Article - IIFYM: A New Vehicle for Eating Disorders
Replies
-
Right, track and be accurate when you can and when you can't, be mindful. Use tracking as a teaching tool to be used for when you can not track with an ultimate goal (if the dieter wants it to be) of not having to track at all anymore...IMO finding the right balance between being accurate when you can, and not worrying about when out and about seems to be the correct path.
0 -
I'd go beyond that and say that tracking is a method. It has pros and cons to it. Some people do really well on it and enjoy it. Some people hate it and obsess over it and it becomes a negative thing in their life.
It's not the only way to do things and it's not the definition of mindfulness.
Best bet is to match the method to the person. As a coach, finding that stuff out and helping the client choose the correct path is the tricky part -- something I'm still working on.
But I'm totally against the idea that an ultimate method exists that everyone must use.
Dogma is still dogma even when it's the trendy thing
I'm ranting a bit.
To the bolded... YES, YES and YES!
0 -
I think tracking in general can lead to a lot of disordered thinking. I see people here all of the time get really obsessive about their macros....like, if they don't get exactly 1 gram of protein per Lb of LBM, the world is going to end kind of obsessive.
I personally had a lot of these obsessive tendencies when I was tracking and I do a lot better without tracking my calories or my macros. There were some benefits that came with tracking in that I am just more generally aware and mindful about what I"m eating than I used to be...but every time I start tracking, I really get caught up in the numbers in not a good way.0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »I think tracking in general can lead to a lot of disordered thinking. I see people here all of the time get really obsessive about their macros....like, if they don't get exactly 1 gram of protein per Lb of LBM, the world is going to end kind of obsessive.
I personally had a lot of these obsessive tendencies when I was tracking and I do a lot better without tracking my calories or my macros. There were some benefits that came with tracking in that I am just more generally aware and mindful about what I"m eating than I used to be...but every time I start tracking, I really get caught up in the numbers in not a good way.
:drinker:
Doesn't describe me (my many faults lie elsewhere
) but yeah, MFP is full of that kind of behaviour. Important thing is to catch it when we see it in ourselves. 0 -
What's messed up is thinking that's the opposite.
Oy vey...talk about projecting "morals" onto food...
Um. That's what the word "clean" implies. Either that or the RELIGIOUS TERM clean/unclean. That's what it means. Words have meaning, and meaning is important.0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »
Um. That's what the word "clean" implies. Either that or the RELIGIOUS TERM clean/unclean. That's what it means. Words have meaning, and meaning is important.
Words do have meaning. Agreed upon meanings. Words don't inherently have meaning.
There's nothing particularly ominous or evil about the phrase clean eating, and its use, in and of itself, does not denote anything "messed up" about the folks who use it.
We have 50+ years of the phrase "JUNK FOOD" to juxtapose.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
A challenge for you: step back, look at your posting style and see if you can make your point without flinging insults. No, you're not necessarily insulting any one specific person, but if it's rude nonetheless. (And frankly has me thinking: "the lady doth protest too much".) Just a thought.
Protest against what? My food diary is open. I have nothing to hide. I don't stress over what I do or don't eat. I do make an attempt to eat a bit more fruit (because I don't actually like much of it), but that's pretty much as far as it goes.
I got fat by not exercising. My daily burn was averaging below 1650 calories even after I started doing 5-10k steps a day, and before that, it was below 1600 calories, and I ate like I normally did--about 1700-1900 calories. I was just very busy and very sedentary, partly because regaining muscle mass is a brutal experience with my genetic disorder and I'd lost a ton of strength and tone on months of bed rest. I've exercised off every pound I gained with my first two kids, and I'm going to do it again, same way.
All my unsuccessful friends are the ones who want to constantly talk about food as if they can just eat "good things" to lose weight. They're going to eat more veg or organic or gluten-free or more olive oil or Atkins or paleo or whatever, and suddenly, they'll lose weight. Never works. Never. They lose some, regain it. Lose, regain. One finally got tired of it and started exercising and counting calories and is down 100lbs and maintaining. But suddenly he stopped talking about eating the "right" things and said that he's MOSTLY just eating LESS things.
The only ones it "works" for are the type who have generally always been slim and went from, say, outright anorexia to orthorexia maintaining above unhealthy weights but still obsessing about food just as much. And they aren't actually my friends, just acquaintances, because they're so food-obsessed that they're unbearable to be around even if they are otherwise nice people. I have other things in the world I want to talk about than the new thing they won't eat anymore because they read on some crackpot website that it causes an unbalanced chi or inflammation of the liver.0 -
I question this as an automatic process at least in some people. Quite possibly depends on how observant/objective people are when tracking and whether or not they are establishing behaviors while they are tracking intake.
Most people eat somewhat the same things from day to day. They get into food habits about snacks, lunches, and breakfasts. I'm weird because I often cook completely brand new dinners when I'm cooking for the family...but even then, I use a lot of the same ingredients.
That said, I never bothered to count calories before simply because I was way more active. "Eat a little less" and "exercise a little more" works MORE than well enough when you're fairly close to maintenance, anyway. For years, I maintained my weight between 123 and 132 this way. I lost from 162 (basically, never lost weight after the last kid for a variety of reasons) to fluctuating between 145 and 150 this way again. I needed MFP to figure out what was up now that I had hit maintenance there. And that's when I discovered that my activity level had just bottomed out. For me, the calorie-counting only speeds up weight loss and is temporary. I'll ditch it at my weight goal and then continue to count calorie burn for a while because that's where I fell down.
But someone who has a life-long habit of 2500 or 3000 or 3500 calories feeling like normal is coming from a REALLY, REALLY different place. If they need to weigh and measure for years into maintenance...is that so bad? They can ease off it in time as they learn to listen to how they look in the mirror and how their pants feel instead. Until then, it's a tool, ESPECIALLY if they're going through a tough spot in life. And it's not a bad tool at all.0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »
Protest against what? My food diary is open. I have nothing to hide. I don't stress over what I do or don't eat. I do make an attempt to eat a bit more fruit (because I don't actually like much of it), but that's pretty much as far as it goes.
I got fat by not exercising. My daily burn was averaging below 1650 calories even after I started doing 5-10k steps a day, and before that, it was below 1600 calories, and I ate like I normally did--about 1700-1900 calories. I was just very busy and very sedentary, partly because regaining muscle mass is a brutal experience with my genetic disorder and I'd lost a ton of strength and tone on months of bed rest. I've exercised off every pound I gained with my first two kids, and I'm going to do it again, same way.
All my unsuccessful friends are the ones who want to constantly talk about food as if they can just eat "good things" to lose weight. They're going to eat more veg or organic or gluten-free or more olive oil or Atkins or paleo or whatever, and suddenly, they'll lose weight. Never works. Never. They lose some, regain it. Lose, regain. One finally got tired of it and started exercising and counting calories and is down 100lbs and maintaining. But suddenly he stopped talking about eating the "right" things and said that he's MOSTLY just eating LESS things.
The only ones it "works" for are the type who have generally always been slim and went from, say, outright anorexia to orthorexia maintaining above unhealthy weights but still obsessing about food just as much. And they aren't actually my friends, just acquaintances, because they're so food-obsessed that they're unbearable to be around even if they are otherwise nice people. I have other things in the world I want to talk about than the new thing they won't eat anymore because they read on some crackpot website that it causes an unbalanced chi or inflammation of the liver.
okie dokie. Best of luck on your journey.
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
Words do have meaning. Agreed upon meanings. Words don't inherently have meaning.
There's nothing particularly ominous or evil about the phrase clean eating, and its use, in and of itself, does not denote anything "messed up" about the folks who use it.
We have 50+ years of the phrase "JUNK FOOD" to juxtapose.
Yes, I when I say I'm "cleaning up my diet" I mean I'm eating less "junk food."
0 -
MamaBirdBoss wrote: »
Protest against what? [snip]
When Sabine_Stroehm suggest you "look at your posting style and see if you can make your point without flinging insults" she is likely referring to comments you make such as:If you're a silly person who can't figure out things or look up a chain restaurant ahead of time, this might be an issue, but if you have two brain cells to rub together to keep warm, it's not that hard.
When you stick to "I" statement like these, you're great:My food diary is open. I have nothing to hide. I don't stress over what I do or don't eat. I do make an attempt to eat a bit more fruit (because I don't actually like much of it), but that's pretty much as far as it goes.
I got fat by not exercising. My daily burn was averaging below 1650 calories even after I started doing 5-10k steps a day, and before that, it was below 1600 calories, and I ate like I normally did--about 1700-1900 calories. I was just very busy and very sedentary, partly because regaining muscle mass is a brutal experience with my genetic disorder and I'd lost a ton of strength and tone on months of bed rest. I've exercised off every pound I gained with my first two kids, and I'm going to do it again, same way.0 -
Hello
make that 2.
I mostly IIFYM/Flexible diet- and I'm hungry all the time. But- I'm just always hungry- so- I'm not really upset/bothered by this information.
IIFYMs stands for If it fits your macros, and one of the criteria for the fitting, is satiety, isn't it? So if you're hungry because of the way you eat, that way of eating doesn't fit you (or your macros, or rather, your macros are off).
But if you are hungry no matter what, you just have to disregard that. I hope it's not too unpleasant.
Hunger is interesting. I used to be very hungry when I overate. I think that was part of the reason why I overate, to try to feel full. Now I eat well (as in getting more nutrients, not clean, hahaha) and rarely feel hungry. In fact, I often have to force myself to eat, even though I still love food; I think I love food more now. Some hunger is psychological, due to boredom or anxiety or the habit of grazing, or misinterpretation of the body's signals, but there is still hunger because of malnutrition, yes, in the Western world, today.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
Meh, all he is doing is giving undue attention on the outliers.0
-
My undergrad/grad school training and subsequent career can basically be summed up as 'health behavior change', though I don't work specifically with weight loss (except in my own case, lol). But if you don't mind taking your reading a bit outside of the realm of fitness/nutrition, you might find some of the literature on harm reduction helpful. Harm reduction is a strategy originally developed for people who are addicted to alcohol/drugs. It involves helping those who are unwilling/unable to commit to eliminating drug use to learn how to modify their use patterns and choices in ways that are (a) healthier and (b) can gradually move them toward better choices if they become open to that.
I find it really useful and applicable to a lot of health behavior changes in general, but don't want to derail this thread with a discussion about it. Google it or shoot me a message if you want some reading suggestions.
And yes - you sound like a really excellent coach.
Thanks, I've never actually heard of the topic of "harm reduction". I'd be happy to send you a message, but would you be willing to post a couple of book recommendations here?
There could be other people reading this thread that might find value in that.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.8K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 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
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions