Flexible Dieting (IIFYM)

Options
145791012

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    *spray*
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    I could be mistaken, but, I believe that it was first discovered by the Germans sometime in the turn of the 19th century and means whale's vagina.

    So very close.......
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    Yes
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    Yes

    So far were 2 / 3 people. Gonna need a bigger sample....lol.
  • jkal1979
    jkal1979 Posts: 1,896 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    I could be mistaken, but, I believe that it was first discovered by the Germans sometime in the turn of the 19th century and means whale's vagina.

    Keep it classy asflatasapancake.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    Yes

    So far were 2 / 3 people. Gonna need a bigger sample....lol.

    My understanding is it is something that was developed in the body building circles...but not sure if that is its origins or not....
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    jkal1979 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    I could be mistaken, but, I believe that it was first discovered by the Germans sometime in the turn of the 19th century and means whale's vagina.

    Keep it classy asflatasapancake.

    I did say I could be mistaken. Perhaps this is one of those times.

    LoL, you didn't even get her PUN there.........hehe
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    Yes

    So far were 2 / 3 people. Gonna need a bigger sample....lol.

    My understanding is it is something that was developed in the body building circles...but not sure if that is its origins or not....

    *DING*
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    I guess I should have added the "why" also....
  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    Yes

    So far were 2 / 3 people. Gonna need a bigger sample....lol.

    My understanding is it is something that was developed in the body building circles...but not sure if that is its origins or not....

    *DING*

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNcsHKOQX1E
  • DeeJayShank
    DeeJayShank Posts: 92 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    dubird wrote: »
    Personally, I think 'flexible eating' is a much better term for what a lot of people are actually doing on MFP, not IIFYM.

    I agree. I think it depends on how focused you are on specific macros.

    I'm really quite, uh, flexible on the macros beyond a few broad guidelines, so I call it flexible dieting. ;-)

    Exactly this. IIFYM implies you just get the right protein/carb/fat mix and you're good to go. Doesn't address satiety, flexibility of using either carbs or fat as an energy source (and in which situations you should prefer one or the other), or a host of other quality issues that people trying to reach elite levels of fitness are going for.

    Flexible dieting is a term that is instantly understandable. It just means chill out and live life, but don't go crazy. Be flexible, but still focus on having some semblance of a diet. If you're a 100% noob and hear someone say "well, if it fits your macros" you are probably going to continue eating a lot of garbage (just less of them) when not all macros are created equal. You may walk around hungry, wondering why it's not working, wondering why it's not sustainable.

    If you want to focus on just weight loss, go right ahead and eat a deficit a twinkies every day. It WILL work. You will lose a lot of weight, wear our your pancreas, and have the physique of a 4-year-old.

    Weight loss shouldn't be the only goal of anyone health-minded. The number on the scale is not the most important challenge to overcome, anymore than making the most money is the only goal of anyone career-focused.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    Lotta meatheads in these forums, really pretty suffocating.

    To newbies, IIFYM often means eat whatever you want, just fit macros. This is crappy advice. This is my point.

    Why is it crappy advice though? IIFYM is for weight loss. To lose weight, you have to eat less than you burn. IIFYM will put you in a deficit and that's what matters. MFP is essentially the same set up. Is that crappy, too?
    Not exactly. IIFYM is more so for improvements in body composition. Lose fat and build muscle...

  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Every single day, I first always focus on eating 0.8g protein (or more) per pound of lean body mass (my total weight minus my bodyfat weight)

    On rest days, I keep carbs under 50g and eat more fat.
    On workout days, I eat very little fat and eat higher carbs.

    This is a common bodybuilder methodology.

    IIFYM works great if you have >30 pounds to lose. But once you reach sub-12% bodyfat, you will find it challenging to get any leaner unless you focus more intently on what you're eating and when you eat it.

    Losing weight via a calorie deficit is definitely possible via IIFYM, but building muscle while staying lean is, speaking frankly, not nearly as simple.

    Tell that to Kane Sumabat or Layne Norton...

    No reason to. Just sharing my own experience. For me, IIFYM works great when I have plenty of bodyfat to provide me with extra energy. Not the same mental/physical experience when I try to eat candy all day and maintain a deficit at under 12% bodyfat.

    What? Again, you're failing to understand IIFYM. No IIFYM'er is advocating eating candy all day....

    RULE #1 - FOCUS ON NUTRIENT DENSE FOODS!!!!!!! This will be the 4th time I've had to post this........

    You are wrong. Sorry. IIFYM, by it's very definition, says to focus on what fits your macros. YOU are placing your own brand and thoughts on it by saying "focus on nutrient dense foods". That is YOU saying that, not the universe of IIFYM believers.

    Recognize the fact that you are adding supplementary conditions to IIFYM. So you cannot simultaneously criticize a plan that focuses on higher-quality food and say that IIFYM is ok as long as you eat nutrient-dense food.

    This is an illogical argument.

    You clearly have no idea what IIFYM is...

  • LolBroScience
    LolBroScience Posts: 4,537 Member
    Options
    J72FIT wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Every single day, I first always focus on eating 0.8g protein (or more) per pound of lean body mass (my total weight minus my bodyfat weight)

    On rest days, I keep carbs under 50g and eat more fat.
    On workout days, I eat very little fat and eat higher carbs.

    This is a common bodybuilder methodology.

    IIFYM works great if you have >30 pounds to lose. But once you reach sub-12% bodyfat, you will find it challenging to get any leaner unless you focus more intently on what you're eating and when you eat it.

    Losing weight via a calorie deficit is definitely possible via IIFYM, but building muscle while staying lean is, speaking frankly, not nearly as simple.

    Tell that to Kane Sumabat or Layne Norton...

    No reason to. Just sharing my own experience. For me, IIFYM works great when I have plenty of bodyfat to provide me with extra energy. Not the same mental/physical experience when I try to eat candy all day and maintain a deficit at under 12% bodyfat.

    What? Again, you're failing to understand IIFYM. No IIFYM'er is advocating eating candy all day....

    RULE #1 - FOCUS ON NUTRIENT DENSE FOODS!!!!!!! This will be the 4th time I've had to post this........

    You are wrong. Sorry. IIFYM, by it's very definition, says to focus on what fits your macros. YOU are placing your own brand and thoughts on it by saying "focus on nutrient dense foods". That is YOU saying that, not the universe of IIFYM believers.

    Recognize the fact that you are adding supplementary conditions to IIFYM. So you cannot simultaneously criticize a plan that focuses on higher-quality food and say that IIFYM is ok as long as you eat nutrient-dense food.

    This is an illogical argument.

    You clearly have no idea what IIFYM is...

    Indeed, extremely unaware.
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    J72FIT wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Every single day, I first always focus on eating 0.8g protein (or more) per pound of lean body mass (my total weight minus my bodyfat weight)

    On rest days, I keep carbs under 50g and eat more fat.
    On workout days, I eat very little fat and eat higher carbs.

    This is a common bodybuilder methodology.

    IIFYM works great if you have >30 pounds to lose. But once you reach sub-12% bodyfat, you will find it challenging to get any leaner unless you focus more intently on what you're eating and when you eat it.

    Losing weight via a calorie deficit is definitely possible via IIFYM, but building muscle while staying lean is, speaking frankly, not nearly as simple.

    Tell that to Kane Sumabat or Layne Norton...

    No reason to. Just sharing my own experience. For me, IIFYM works great when I have plenty of bodyfat to provide me with extra energy. Not the same mental/physical experience when I try to eat candy all day and maintain a deficit at under 12% bodyfat.

    What? Again, you're failing to understand IIFYM. No IIFYM'er is advocating eating candy all day....

    RULE #1 - FOCUS ON NUTRIENT DENSE FOODS!!!!!!! This will be the 4th time I've had to post this........

    You are wrong. Sorry. IIFYM, by it's very definition, says to focus on what fits your macros. YOU are placing your own brand and thoughts on it by saying "focus on nutrient dense foods". That is YOU saying that, not the universe of IIFYM believers.

    Recognize the fact that you are adding supplementary conditions to IIFYM. So you cannot simultaneously criticize a plan that focuses on higher-quality food and say that IIFYM is ok as long as you eat nutrient-dense food.

    This is an illogical argument.

    You clearly have no idea what IIFYM is...

    Indeed, extremely unaware.

    All three of us must be wrong and have NO CLUE what were are talking about......... :smirk:
  • jmule24
    jmule24 Posts: 1,382 Member
    Options
    jmule24 wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    jmule24 wrote: »
    Are people aware of the "origin" behind IIFYM???

    Yes

    So far were 2 / 3 people. Gonna need a bigger sample....lol.

    My understanding is it is something that was developed in the body building circles...but not sure if that is its origins or not....

    *DING*

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNcsHKOQX1E

    Ahhh yes, AA. I forgot about this video. Thanks for sharing.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    dubird wrote: »
    Personally, I think 'flexible eating' is a much better term for what a lot of people are actually doing on MFP, not IIFYM.

    I agree. I think it depends on how focused you are on specific macros.

    I'm really quite, uh, flexible on the macros beyond a few broad guidelines, so I call it flexible dieting. ;-)

    Exactly this. IIFYM implies you just get the right protein/carb/fat mix and you're good to go. Doesn't address satiety, flexibility of using either carbs or fat as an energy source (and in which situations you should prefer one or the other), or a host of other quality issues that people trying to reach elite levels of fitness are going for.

    Flexible dieting is a term that is instantly understandable. It just means chill out and live life, but don't go crazy. Be flexible, but still focus on having some semblance of a diet. If you're a 100% noob and hear someone say "well, if it fits your macros" you are probably going to continue eating a lot of garbage (just less of them) when not all macros are created equal. You may walk around hungry, wondering why it's not working, wondering why it's not sustainable.

    If you want to focus on just weight loss, go right ahead and eat a deficit a twinkies every day. It WILL work. You will lose a lot of weight, wear our your pancreas, and have the physique of a 4-year-old.

    Weight loss shouldn't be the only goal of anyone health-minded. The number on the scale is not the most important challenge to overcome, anymore than making the most money is the only goal of anyone career-focused.

    yea, you are not understanding what IIFYM is and you clearly did not read the link that I provided that said IFFYM is NOT what you are saying.

  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    Options
    If I'd seen your question without seeing the topic, I'd have answered yes, becauase my diet is very flexible. I basically only have 2 rules - don't overeat and eat lots of fiber.

    But I don't follow any named diet like IIFYM and I don't track macros.
This discussion has been closed.