Flexible Dieting (IIFYM)

This content has been removed.

DeeJayShank wrote: »

DeguelloTex wrote: »

DeeJayShank wrote: »

235-240 at 10%? How tall are you?

6'9". How tall are you?

5'10" . I am about 11% right now and only 170 lbs.

Well, I can't help that.

If I can gain 25 pounds of muscle and lose 7 pounds of fat, I'll be 10% BF at 240. If I can gain 21 pounds of muscle and lose 8 pounds of fat, I'll be 10% at 235.

Maybe I can't do it. Maybe I'll only make 230 or something.

Maybe my body can't recover enough to run 10K on upper body and off days and 5K on leg days. Maybe I'll have to run two of each. Or less.

That's why they're goals, not certainties.

ETA:

Per muscle potential sites I've gotten:

Your estimated maximum muscular bodyweight at ~10% bodyfat is: 268.9 lbs

Your estimated maximum bulked bodyweight at ~10% bodyfat is: 279.7 lbs

My goals are far short of that. Even old and broken down, I don't think 240/10% is impossible.

ndj1979 wrote: »

DeeJayShank wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Oh, and to add to that, when I started MFP I was doing a modified paleo thing influenced strongly by my own past history of being into eating as "natural" and local as possible, although I already thought my leanings toward the woo were a little ridiculous, I also knew I tended to enjoy that sort of thing.

So when I found a paleo vs. "clean eating" (not a term I was then familiar with except as meaning "as paleo as possible" vs. IIFYM discussion, I was interested and initially kind of annoyed at some of the claims by the IIFYM eater (like that McD's wasn't "unhealthy," as I would have claimed it was). In responding to the arguments I did what any sensible person on the internet would do--look up IIFYM and read about what it was.

In reading about what it, and flexible dieting, were, I understood right away that part of the concept was to eat an overall healthy diet with attention toward nutrition. I think that's really not that mysterious if someone reads the background on it.

This is a huge problem with MFP forums. There are some people who seem to follow this condescending recipe:

1.) Person spends years being overweight and unhealthy
2.) Person finds a reason to change their life, finds MFP, tracks food
3.) Person loses weight doing their plan
4.) Person defends their plan until the ends of the earth against any opposition based upon an n=1 experiment; doesn't accept that there may be more efficient methods of weight loss, fitness, or health
5.) Person expects anyone they encounter to now also be reasonable about diet and fitness, and gives unhelpful advice like "just read more on the internet"
6.) Another overweight person on the forums is not helped at all, or worse, comes away with bad strategies for weight loss. Doesn't lose as much weight as they want and gives up.

Another diet bites the dust.

I make a really simple assumption when working with someone 100+ pounds overweight. If someone 100+ pounds overweight was sensible about diet or exercise, they would already be thin and healthy. It should be assumed by anyone helping them that the obese person needs to start from scratch, relearn how to eat, how to move, etc. Boot Camp is an appropriate analogy. There's no shame in assuming you know bupkis and learning something new. Nick Faldo quit golf even after winning the masters to learn a new swing.

IIFYM is not, by default, easily understood. I've seen several responses in this same forum thread that prove there are many people on MFP that don't understand it fully.

You understood it completely on the first run? Good for you, you must be a health genius. Don't assume everyone else is as smart as you.

Just saying "read about IIFYM and watch these YouTube videos" is horrible advice because it doesn't change behavior. All it does is logically explain how to lose weight without supply the necessary mental and physical tools to actually do it.

It should be assumed that anyone obese needs help from the ground up. That's not condescending at all. I would counter that it is arrogant for an obese person to assume they know what they are doing when they are clearly out of control and have been for some time. I speak from experience. I was 70 pounds overweight myself. I'm sure many of us were or are.

Like I said, I just think we could tone down the opinion that everyone is reasonable or could easily find info on the internet to help them. It's just not that simple at all.

the only person who does not understand IFFYM in this thread is you. You have been given numerous links and videos showing it is NOT about eating pop tarts all day, but you keep falling back to that position, which is blatantly wrong.

I apparently don't understand or eat according to IIFYM, even after listening to Alan and a bunch of people on here explain it. It seems to be more complicated than the initialism states.

I actually thought that's what myfitnesspal was all about lol

DeeJayShank wrote: »

DeguelloTex wrote: »

DeeJayShank wrote: »

I find it laughable that you think someone 100+ pounds overweight has any idea what sensible eating is or how to execute it. If they knew, they would have already.

So you think I only figured it out after I lost the weight? I think you might be unclear on the cause and effect there.

Dude you were 100+ pounds overweight. Why do you think that is?

Because I ate too much.

Now I'm not 100+ pounds overweight. Why do you think that is?

Do you think I got a handle on sensible eating before or after I lost all that weight?

DeeJayShank wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Oh, and to add to that, when I started MFP I was doing a modified paleo thing influenced strongly by my own past history of being into eating as "natural" and local as possible, although I already thought my leanings toward the woo were a little ridiculous, I also knew I tended to enjoy that sort of thing.

So when I found a paleo vs. "clean eating" (not a term I was then familiar with except as meaning "as paleo as possible" vs. IIFYM discussion, I was interested and initially kind of annoyed at some of the claims by the IIFYM eater (like that McD's wasn't "unhealthy," as I would have claimed it was). In responding to the arguments I did what any sensible person on the internet would do--look up IIFYM and read about what it was.

In reading about what it, and flexible dieting, were, I understood right away that part of the concept was to eat an overall healthy diet with attention toward nutrition. I think that's really not that mysterious if someone reads the background on it.

This is a huge problem with MFP forums. There are some people who seem to follow this condescending recipe:

1.) Person spends years being overweight and unhealthy
2.) Person finds a reason to change their life, finds MFP, tracks food
3.) Person loses weight doing their plan
4.) Person defends their plan until the ends of the earth against any opposition based upon an n=1 experiment; doesn't accept that there may be more efficient methods of weight loss, fitness, or health

Who is this person? Not me.

5.) Person expects anyone they encounter to now also be reasonable about diet and fitness, and gives unhelpful advice like "just read more on the internet"

No one gave this advice. I was saying that your silly idea that others were confused by the term IIFYM simply because you seem to be ignores the fact that anyone halfway intelligent (and I don't assume the obese are less intelligent) is perfectly capable of doing the minimal research that it requires to learn about the concept.

6.) Another overweight person on the forums is not helped at all, or worse, comes away with bad strategies for weight loss. Doesn't lose as much weight as they want and gives up.

I've yet to see you suggest any good strategies.

Contrary to that, many of the IIFYM posters give good and helpful advice. I don't consider myself an IIFYM poster, but I think I've given quite a bit of helpful and encouraging advice and that I've been there (and so have many of the IIFYM posters) likely helps for some. Of course, not everyone will find what I have to say helpful, which is why it's great that there are many different voices here. (Too bad there's so much ridiculous woo also, but whatever.)

I make a really simple assumption when working with someone 100+ pounds overweight. If someone 100+ pounds overweight was sensible about diet or exercise, they would already be thin and healthy.

This ignores human nature and is condescending. When I had a lot to lose I chose to do it myself, and I'm often quite happy about that, when meeting people like you, who would probably have depressed and discouraged me by treating me like a moron and an incompetent merely because I had let myself gain a ridiculous amount of weight.

It should be assumed by anyone helping them that the obese person needs to start from scratch, relearn how to eat, how to move, etc.

For many of us, you'd be wrong. Plenty of people get fat who aren't too stupid to know about nutrition and calories and such and who have been active in the past.

IIFYM is not, by default, easily understood.

Seems simple enough to me, and I don't even do it.

More significantly, doing it well enough to be helpful to many newbies is--someone with 100 lbs to lose doesn't need to major in the minors and get obsessive about macros or how much potassium or iron she is taking in. Most of the time she needs to eat more protein, maybe fewer carbs or sugar (maybe not), figure out an easy way to cut calories, probably add some vegetables/fiber, and generally learn to construct a balanced meal that intuitively has about the right number of calories. I don't think this is very hard, really. I think most people already know what they should do, but overcomplicate it or don't want to do it (see the millions of posts here about being "a fussy eater"), or make it all or nothing (tell themselves they can't succeed unless they cut out all sugar or some such so they fail). Often the benefit of IIFYM is it's a baby step toward understanding what a balanced diet is.

I've seen several responses in this same forum thread that prove there are many people on MFP that don't understand it fully.

Mostly I've seen yours that fit that mold, with the citation to IIFYM.com and the claim that micros are irrelevant.

This content has been removed.

I just started with IIFYM, and I haven't found any discussions or groups involving others who follow that methodology to be "annoying". In fact, quite the opposite. They're pretty inspiring sometimes.

IIFYM is a system based on your macronutrients, as others have already pointed out, and which (if you use one of the actual macro calculators) corresponds to a few things:
- whether you're bulking, losing, or maintaining
- your body fat percentage, if you're trying to lose
- your activity level

For those concerned about micronutrients, certainly things like sugar and sodium are important - but unless you are diabetic or have a medical condition which requires a low sodium diet, they're not THE MOST important. I also track my iron, as I'm borderline anemic. That's important to me, but might not be for you.

Most people I've talked to, including the group IIFYM Women on Facebook, advocate strength training as a means of helping with your weight loss and fitness levels. I love that. Feeling stronger is amazing. It also helps me focus more on protein intake and eating more healthily. Lifting makes you hungry, and potato chips don't fill you up!

The benefit of IIFYM is that if adhered to it can work for any nutrition profile (I'm mostly vegetarian, for example) and any fitness level (even if you don't work out at all, which I don't recommend) while giving you wiggle room for a piece of cake at a birthday party. Eat it, log it as accurately as possible, move on.

To the people posting about Pop Tarts: stop being silly. Certainly, IIFYM allows you to have Pop Tarts, but since eating all of your calories in Pop Tarts won't meet your macros, it's not a "Pop Tart diet". It's not a diet at all. It's a way to count what you eat more accurately than the MFP databases and estimating serving sizes. The calculators also provide more accurate numbers for where your goals should be.

I would recommend looking into it further if you're interested, using the macro calculators, joining the groups if you have questions (both here and on FB), and trying it for yourself.

p.s. - if you do start and want to set macro goals here, there's a browser (Chrome) extension which will let you do so. Information about it is available through those groups, or you can PM me.