IIFYM? Opinions?

Options
2»

Replies

  • skullshank
    skullshank Posts: 4,324 Member
    edited December 2014
    Options
    Chief_Rocka wrote: »
    I only eat things that don't fit my macros

    IIDFYM

    chuck-norris-thumbs-up-dodgeball-gif.gif


    OP, calories in/calories out. clean, dirty, shiny, slutty....you can lose regardless.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    chrissoares77 wrote: »
    I have ate "Clean" at one point then I have accidently tried IIFYM. Saw Gains in both areas. Curious of what everyone thinks.

    how do you 'accidently' do IIFYM?
  • JenAndSome
    JenAndSome Posts: 1,908 Member
    Options
    I don't understand all of this "clean eating." I wash my hands before I eat, does that count? I think some people way over-think food.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    IIFYM isn't a diet, it's a concept...IIFYM can be applied to "clean eating", Paleo, Adkins, whatever...it's a concept for which you focus on hitting your macros as well as your calorie goals.

    The concept originated in the fitness industry...more specifically, the body building industry rather than the diet industry. The concept, by and large, revolves around macro targets optimal to fitness performance. As such the "Y" (Your) in IIFYM is pretty important and largely dependent on fitness goals and a little trial and error as to what is going to optimize your performance.

    Contrary to popular belief, IIFYM doesn't mean eat anything you want...If you're truly applying the concept as intended, you're going to be eating a pretty highly nutritious diet in order to hit your optimal macro targets...you're not going to hit any kind of reasonable macro target eating nothing but cookies and ice cream...but you can generally have a bit of that kind of stuff as part of an otherwise nutritious and balanced diet.
  • Ferrous_Female_Dog
    Ferrous_Female_Dog Posts: 221 Member
    Options
    In for over-complicating things!
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    Options
    jacksonpt wrote: »
    Both can work if you stay within your calorie/macro goals. Both can fail if you don't.

    It's just a matter of preference. And they are not mutually exclusive... it doesn't have to be either/or.

    I am following CICO to lose weight. I use IIFYM to determine how I am going to distribute the "calories in" part of the equation. I eat "clean" because I wash everything before eating (well, not the bread because that would get too soggy).

    58841349.png
  • QuiznatoddBidness
    QuiznatoddBidness Posts: 603 Member
    Options
    Acg67 wrote: »
    chrissoares77 wrote: »
    I have ate "Clean" at one point then I have accidently tried IIFYM. Saw Gains in both areas. Curious of what everyone thinks.

    You can eat clean and follow iifym at the same time , mind blown

    ^^^ sorta this, though I don't really know what "eating clean" means (hate the stupid fads and cliches).

    True statement: you can eat _________ and follow IIYFM at the same time. Fill in the blank with whatever you want: clean, gluten-free, cookies, pizza, vegan, paleo, low carb, fast food, liquified meals, high fat, weight watchers meals, etc, etc, etc. As long as you ACTUALLY FIT WITHIN YOUR MACROS, the thing you put in the blank is irrelevant.

    BTW, how can someone *accidentally* try IIFYM??? That's seems about as likely as accidentally cooking a pan of baklava or accidentally dressing as Tinkerbell for work.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    edited December 2014
    Options
    earlnabby wrote: »
    jacksonpt wrote: »
    Both can work if you stay within your calorie/macro goals. Both can fail if you don't.

    It's just a matter of preference. And they are not mutually exclusive... it doesn't have to be either/or.

    I am following CICO to lose weight. I use IIFYM to determine how I am going to distribute the "calories in" part of the equation. I eat "clean" because I wash everything before eating (well, not the bread because that would get too soggy).

    Sounds like you get it!
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    Options
    jacksonpt wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    jacksonpt wrote: »
    Both can work if you stay within your calorie/macro goals. Both can fail if you don't.

    It's just a matter of preference. And they are not mutually exclusive... it doesn't have to be either/or.

    I am following CICO to lose weight. I use IIFYM to determine how I am going to distribute the "calories in" part of the equation. I eat "clean" because I wash everything before eating (well, not the bread because that would get too soggy).

    Sounds like you get it!

    Thanks. It's not rocket science, just common sense. I want the most bang for my calorie buck so I generally eat the most nutrient dense food I can and have treats when my daily log tells me I have extras to play around with.

  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Options
    You said you had gains with both. Are you trying to gain or lose? If you're gaining while trying to lose, you are eating too much no matter what method you go with. As previously mentioned, calculate your TDEE and eat at a deficit.

    If you're trying to gain and you gained with both ways of eating, just eat whatever plan was easier to follow. And I suggest focus on your macros in general, and then fill in with whatever foods you want (whether they are clean or not is just personal preference).
  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    Options
    PikaKnight wrote: »
    Kalikel wrote: »
    I don't do the IIFYM thing, but many people swear by it. Some say that it's really a healthy program with a little junk allowed. Others report eating junk food all day, every day. I really don't know what the deal is, but if you like it and it's working for you, why not? :)

    A link to what is IIFYM. There is also a website that goes into detail about what IIFYM is (iifym.com).

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/817188/iifym/p1

    I really like IIFYM but I REALLY hate iifym.com. People google it and find that and think it's the only way to do IIFYM but really it works on macro percentages when minimums are generally better and it recommends pretty high protein. It just some guy who took a commonly used, loosely defined acronym and was smart enough to buy the domain name. He didn't come up with it at all.
  • NoelFigart1
    NoelFigart1 Posts: 1,276 Member
    Options
    I think it is a good way to get a more balanced diet while giving you some leeway for Life happening. The principles are fine.

    At the end of the day, I'm more concerned with calorie consumption and trying to make sure most of my diet is centered around meat and produce instead of processed foods (including grains). But different things work for different people.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited December 2014
    Options
    I wouldn't say that I "do" IIFYM, but I have found that focusing on getting enough (based on my goals) protein makes it easy to structure my meals and tends to make me feel more satisfied than if I were focused on calories or nutrient-density alone. (If I eat enough protein my fats and carbs seem to fall in an acceptable range without effort.) Part of this is that "eat nutrient dense food" really doesn't mean much outside of a broader context. I mean, broccoli is nutrient dense, but is it more nutrient dense than, say, chicken? If you thought so, you could quite easily be eating a very unbalanced diet, and the focus on macros is a casual way of forcing some sort of balance (based on whatever you decide makes sense for you).

    I despise the term "eating clean," but I also try to eat mostly (and a wide variety of) nutrient dense foods and cook and all that, because I prefer eating that way and think it's healthy for me. The two concepts to me (balancing macros, eating healthy) seem to go hand and hand.

    That said, I'm not currently focused on building muscle, as I'm still losing.

Categories