IIFYM vs Carb Cycling

2456

Replies

  • This content has been removed.
  • EvanKeel
    EvanKeel Posts: 1,903 Member
    You have no evidence that sugar causes weight gain in a caloric deficit.

    Never said it didn't short term, but if you develop diabetes you will have more difficulty losing weight. Every serving of refined sugar you eat contributes to diabetes risk. I don't know why you keep turning this into a short term, non-diabetic discussion because I never disagreed with that.

    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/10/5/563.full.pdf

    The only possible reason we would be talking about diabetes at all is because you keep claiming that sugar intake contributes to it (let's not forget your complete lack of context there). And the main findings of the study say nothing about that. Why did you bother posting it?

    There is no compelling reason why someone who isn't diabetic should care if losing weight is harder for people who are diabetic. And it looks like the study is actually blaming a lack of caloric restriction, which has more to do with eating behavior outside of a IIFYM program than anything else...which isn't what we're talking about.
  • dieselbyte
    dieselbyte Posts: 733 Member
    You have no evidence that sugar causes weight gain in a caloric deficit.

    Never said it didn't short term, but if you develop diabetes you will have more difficulty losing weight. Every serving of refined sugar you eat contributes to diabetes risk. I don't know why you keep turning this into a short term, non-diabetic discussion because I never disagreed with that.

    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/10/5/563.full.pdf

    Sugar does not matter in the short term but it does in the long term. Increasing refined sugar intake (again distinguishing from natural) is associated with increased risk of diabetes. Diabetes impacts energy utilization and weight loss as well as being tightly correlated with obesity.

    Do you disagree eating refined sugar increases your risk of developing diabetes?

    Do you disagree that diabetes impacts energy utilization and weight loss?

    I fail to see what you are arguing for/against. In one post you state that sugar increases your risk of becoming overweight and developing diabetes. Yet in your latest post, you link an article stating that the make-up of diet didn't matter to weight loss, but that caloric deficit was the key - even in diabetic individuals! What are you trying to state?

    The fact is, not one study has proven that refined sugar by itself causes weight gain. Calories determine weight gain/loss. In healthy individuals following a strict caloric or macro intake such as IIFYM, where is the evidence that refined sugar alone will lead to weight gain.

    Diabetes risk factors include many things, the MOST important being weight and inactivity. Sugar itself doesn't increase fatty tissue, which is a contributing factor to insulin resistance. Eat more, burn less, increase fatty tissue = risk for insulin resistance. But using your train of thought (again, I'm not sure where you are going with your posts), one can argue that 100% of individuals that drink water will die - so stay away from water.

    Causation vs correlation my friend...
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    I mean I don't think you could hit your macros, and not have a well balanced diet....just wouldn't be possible.

    What's to stop you from doing an 80/10/10 diet and eating hard candy and fried chicken to hit your macros?

    I mean every single bad food has a macronutrient ratio. I could pick the macronutrient ratio of a burrito supreme and eat that all day. Or the macronutrient ratio of a burger, fries, and sugary soda and eat that all day.

    If you choose to eat clean then yes IIFYM is fine, but IIFYM isn't based on clean eating.

    I think you have a skewed view of the of IIFYM. Even those who coined the term IIFYM suggest eating a diet heavily based on whole, nutrient dense foods; while filling in the remaining calories and macros with any other foods.
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    You have no evidence that sugar causes weight gain in a caloric deficit.

    Never said it didn't short term, but if you develop diabetes you will have more difficulty losing weight. Every serving of refined sugar you eat contributes to diabetes risk. I don't know why you keep turning this into a short term, non-diabetic discussion because I never disagreed with that.

    http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/10/5/563.full.pdf

    Sugar does not matter in the short term but it does in the long term. Increasing refined sugar intake (again distinguishing from natural) is associated with increased risk of diabetes. Diabetes impacts energy utilization and weight loss as well as being tightly correlated with obesity.

    Do you disagree eating refined sugar increases your risk of developing diabetes?

    Do you disagree that diabetes impacts energy utilization and weight loss?

    I fail to see what you are arguing for/against. In one post you state that sugar increases your risk of becoming overweight and developing diabetes. Yet in your latest post, you link an article stating that the make-up of diet didn't matter to weight loss, but that caloric deficit was the key - even in diabetic individuals! What are you trying to state?

    The fact is, not one study has proven that refined sugar by itself causes weight gain. Calories determine weight gain/loss. In healthy individuals following a strict caloric or macro intake such as IIFYM, where is the evidence that refined sugar alone will lead to weight gain.

    Diabetes risk factors include many things, the MOST important being weight and inactivity. Sugar itself doesn't increase fatty tissue, which is a contributing factor to insulin resistance. Eat more, burn less, increase fatty tissue = risk for insulin resistance. But using your train of thought (again, I'm not sure where you are going with your posts), one can argue that 100% of individuals that drink water will die - so stay away from water.

    Causation vs correlation my friend...

    Also, ^ x2.
  • MityMax96
    MityMax96 Posts: 5,778 Member
    Anyone eating clean (and clean is subjective as well) 90% of the time is doing great, but IIFYM allows you to eat dirty 100% of the time.

    Anyone who practices IIFYM will tell you it's nearly impossible to hit your macros eating 'dirty' all the time. You really have to keep a pretty clean diet to do it right, especially when running a deficit.

    It's actually really easy to eat dirty and hit your macros. What makes you think it's hard? I can eat sugar based foods for carbs, fried foods for fats and proteins. Give me any macronutrient ratio and I can give you a realistic dirty meal that satisfies it.

    2500 calories
    200 gr of protein
    80 gr of fat
    25 - 35 gr of fiber
    Remaining calories can be in carbs.

    Curious to see what you come up with.
  • This content has been removed.
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    I think you have a skewed view of the of IIFYM. Even those who coined the term IIFYM suggest eating a diet heavily based on whole, nutrient dense foods; while filling in the remaining calories and macros with any other foods.

    I agree that many implementations of IIFYM recommend clean eating, but it's not called IIFYMAICESOTTUYHD (And Is Clean Except Some Of The Time Unless You Have Diabetes).

    It's the same argument I have with vegan and vegetarian diets - they do not equal healthy. You can fill up those diets with loads of soy, oils, and sugars too. It's all about the implementation.

    One of the worst cases is with Atkin's because people misinterpret Atkins as a ketogenic diet. Only the induction phase is a ketogenic diet which is 2 weeks or something and you're meant to work back in carbohydrates. It's just many people have the wrong impression of what it is supposed to be.

    I personally think IIFYM is a dangerous concept because your average Joe might look at this and think I can still have my candy bars and loose weight - great! Meanwhile they're prediabetic with other chronic conditions and not eating the micronutrients and foods to help regain their health.

    Yet, it's better to create disordered eating patterns by demonizing certain foods.

    Eating "dirty foods" is bad if it is in moderation?
  • waldo56
    waldo56 Posts: 1,861 Member
    I personally think IIFYM is a dangerous concept because your average Joe might look at this and think I can still have my candy bars and loose weight - great! Meanwhile they're prediabetic with other chronic conditions and not eating the micronutrients and foods to help regain their health.

    Oh given me a break. You understand IIFYM so poorly you should just stop posting. It doesn't matter what the trees look like when the forest is perfect.

    True micronutrient deficiencies are rare in western society.

    What is a dangerous concept is classifying foods as good or bad, right or wrong. That can be taken too far in multiple ways; its a big time contributer to binge eating disorder and pretty much is orthorexia.

    The only way you can get your strawman "dirty" diet that you are mentally doing battle with is to heavily subsidize with protein shakes. There is no other way to hit usual IIFYM protein levels and still eat "dirty".
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    I personally think IIFYM is a dangerous concept because your average Joe might look at this and think I can still have my candy bars and loose weight - great! Meanwhile they're prediabetic with other chronic conditions and not eating the micronutrients and foods to help regain their health.

    Oh given me a break. You understand IIFYM so poorly you should just stop posting. It doesn't matter what the trees look like when the forest is perfect.

    True micronutrient deficiencies are rare in western society.

    What is a dangerous concept is classifying foods as good or bad, right or wrong. That can be taken too far in multiple ways; its a big time contributer to binge eating disorder and pretty much is orthorexia.

    But... if he didn't position himself in such a fashion he wouldn't be able to passively redirect people to buy his book on amazon.com ;)
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    In for reading the stupidity.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • MityMax96
    MityMax96 Posts: 5,778 Member
    2500 calories
    200 gr of protein
    80 gr of fat
    25 - 35 gr of fiber
    Remaining calories can be in carbs.

    Curious to see what you come up with.

    4 Taco Bell Supreme Beef Burritos, 5 scoops of whey protein, and a glass of OJ would get you:
    2557 calories
    248 gr of carbs
    200 gr of protein
    85 gr of fat
    32 gr of fiber


    :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

    5 scoops of whey?
    Which brand?
    What is the nutritional make up?

    I dont see that as dirty....

    I don't see anything u listed as dirty.....

    I was expecting u to come back with a menu of nothing but food from the candy aisle in the store....and you come back with the above.....and that is dirty??

    You are such a joke
  • EvanKeel
    EvanKeel Posts: 1,903 Member
    2500 calories
    200 gr of protein
    80 gr of fat
    25 - 35 gr of fiber
    Remaining calories can be in carbs.

    Curious to see what you come up with.

    4 Taco Bell Supreme Beef Burritos, 5 scoops of whey protein, and a glass of OJ would get you:
    2557 calories
    248 gr of carbs
    200 gr of protein
    85 gr of fat
    32 gr of fiber

    And based on your previous statements, you should probably also explain any nutritional deficiencies there.
  • MityMax96
    MityMax96 Posts: 5,778 Member
    I am not one given to be rude on these boards....
    But damn I have to say you are a f***ing idiot......

    I really cannot believe you are spouting the stuff you spout, and then come back and produce a diary like that, and say that, those listed foods are "dirty"
  • EvanKeel
    EvanKeel Posts: 1,903 Member


    And science has proven that sugar consumption is causal.

    Via what mechanism? If you're tempted to type the word insulin, I can re-paste a link for you...
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    But... if he didn't position himself in such a fashion he wouldn't be able to passively redirect people to buy his book on amazon.com ;)

    Hey now. I've got 3 books on amazon and I haven't mentioned them in this thread.

    You also refer to yourself as a "dietary expert". I'd say about as much as an expert as Dr. Oz.
  • TKhamvongsa
    TKhamvongsa Posts: 287
    In for the entertainment.
  • MityMax96
    MityMax96 Posts: 5,778 Member
    In for the entertainment.

    plenty of it here for you darling
  • DPruneda17
    DPruneda17 Posts: 124 Member
    So, I've been reading mainly because I'm curious. I'm here to learn! So, who tells you what your 'macros' are? I have changed my calories so many times, trying to figure out what it's suppose to be (am I eating too little or too much??), and also changing my percent of protein/carbs/fat. I'm so confused! I would love for someone to tell me exactly what my targets should be. How in the world are we suppose to know??? :huh:
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Bad sugar, BAD!



    :laugh:
  • MityMax96
    MityMax96 Posts: 5,778 Member
    So, I've been reading mainly because I'm curious. I'm here to learn! So, who tells you what your 'macros' are? I have changed my calories so many times, trying to figure out what it's suppose to be (am I eating too little or too much??), and also changing my percent of protein/carbs/fat. I'm so confused! I would love for someone to tell me exactly what my targets should be. How in the world are we suppose to know??? :huh:

    You can use a site like iifym.com
    plug in your numbers on their caluclator

    My rule of thumb
    0.4 gr of fat / pound of body weight
    0.8 - 1.0 gr of protein / pound of body weight, I round off to at least 1.0 gr, just easier for me
    and carbs can make up the remainder of your calories for what u need.....they are non-essential, so they can be used as a way to lower or raise your daily calories.
  • EvanKeel
    EvanKeel Posts: 1,903 Member
    So, I've been reading mainly because I'm curious. I'm here to learn! So, who tells you what your 'macros' are? I have changed my calories so many times, trying to figure out what it's suppose to be (am I eating too little or too much??), and also changing my percent of protein/carbs/fat. I'm so confused! I would love for someone to tell me exactly what my targets should be. How in the world are we suppose to know??? :huh:

    For most people, it's determined by:

    -goals
    -activity
    -preference

    If your goal is to retain muscle mass while in a deficit, adequate protein is important. Usually people will recommend 1g protein per 1lb of LBM. Fat is also important for just everyday function, but it can also help with satiety. Carbs can help with performance if you enjoy intense workouts.

    I try for around 165g protein, 80g fat, 200g carbs. Your mileage will vary.
  • NRBreit
    NRBreit Posts: 319 Member
    2500 calories
    200 gr of protein
    80 gr of fat
    25 - 35 gr of fiber
    Remaining calories can be in carbs.

    Curious to see what you come up with.

    4 Taco Bell Supreme Beef Burritos, 5 scoops of whey protein, and a glass of OJ would get you:
    2557 calories
    248 gr of carbs
    200 gr of protein
    85 gr of fat
    32 gr of fiber


    Here's another (my current cutting diet):

    2000 cals
    180 protein
    150 carbs (50% complex)
    78 fat
    25g fiber
    No whey shakes

    I can usually fit in 1/2-1 cup of ice cream in these numbers when I want to.

    Let's see a 100% dirty diet using these macros and whole foods only and I'll let you know if it's something I would consider eating.
  • This content has been removed.
  • TKhamvongsa
    TKhamvongsa Posts: 287
    In for the entertainment.

    plenty of it here for you darling

    LOL 3 books on Amazon and he doesn't have his facts right. I feel sorry for whoever purchased them. And 5 scoops of whey protein?! Who would do that? Most flexible dieters would rather have chicken, steak, shrimp of fish over protein powder.. It's all about balance.

    That's like saying I could fill up my carbs with candy, fats with spoonfuls of mayo/butter and just have protein powder to hit all my macros.
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    You also refer to yourself as a "dietary expert". I'd say about as much as an expert as Dr. Oz.

    Not dietary expert, dieting expert. I've fasted for a week, gone without salt, seasonings, and sugar for 6 months, I'm a competitive eater so I can take down 5+ lbs of beef in a setting or 5,000+ calories of whole plant foods in a day. I can do any diet for any length of time. Right now I'm on an experiment where I'm gorging on 6 lbs of raw beef in 12 - 16 hours then fasting for 48 - 72 hours.

    Nice. I wouldn't say that makes you an expert on dieting. An expert on being curious perhaps.
  • MityMax96
    MityMax96 Posts: 5,778 Member
    In for the entertainment.

    plenty of it here for you darling

    LOL 3 books on Amazon and he doesn't have his facts right. I feel sorry for whoever purchased them. And 5 scoops of whey protein?! Who would do that? Most flexible dieters would rather have chicken, steak, shrimp of fish over protein powder.. It's all about balance.

    That's like saying I could fill up my carbs with candy, fats with spoonfuls of mayo/butter and just have protein powder to hit all my macros.

    Yeah, kinda what we have been saying....but he doesn't want to believe us.

    Apparently IIFYM is the spawn of the Dark Lord himself.