Flexible Dieting (IIFYM)
Options
Replies
-
So, in other words, 'IIFYM' is just as confusing a term as 'clean eating'. I need to start putting it in quote marks too, then!
nope not at all, some have just chosen to directly associate with a diet of twinkies that is not nutritionaly dense, and I have never heard a single IIFYM proponent say "its OK if you do not hit micros" or "yea, you can eat twinkies all day and you will be good"0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Yes--as I said above I think the concept of IIFYM (or flexible dieting also) incorporates an assumption that you are eating a mostly nutrient dense diet, but even for those who aren't there yet I think focusing on meeting reasonable macros is a step toward a balanced diet and understanding what that means. It's kind of shocking to me that this is necessary, but from observing on MFP I think for some it is--just learning what foods contain what and likely increasing your protein can lead to improvements in the diet.
When I was a kid the standard American diet was pretty balanced: dinner=meat, veg, and a starch, and that's not so different than what someone might come up with in thinking through how to meet macros. (You'd add some fat or cook with it, of course.)
I eat like a chemist
My diet and exercise is very specific.
I eat for daily activities. I don't even attempt to discuss it on MFP much since this place is so prone to want to argue
If I plan a 40 mile bike ride on Saturday I will be pretty carb heavy and eat some sugar GU packs on the ride. I will hit lots of sodium and electrolyte packs to hold some water but still lose 5 lbs in the 95+ heat here.
For a heavy lifting Saturday I will be low carb and protein heavy with different supplements with a nitric oxide focus.
Studying nutrition a bit has destroyed old myths of the last on how to eat.
I like hearing how others eat for activities and use food to reach performance goals.
I totally agree that learning the properties of food, going beyond a calorie is just a calorie is helpful. Food has so many more properties than just the popular one, the caloric value.
0 -
Right, but if you look, there seems to be variance of what people think IIFYM means.
That's because sites like this have allowed it to become something it's not..... Did you watch the youtube video that LOLbroscience posted with Alan Aragon? If not, I suggest you watch it. It should clear up anyone's view about what IIFYM is.....0 -
Nope. "Clean" labels food good vs. bad. IIFYM is a principle which can be applied to your overall diet.
And then there are those who can assign differing values to foods AND not restrict them...0 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
And then there are those who can assign differing values to foods AND not restrict them...
What's your point?0 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
And then there are those who can assign differing values to foods AND not restrict them...
Not sure what YOU mean by this, but IMO that's flexible dieting. I understand how foods differ and what they contribute (including taste, of course), so I take that into account when choosing what to eat. There's a context.
But it's IMO not very intelligent to turn that into "good foods" and "bad foods" as if context weren't relevant.0 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
And then there are those who can assign differing values to foods AND not restrict them...
You mean like Alan does in the video I posted clarifying the origin of IIFYM?- Whole Foods
- Minimally Processed
- Processed
The main focal point should still be nutrient dense foods, but it doesn't associate any particular food as "good" or "bad" without taking a look at overall diet.0 -
What's your point?
Labeling the extremes is ultimately unproductive is the point0 -
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Not sure what YOU mean by this, but IMO that's flexible dieting. I understand how foods differ and what they contribute (including taste, of course), so I take that into account when choosing what to eat. There's a context.
But it's IMO not very intelligent to turn that into "good foods" and "bad foods" as if context weren't relevant.
I didn't use the terms good and bad.0 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
I didn't use the terms good and bad.
Didn't say you did.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Didn't say you did.
Well then we're good, aren't we?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
accidentalpancake wrote: »
Well then we're good, aren't we?
But are you healthier than broccoli?0 -
But are you healthier than broccoli?
I like to think I have better hair.0 -
Eh, hair doesn't have useful macros, and doesn't taste as good as poptarts.accidentalpancake wrote: »
I like to think I have better hair.
0 -
Eh, hair doesn't have useful macros, and doesn't taste as good as poptarts.
You're not cooking it right.0 -
accidentalpancake wrote: »
Well then we're good, aren't we?
I thought we were basically agreeing, yes.0 -
No, you said IIFYM is for weight loss. I said fat loss, they are very different.TheVirgoddess wrote: »So, exactly what I said.
I agree and never said you did. That said, for optimal muscle building and or retention, tailoring macros can have a major impact.TheVirgoddess wrote: »You don't build muscle with your food alone.
Agree. IIFYM started in the bodybuilding world so I would imagine that is par for the course.TheVirgoddess wrote: »If people want to adjust their macros for maximum muscle retention, they certainly can, but it's entirely up to the person applying it.
0 -
Eh, hair doesn't have useful macros, and doesn't taste as good as poptarts.
Poptarts...
Interesting taste.
Not a big fan of them.0 -
That seems like an odd way to look at it.DeeJayShank wrote: »
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.
Would a reasonable person stick with an eating plan that didn't satiate or meet his energy needs?
You go back and forth between "people trying to reach elite levels of fitness" and "100% noobs."
Can someone come up with a crappy, ineffective diet that fits a particular macro ratio? Yeah. Duh. The same person could do the same thing with a "flexible diet," too.
You write as if IIFYM somehow excludes the possibility of goals other that weight loss. It's like you really, truly don't grasp it or you're being intentionally obtuse.
0 -
Guess I thought Flexible Dieting meant something else, similar to IIFYM but not so macro-focused. I thought IIFYM meant hit target macros, micros, and calories in that order whereas FD meant a mix of the three with no stress on hitting macros/micros.
Well, now I know why I never get invited to the IIFYM and FD parties.
Thank you for posting this. You are exactly the person I am trying to address.
The so-called experts on this board often speak to everyone as if IIFYM is some well-understand concept when, in fact, the term "If it fits your macros" implies something quite different than what the actual plan is.
If I am 100 pounds overweight, new to this site, and I read a post that says "you can lose a lot of weight with IIFYM, try it out, just make sure food fits your macros", and I continue to read this over and over again, it is simply going to reinforce a plan in my mind that lets me eat the same food I always ate before, but just less of it. I am going to do just that, and then wonder why I am hungry, tired, etc. I've been there. I lost 70 pounds myself using MyFitnessPal and a combination of diets. Probably the biggest thing standing in my way was bad advice from these forums. You can say I was naive for believing what I read in a forum, but if that were always true, then what's the point of an advice forum anyways? People come here seeking advice and help.
I wish the IIFYM fanboys could step back for just a minute and say "Hmm, if I was brand-new to this site, what might I think IIFYM is? What does that sound like?" And spend some time to describe the plan instead of denigrating people who try to bring a differing opinion.
In my opinion, what new dieters should take away from this site is that you whatever you were doing before didn't work. If total flexibility worked, then everyone would already be at their goal weight. At some point, everyone losing weight has to make some sacrifices. Yes, you can still have flexibility in your diet and eat pizza every now and then. But it is a poor strategy to assume that you can just eat less pizza and achieve all fitness and health goals. I am a big, big believer that everyone should focus on getting to a healthy weight first and foremost, and that everything else comes second. But the term "if it fits your macros" is unintentionally misleading to those new to it, to those that don't know the real plan. You should not eat everything under the sun just because it fits your macros. This is a poor dieting strategy and a poor long-term health strategy. I don't know how else to say it.
I am sure I will get a dozen responses say "but that's not what IIFYM is" or "you are an idiot" because that is typical of these forums. Very quick responses that don't solve anyone's problems, but instead just invite confrontation.
My advice to anyone reading this is to subscribe to www.LeanGains.com, www.BodyRecomposition.com, andhttp://jyfitness.blogspot.com/ . These are great sites that use science to back up their claims.
The MyFitnessPal forums are full of people that have opinions without any scientific backup (even mine is just an opinion). Buyer beware.0 -
professionalHobbyist wrote: »
I eat like a chemist
My diet and exercise is very specific.
I eat for daily activities. I don't even attempt to discuss it on MFP much since this place is so prone to want to argue
If I plan a 40 mile bike ride on Saturday I will be pretty carb heavy and eat some sugar GU packs on the ride. I will hit lots of sodium and electrolyte packs to hold some water but still lose 5 lbs in the 95+ heat here.
For a heavy lifting Saturday I will be low carb and protein heavy with different supplements with a nitric oxide focus.
Studying nutrition a bit has destroyed old myths of the last on how to eat.
I like hearing how others eat for activities and use food to reach performance goals.
I totally agree that learning the properties of food, going beyond a calorie is just a calorie is helpful. Food has so many more properties than just the popular one, the caloric value.
Excellent post, thank you.0 -
Yeah. That was me. That's exactly what I did.DeeJayShank wrote: »
Thank you for posting this. You are exactly the person I am trying to address.
The so-called experts on this board often speak to everyone as if IIFYM is some well-understand concept when, in fact, the term "If it fits your macros" implies something quite different than what the actual plan is.
If I am 100 pounds overweight, new to this site, and I read a post that says "you can lose a lot of weight with IIFYM, try it out, just make sure food fits your macros", and I continue to read this over and over again, it is simply going to reinforce a plan in my mind that lets me eat the same food I always ate before, but just less of it.
0 -
DeeJayShank wrote: »
Thank you for posting this. You are exactly the person I am trying to address.
The so-called experts on this board often speak to everyone as if IIFYM is some well-understand concept when, in fact, the term "If it fits your macros" implies something quite different than what the actual plan is.
If I am 100 pounds overweight, new to this site, and I read a post that says "you can lose a lot of weight with IIFYM, try it out, just make sure food fits your macros", and I continue to read this over and over again, it is simply going to reinforce a plan in my mind that lets me eat the same food I always ate before, but just less of it. I am going to do just that, and then wonder why I am hungry, tired, etc. I've been there. I lost 70 pounds myself using MyFitnessPal and a combination of diets. Probably the biggest thing standing in my way was bad advice from these forums. You can say I was naive for believing what I read in a forum, but if that were always true, then what's the point of an advice forum anyways? People come here seeking advice and help.
I wish the IIFYM fanboys could step back for just a minute and say "Hmm, if I was brand-new to this site, what might I think IIFYM is? What does that sound like?" And spend some time to describe the plan instead of denigrating people who try to bring a differing opinion.
In my opinion, what new dieters should take away from this site is that you whatever you were doing before didn't work. If total flexibility worked, then everyone would already be at their goal weight. At some point, everyone losing weight has to make some sacrifices. Yes, you can still have flexibility in your diet and eat pizza every now and then. But it is a poor strategy to assume that you can just eat less pizza and achieve all fitness and health goals. I am a big, big believer that everyone should focus on getting to a healthy weight first and foremost, and that everything else comes second. But the term "if it fits your macros" is unintentionally misleading to those new to it, to those that don't know the real plan. You should not eat everything under the sun just because it fits your macros. This is a poor dieting strategy and a poor long-term health strategy. I don't know how else to say it.
I am sure I will get a dozen responses say "but that's not what IIFYM is" or "you are an idiot" because that is typical of these forums. Very quick responses that don't solve anyone's problems, but instead just invite confrontation.
My advice to anyone reading this is to subscribe to www.LeanGains.com, www.BodyRecomposition.com, andhttp://jyfitness.blogspot.com/ . These are great sites that use science to back up their claims.
The MyFitnessPal forums are full of people that have opinions without any scientific backup (even mine is just an opinion). Buyer beware.
Pretty sure I posted a video addressing this on the last page.
I don't understand your point about the science aspect? No one is stating anything that would be otherwise noted as non-scientific? The same posters that you describe as "Fan Boys" regularily spread around science based websites such as:- https://evidencemag.com/
- http://examine.com/welcome
- http://weightology.net/?page_id=10
- http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/
and many more...0 -
0
-
flyingtanuki wrote: »IIFYM works for me: down 75+ lbs., and haven't had to give up a single food.
This is AWESOME! Congrats!
I am a flexible dieter! I have been for about a year and a half now. No more obsessing, feeling guilty, feeling restricted, and making progress. You hear this line all the time about "diets" but this REALLY is a life style! I cannot imagine ever going back!
I *USED* to be a "clean" eater (cringe) do great Mon-Fri then binge all weekend. NO more roller coaster and guilt trips for me! IIFYM FTW!
0 -
Is it like having a cheat meal once a week?
Sorry,but I have tried to look info on this,I try to cover my macros properly, with food not too high on sodium ( had kidney stones and what not ) I do avoid sugar unless it's fruits and eh stuff like that, but once a week I choose to eat something I usually wouldn't,that is still ok for me and yeah. Is that flexible?
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
And what are your fitness and physique goals?0 -
My fitness goal is to run 10K on upper body and non-lifiting days and run 5K on leg days.DeeJayShank wrote: »
And what are your fitness and physique goals?
My physique goals are to maintain weight until August, then begin a slow bulk. Eventually, I'd like to be about 235-240 with somewhere around 10% BF, maybe a little less if I want to cut going into summer.
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd8tZiHexPc
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396.9K Introduce Yourself
- 44.2K Getting Started
- 260.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 453 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.7K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.3K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.5K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3.1K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions