Article: Clean Eating vs IIFYM (If it Fits your Macros)

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Huh?

Why does eating certain foods magically make calories irrelevant?

ha. I was debating whether to touch this.

because clean eating is MAGIC!

Haha. I knew I spotted a troll.

wow. I just expressed my opinion about clean eating and now I'm a troll. it's pretty sad how unsupportive people are on this site.

And it took you more than 1000 posts to figure that out ?

I didn't read it all, but I disagree with this early statement

What I mean is, the main reason a person chooses to use this stricter “clean” style of eating is because they think that, with all else being equal, there is something superior about it in terms of its effects on body composition (fat loss, muscle growth, preventing fat gain, preventing muscle loss, etc.).

I would guess that far more people who eat clean do it for health, rather than body composition. Some, no doubt, see it as a way to simply eat more volume while losing fat, but I would guess that's just a nice perk for most and not the driving force.

Eh.. I don't think most clean eaters see themselves as somehow superior..i don't think most iifym people are that way either.. the minority yells the loudest though.. I eat clean because of how I feel versus how I feel when I eat unhealthy food. and yes.. i fall off track sometimes and suffer for it. I think if someone is eating clean and hating it, then they shouldn't be eating clean. You're never going to get healthy if you walk around hating life because you are not happy with your diet. That's ultimately why traditional diets fail. If you really think about it.. All diets are based off personal experience and what works for each person. No one is going to walk around following atkins, if they gain weight while on it, unless that is their goal. I don't eat shellfish cause i'm allergic, but i know a ton of people who have an allergy take benedryl and eat it anyway. You can spout off all the scientific facts you want to. Sugar and I don't get along. period. The people I know who eat clean, are not doing it for the "perk" of being able to eat more. We are doing it because we like the taste of the food better, we like the food better and we find personal health benefits from it. Most of the people I know who eat clean struggle to eat enough and are not looking to increase their intake. Does that mean everyone does?? Of course not. It's also nearly impossible to eat 100% clean.

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Huh?

Why does eating certain foods magically make calories irrelevant?

Maybe she's referring to whole foods? I know for me, when I eat whole foods I feel fuller on less calories-a bowl of oats made with water, with a banana and some almonds added in will keep me feeling full for hours, as opposed to the same amount of calories in Doritos, which I could eat the whole bag and still want more lol. I made a stirfry yesterday with brown rice, mushrooms and veggies that filled a dinner plate-kept me full for hours and it was a little over 200 calories.

yes, this is exactly what I meant. I used to eat at mcdonald's for breakfast but it was about 400 calories and I was not that full. now, I eat 2% greek yogurt with splenda every morning for 158 calories and I am much more full. I have similar examples for lunch and dinner. it seems silly to log when I know for a fact I am eating much less than I used to.

You were serious? Damn...

Okay, so these muffins I'm making this morning, they call for 1/2 a cup of coconut oil. That's 'clean' and it's organic even. That doesn't make it any less calorific because it's still OIL.

I'm substituting plain applesauce to cut calories so I can have more than one.

*shakes head at 'clean eating means I don't have to count calories* Dayum. And I was hoping for a clever troll...instead I got the definition of misguided clean eater.

I don't use oil at all. it is too fattening.

Read it yesterday and loved it... Long, but I have had the same opinion since I have experienced both.

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Then how do you know you are in a deficit. If you eat clean or IIFYM you should be counting cals and macro nutrients. Just because you eat clean does not mean you are meeting your fat and protein goals. So I would, even if eating clean, count them.

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Huh?

Why does eating certain foods magically make calories irrelevant?

Maybe she's referring to whole foods? I know for me, when I eat whole foods I feel fuller on less calories-a bowl of oats made with water, with a banana and some almonds added in will keep me feeling full for hours, as opposed to the same amount of calories in Doritos, which I could eat the whole bag and still want more lol. I made a stirfry yesterday with brown rice, mushrooms and veggies that filled a dinner plate-kept me full for hours and it was a little over 200 calories.

yes, this is exactly what I meant. I used to eat at mcdonald's for breakfast but it was about 400 calories and I was not that full. now, I eat 2% greek yogurt with splenda every morning for 158 calories and I am much more full. I have similar examples for lunch and dinner. it seems silly to log when I know for a fact I am eating much less than I used to.

You were serious? Damn...

Okay, so these muffins I'm making this morning, they call for 1/2 a cup of coconut oil. That's 'clean' and it's organic even. That doesn't make it any less calorific because it's still OIL.

I'm substituting plain applesauce to cut calories so I can have more than one.

*shakes head at 'clean eating means I don't have to count calories* Dayum. And I was hoping for a clever troll...instead I got the definition of misguided clean eater.

I don't use oil at all. it is too fattening.

Thanks for the good read. I eat clean-ish to hit my protein and fat macros and I can fill in the rest of my daily calories with whatever looks good at the time. But I look at that as really just eating normally, you know? A nice homemade meal of meat and veg (with real butter - YUMMY!!) and a little dessert. Anyone remember those days?

I didn't read it all, but I disagree with this early statement

What I mean is, the main reason a person chooses to use this stricter “clean” style of eating is because they think that, with all else being equal, there is something superior about it in terms of its effects on body composition (fat loss, muscle growth, preventing fat gain, preventing muscle loss, etc.).

I would guess that far more people who eat clean do it for health, rather than body composition. Some, no doubt, see it as a way to simply eat more volume while losing fat, but I would guess that's just a nice perk for most and not the driving force.

I would recommend then you read it all before doing your typical knee jerk response without all the information

Actually, I just did. I still disagree with the statement.

Yes, all the people that join my fitness pal start gluten free, paleo, low carb, clean eating diets for health. No desire to lose weight. Your guess is pretty much that. A guess. And the claims for eating clean 100% of the time versus 80 or 90 percent of the time for health, would also be a guess. No basis in fact.

No, that's not at all what I said or suggested. And I wasn't just talking about people on MFP.

I didn't read it all, but I disagree with this early statement

What I mean is, the main reason a person chooses to use this stricter “clean” style of eating is because they think that, with all else being equal, there is something superior about it in terms of its effects on body composition (fat loss, muscle growth, preventing fat gain, preventing muscle loss, etc.).

I would guess that far more people who eat clean do it for health, rather than body composition. Some, no doubt, see it as a way to simply eat more volume while losing fat, but I would guess that's just a nice perk for most and not the driving force.

Eh.. I don't think most clean eaters see themselves as somehow superior..i don't think most iifym people are that way either.. the minority yells the loudest though.. I eat clean because of how I feel versus how I feel when I eat unhealthy food. and yes.. i fall off track sometimes and suffer for it. I think if someone is eating clean and hating it, then they shouldn't be eating clean. You're never going to get healthy if you walk around hating life because you are not happy with your diet. That's ultimately why traditional diets fail. If you really think about it.. All diets are based off personal experience and what works for each person. No one is going to walk around following atkins, if they gain weight while on it, unless that is their goal. I don't eat shellfish cause i'm allergic, but i know a ton of people who have an allergy take benedryl and eat it anyway. You can spout off all the scientific facts you want to. Sugar and I don't get along. The people I know who eat clean, are not doing it for the "perk" of being able to eat more. We are doing it because we like the taste of the food better, we like the food better and we find personal health benefits from it. Most of the people I know who eat clean struggle to eat enough and are not looking to increase their intake. Does that mean everyone does?? Of course not. It's also nearly impossible to eat 100% clean.

I wasn't suggesting either group saw themselves as superior. I'm sure there are individuals from both sides of the fence that do, but it has nothing to do with my post. I just think more people choose to eat clean for reasons that have nothing to do with body composition. Outside of MFP, I'd imagine it usually doesn't even have to do with weight at all. I think it has to do with a person thinking eating less "junk" (whatever that may mean to them) is healthier.

And where in the article did the author state anything to the contrary or state that eating high quality foods should be discouraged?

What??? He didn't. I have no idea what you are talking about.

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Huh?

Why does eating certain foods magically make calories irrelevant?

I'll play. I have found when the big majority of my food intake is whole foods, fruits, veggies, nuts, meat, chicken, etc, I get full and stay full long before I over eat. Therefore I stopped counting with no negative effects. I also dont bother to count calories even when I do splurge on occasion because I know the majority of the rest of what I eat allows me to do so.

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Huh?

Why does eating certain foods magically make calories irrelevant?

I'll play. I have found when the big majority of my food intake is whole foods, fruits, veggies, nuts, meat, chicken, etc, I get full and stay full long before I over eat. Therefore I stopped counting with no negative effects. I also dont bother to count calories even when I do splurge on occasion because I know the majority of the rest of what I eat allows me to do so.

Then you're one of the lucky few who can just eat intuitively. That is not the case for many people who are trying to lose weight. I just meant to highlight that no matter what you're eating, calories matter. You can eat 100% clean, but if you're eating in surplus, you will gain.

Read this yesterday and really enjoyed it...

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

My guess is that you didn't read the article since this misconception is stated pretty early on...

it doesn't apply to me. I stay away from calorie dense foods such as oil. I mentioned this earlier.

I eat clean so I don't have to count calories. Sure it takes more time to prepare everything from scratch, but not having to log makes up for the difference IMO.

Huh?

Why does eating certain foods magically make calories irrelevant?

I'll play. I have found when the big majority of my food intake is whole foods, fruits, veggies, nuts, meat, chicken, etc, I get full and stay full long before I over eat. Therefore I stopped counting with no negative effects. I also dont bother to count calories even when I do splurge on occasion because I know the majority of the rest of what I eat allows me to do so.

and are you maintaining or losing?

See for me I don't eat clean but I eat fruit, veggies, meat etc and

I get full on this for Breakfast and wow look at that I am hungry at lunch....so another probably 300-400 calories for lunch, then supper...

2egg whites, 2 whole eggs, 30g cheese, 100g chicken and 1c milk (this mornings breakfast) that is almost 700 calories...that leaves me with 900-1100 today...but I am trying to lose...and that gave me lots of protien so I will count the rest of the day and at the end of it if I have calories left I will have maybe chocolate or ice cream or AMG even chester cheetos cheese popcorn and still lose weight. IIFYM

As for the whole greek yogurt with splenda keeping you fuller then MacDonalds breakfast...yup if you are eating a whole huge container of it and you were eating a muffin before sure but otherwise...psh.

I didn't read it all, but I disagree with this early statement

What I mean is, the main reason a person chooses to use this stricter “clean” style of eating is because they think that, with all else being equal, there is something superior about it in terms of its effects on body composition (fat loss, muscle growth, preventing fat gain, preventing muscle loss, etc.).

I would guess that far more people who eat clean do it for health, rather than body composition. Some, no doubt, see it as a way to simply eat more volume while losing fat, but I would guess that's just a nice perk for most and not the driving force.

I would recommend then you read it all before doing your typical knee jerk response without all the information

Actually, I just did. I still disagree with the statement.

Color me surprised.

Even in your rebuttal, you're saying they likely do it for health. If that's the reason I suspect they still think there are superior health benefits to eating clean versus following IIFYM. So, superiority is still a factor.

This is in contrast to IIFYMers who follow that "philosophy" simply because they want to continue eating things they love.

This is a generalization for both approaches, of course. But I can't account for the opinion of every single person.

I'm not really sure what your point is in regards to my post, but if you want to think one group thinks they are superior, then that is certainly your prerogative. It has nothing at all to do with my post anyway.