a good argument.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395.1K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 446 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions