IIFYM Questions
Replies
-
katherinemfries wrote: »Suggested on the IIFYM site, 221C 70P 35F
I would bump up the protein a bit, it should be 1g per lb of lean body mass. So if you know your bf% subtract it from your weight and that should be you protein intake.0 -
That sounds a bit more doable!katherinemfries wrote: »Lol I think I found the problem, I had put 52 percent body fat instead of 25.... That explains the low cals. Now it's saying 1700 cals 230C 92P 46F
0 -
killakyle420 wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Suggested on the IIFYM site, 221C 70P 35F
I would bump up the protein a bit, it should be 1g per lb of lean body mass. So if you know your bf% subtract it from your weight and that should be you protein intake.
Thank you thank you thank you!! Finally someone who can explain simply how to calculate LBM
I've asked a few times on here, and never received a concise answer. 0 -
Your 'fat mass' is your BF% x your weight. Your LBM is your weight - your fat mass. You could also calculate LBM as (1-BF%) x weight.christinev297 wrote: »killakyle420 wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Suggested on the IIFYM site, 221C 70P 35F
I would bump up the protein a bit, it should be 1g per lb of lean body mass. So if you know your bf% subtract it from your weight and that should be you protein intake.
Thank you thank you thank you!! Finally someone who can explain simply how to calculate LBM I've asked a few times on here, and never received a concise answer.
0 -
Thanks for all the help yall. I was already loving flexible dieting before I knew I had so much more room to play!0
-
Yeah.... No idea what you just said lol The previous poster was much easier to understandsgthaggard wrote: »
Your 'fat mass' is your BF% x your weight. Your LBM is your weight - your fat mass. You could also calculate LBM as (1-BF%) x weight.christinev297 wrote: »killakyle420 wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Suggested on the IIFYM site, 221C 70P 35F
I would bump up the protein a bit, it should be 1g per lb of lean body mass. So if you know your bf% subtract it from your weight and that should be you protein intake.
Thank you thank you thank you!! Finally someone who can explain simply how to calculate LBM I've asked a few times on here, and never received a concise answer.
0 -
christinev297 wrote: »killakyle420 wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Suggested on the IIFYM site, 221C 70P 35F
I would bump up the protein a bit, it should be 1g per lb of lean body mass. So if you know your bf% subtract it from your weight and that should be you protein intake.
Thank you thank you thank you!! Finally someone who can explain simply how to calculate LBM I've asked a few times on here, and never received a concise answer.
Your welcome!0 -
Well, you could go with that, but you will only get your lean mass by subtracting your BF% from your weight if you weighed 100 lbs.christinev297 wrote: »
Yeah.... No idea what you just said lol The previous poster was much easier to understandsgthaggard wrote: »
Your 'fat mass' is your BF% x your weight. Your LBM is your weight - your fat mass. You could also calculate LBM as (1-BF%) x weight.christinev297 wrote: »killakyle420 wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Suggested on the IIFYM site, 221C 70P 35F
I would bump up the protein a bit, it should be 1g per lb of lean body mass. So if you know your bf% subtract it from your weight and that should be you protein intake.
Thank you thank you thank you!! Finally someone who can explain simply how to calculate LBM I've asked a few times on here, and never received a concise answer..
0 -
Going by some guidelines I gathered while researching my own macro calculations, if I were you, at this weight, my starting caloric goal and macros would be:
156x10= 1560 cal
P= 0.8x156= 125 gr
F= 0.4x156= 62 gr
C= 1560- 1058= 502/4= 125 gr
I would go by these numbers for a month or two and then evaluate my progress.
As I stated at the top, this is "if I were you".0 -
katherinemfries wrote: »So went back to the IIFYM website and did the calculator.
Regarding the IIFYM calculator - After plugging in your stats and finding out your macros, please, please, please, read the last section "Your IIFYM Macro Calculator Results." There are some very important "rules" to adhere to. I think the most important rule is "you should eat the exact amount of fat, carbs, protein and fiber listed in the IIFYM Macro Calculator every day, regardless if you exercise or not." Again, please read the entire section and cut and paste the text somewhere so you can read it whenever you wonder if the program is working for you.
The best is yet to come.0 -
I see a lot of over complication here. First, calculators all mostly suck. The IIFYM one particularly sucks. Don't put tons of faith into it. It gives you a fine enough starting point but you are going to have to alter your numbers based on results. All too often people use a calculator, don't lose weight, and don't know what went wrong. I would take an even simpler method of determining macros. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 10. That number is your calories. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 0.7, that's your grams of protein. Take your weigh in lbs, multiply by 0.3, that's your fats in grams. That give you (rounding your weight to 150) 1500 calories, 105 protein, 45 fat. Those are your minimums. You must hit 105 protein and 45 fat each day while staying at 1500 calories. Carbs are flexible. If you hit exactly your minimums on protein and fat, you would have 169 carbs. You don't have to have that many carbs though, you can have extra protein of fat if you want. This allows for flexibility. That's the whole idea when you do IIFYM. Before it was called by the acronym is was simply called flexible dieting. Trying to hit all 3 macro goals every day isn't flexible, it's also not important for results. This is the worst thing that came with the acronym. For some reason people got it in their heads that they needed to hit all 3 numbers every day. That isn't flexible and that is never how flexible dieting was supposed to work. Just hit your protein and fat minimums, then use extra calories however you see fit.
Adjust your total calories per day based on your actual results. Not losing fast enough or at all? Reduce them. Trial and error is better then the calculators 100% of the time.0 -
deniztuzu2 wrote: »Going by some guidelines I gathered while researching my own macro calculations, if I were you, at this weight, my starting caloric goal and macros would be:
156x10= 1560 cal
P= 0.8x156= 125 gr
F= 0.4x156= 62 gr
C= 1560- 1058= 502/4= 125 gr
I would go by these numbers for a month or two and then evaluate my progress.
As I stated at the top, this is "if I were you".
These are the numbers I would use if I were you. Your fat is too low.0 -
I don't agree that 1500 is a good place to start given that she's been burning 400-450 calories a day in cardio.I see a lot of over complication here. First, calculators all mostly suck. The IIFYM one particularly sucks. Don't put tons of faith into it. It gives you a fine enough starting point but you are going to have to alter your numbers based on results. All too often people use a calculator, don't lose weight, and don't know what went wrong. I would take an even simpler method of determining macros. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 10. That number is your calories. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 0.7, that's your grams of protein. Take your weigh in lbs, multiply by 0.3, that's your fats in grams. That give you (rounding your weight to 150) 1500 calories, 105 protein, 45 fat. Those are your minimums. You must hit 105 protein and 45 fat each day while staying at 1500 calories. Carbs are flexible. If you hit exactly your minimums on protein and fat, you would have 169 carbs. You don't have to have that many carbs though, you can have extra protein of fat if you want. This allows for flexibility. That's the whole idea when you do IIFYM. Before it was called by the acronym is was simply called flexible dieting. Trying to hit all 3 macro goals every day isn't flexible, it's also not important for results. This is the worst thing that came with the acronym. For some reason people got it in their heads that they needed to hit all 3 numbers every day. That isn't flexible and that is never how flexible dieting was supposed to work. Just hit your protein and fat minimums, then use extra calories however you see fit.
Adjust your total calories per day based on your actual results. Not losing fast enough or at all? Reduce them. Trial and error is better then the calculators 100% of the time.
0 -
This is an example of where people confuse IIFYM (the flexible dieting philosophy) with the IIFYM website, two very different things......
"you should eat the exact amount of fat, carbs, protein and fiber listed in the IIFYM Macro Calculator every day"
(Not having a dig a the person who posted this, I'm having a dig at the IIFYM website.)
0 -
katherinemfries wrote: »I'm 5'5 and weigh 156 currently, I want to get down to 130. I do a little bit of lifting but nothing really serious, would like to get more into it but I get weight room anxiety and kinda end up wandering around unsure of what to do haha. So right now it's just dumb bells at home lol
What I got for you (I didnt select bf section) ->
Assumed you were a couch potato/have desk job
BMR: 1460
TDEE: 1752
-15% TDEE: 1489
1g per lb protein -> 156g protein
54g fat
93g carb
If you exercise (cardio (30 minutes) and weight training (hour)) 3x a week
BMR: 1460
TDEE: 2007
-15% TDEE: 1706
1g per lb protein -> 156g protein
54g fat
148g carb
My diary is open if you want to see what that looks like (in a higher calorie form). Only look at Sunday and Today though. I was eating randomly before then experimenting.0 -
I see a lot of over complication here. First, calculators all mostly suck. The IIFYM one particularly sucks. Don't put tons of faith into it. It gives you a fine enough starting point but you are going to have to alter your numbers based on results. All too often people use a calculator, don't lose weight, and don't know what went wrong. I would take an even simpler method of determining macros. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 10. That number is your calories. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 0.7, that's your grams of protein. Take your weigh in lbs, multiply by 0.3, that's your fats in grams. That give you (rounding your weight to 150) 1500 calories, 105 protein, 45 fat. Those are your minimums. You must hit 105 protein and 45 fat each day while staying at 1500 calories. Carbs are flexible. If you hit exactly your minimums on protein and fat, you would have 169 carbs. You don't have to have that many carbs though, you can have extra protein of fat if you want. This allows for flexibility. That's the whole idea when you do IIFYM. Before it was called by the acronym is was simply called flexible dieting. Trying to hit all 3 macro goals every day isn't flexible, it's also not important for results. This is the worst thing that came with the acronym. For some reason people got it in their heads that they needed to hit all 3 numbers every day. That isn't flexible and that is never how flexible dieting was supposed to work. Just hit your protein and fat minimums, then use extra calories however you see fit.
Adjust your total calories per day based on your actual results. Not losing fast enough or at all? Reduce them. Trial and error is better then the calculators 100% of the time.
Q:
applicable for male/female?
Out of curiousity I tried the above method for mine and found some areas that are drastically different. I understand some variation here and there but just curious. Appears that 10 is the multiplier in this "calculator"
I like the approach of the simplified version however I'm still curious, thanks for taking the time to respond. I am in agreement that online calculators have a lot of variance, this is why I consult multiple and also check/balance at the end. But this appears to be a more simplified version that I can give out, I would like to be certain first, thanks.0 -
katherinemfries wrote: »I weigh everything except for like the turkey bacon and deli meats (and chipotle which I refuse to give up haha) but when I scan the barcodes for everything else it's usually by volume so I do some math and portion it out by weight if that makes sense?
I am a huge fan of Chipotle as well.
I took a look in your diary for this entry and saw that you estimated, which i'm not knocking.
But if there is a Chipotle that serves a full 8 oz of chicken I've never ran across that.
Even if I ask for 2 scoops they don't commit to portion sizing, ugh. haha
Just be careful is all: sometimes Chipotle will be spot on, sometimes it'll be off. I'm curious to transition to the kids menu because they use the small little cups, at least those are separate and I can adjust. Great job on your tracking, may the force be with you.0 -
shreddedtrooper wrote: »I see a lot of over complication here. First, calculators all mostly suck. The IIFYM one particularly sucks. Don't put tons of faith into it. It gives you a fine enough starting point but you are going to have to alter your numbers based on results. All too often people use a calculator, don't lose weight, and don't know what went wrong. I would take an even simpler method of determining macros. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 10. That number is your calories. Take your weight in lbs, multiply by 0.7, that's your grams of protein. Take your weigh in lbs, multiply by 0.3, that's your fats in grams. That give you (rounding your weight to 150) 1500 calories, 105 protein, 45 fat. Those are your minimums. You must hit 105 protein and 45 fat each day while staying at 1500 calories. Carbs are flexible. If you hit exactly your minimums on protein and fat, you would have 169 carbs. You don't have to have that many carbs though, you can have extra protein of fat if you want. This allows for flexibility. That's the whole idea when you do IIFYM. Before it was called by the acronym is was simply called flexible dieting. Trying to hit all 3 macro goals every day isn't flexible, it's also not important for results. This is the worst thing that came with the acronym. For some reason people got it in their heads that they needed to hit all 3 numbers every day. That isn't flexible and that is never how flexible dieting was supposed to work. Just hit your protein and fat minimums, then use extra calories however you see fit.
Adjust your total calories per day based on your actual results. Not losing fast enough or at all? Reduce them. Trial and error is better then the calculators 100% of the time.
Q:
applicable for male/female?
Out of curiousity I tried the above method for mine and found some areas that are drastically different. I understand some variation here and there but just curious. Appears that 10 is the multiplier in this "calculator"
I like the approach of the simplified version however I'm still curious, thanks for taking the time to respond. I am in agreement that online calculators have a lot of variance, this is why I consult multiple and also check/balance at the end. But this appears to be a more simplified version that I can give out, I would like to be certain first, thanks.
Bottom line is your activity level for the results determines what you get in the calculator. Many people overestimate how active they are. If you go to the gym 5x a week, cardio for 30 minutes, and weight lift for 30 minutes then go home and lounge as well as sit at a desk job for 8 hours a day then you should only choose 3x week for activity in the calculator. Activity level is not just the days you go to the gym. Its how active are you the entire week.
edit:
However, if you are at a desk job 8 hours a day, go to the gym, cardio 30 minutes and weight lift 2 hours then lounge the rest of the day you should select 5x week.
1 hour x 5 = 5 hours
vs
2.5 hours x 5 = 12.5 hours
aka don't bother selecting 5x week if you exercise less than 2 hours a day.0 -
Dang this is a controversial topic. Like I said I'm only 4 days into it now so I appreciate all the advice.0
-
shreddedtrooper wrote: »I am a huge fan of Chipotle as well.
I took a look in your diary for this entry and saw that you estimated, which i'm not knocking.
But if there is a Chipotle that serves a full 8 oz of chicken I've never ran across that.
Even if I ask for 2 scoops they don't commit to portion sizing, ugh. haha
Just be careful is all: sometimes Chipotle will be spot on, sometimes it'll be off. I'm curious to transition to the kids menu because they use the small little cups, at least those are separate and I can adjust. Great job on your tracking, may the force be with you.
I get 1 scoop rice and double chicken. They definitly tend to be sloppy scoopers so it's just an estimation0 -
katherinemfries wrote: »Dang this is a controversial topic. Like I said I'm only 4 days into it now so I appreciate all the advice.
I would just pick one set of numbers and stick to it for a month to 6 weeks. At that point reevaluate based on your results. That will be a lot more accurate than trying to find the perfect numbers via calculator.0 -
katherinemfries wrote: »Dang this is a controversial topic. Like I said I'm only 4 days into it now so I appreciate all the advice.
Not really...it's just that a lot of people do not understand that IIFYM isn't a website or a calculator...that website is simply taking advantage of the concept.
The concept is simply flexible dieting...not demonizing foods or groups of foods. The concept was really born out of the fitness industry, not the diet industry...and more specifically the body building industry. I was simply a stock answer to questions like, "if I eat X, is this bad?"...to which the response was, "IIFYM"
Basically it is just watching calories and macros...and it doesn't mean to just eat whatever junk food you like because if you have any kind of respectable macro ratio, you simply wouldn't be able to do that...but you are likely to be able to fit in some ice cream for desert for example...or a slice or two of pizza every so often, etc if those things happen to fit your macros and calories.
I would also add that the "Y" in IIFYM is pretty important...there is no one size fits all macro ratio. Remember, the concept was born out of the fitness industry...so the "Y" is generally going to be a macro breakdown that is going to optimize your performance for whatever it is that you do.
Personally, I think people get as hung up with this concept as they do clean eating or low carbing or whatever the case may be...I use my macros as a general guideline in assisting me on getting the kind of nutrition I need to perform well in life and other things I do...but I don't get too worked up if I'm not hitting them bang on...I mean tonight I'm way over on protein and a bit over on fat and quite a bit under in carbs...but I don't really care.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Dang this is a controversial topic. Like I said I'm only 4 days into it now so I appreciate all the advice.
Not really...it's just that a lot of people do not understand that IIFYM isn't a website or a calculator...that website is simply taking advantage of the concept.
The concept is simply flexible dieting...not demonizing foods or groups of foods. The concept was really born out of the fitness industry, not the diet industry...and more specifically the body building industry. I was simply a stock answer to questions like, "if I eat X, is this bad?"...to which the response was, "IIFYM"
Basically it is just watching calories and macros...and it doesn't mean to just eat whatever junk food you like because if you have any kind of respectable macro ratio, you simply wouldn't be able to do that...but you are likely to be able to fit in some ice cream for desert for example...or a slice or two of pizza every so often, etc if those things happen to fit your macros and calories.
I would also add that the "Y" in IIFYM is pretty important...there is no one size fits all macro ratio. Remember, the concept was born out of the fitness industry...so the "Y" is generally going to be a macro breakdown that is going to optimize your performance for whatever it is that you do.
Personally, I think people get as hung up with this concept as they do clean eating or low carbing or whatever the case may be...I use my macros as a general guideline in assisting me on getting the kind of nutrition I need to perform well in life and other things I do...but I don't get too worked up if I'm not hitting them bang on...I mean tonight I'm way over on protein and a bit over on fat and quite a bit under in carbs...but I don't really care.
I meant controversial in a sense that everyone has a different answer. But that makes sense because like you said, the "Y"and everyone's different. Just gotta find what's right for me.
0 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »katherinemfries wrote: »Dang this is a controversial topic. Like I said I'm only 4 days into it now so I appreciate all the advice.
I would just pick one set of numbers and stick to it for a month to 6 weeks. At that point reevaluate based on your results.
This
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions