CICO or IIFYM

It's pretty much the same

CICO (calories in, calories out) is just a statement about how one loses weight, that is, by burning more calories than one consumes. This is how all weight loss occurs. Figuring out the calories in part is relatively straightforward with the use of a scale, figuring out the number of calories burned is significantly more complex due to a number of physiological factors.

IIFYM (if it fits in your macros) is a method of counting calories with some additional attention to macro nutrient profile. A gram of carbohydrate or protein has 4 calories, and a gram of fat has 9, so counting macros, and setting a limit on total intake is essentially setting a limit on calories. The advantage of counting macros would be the ability to maintain what is generally accepted healthy macro nutrient profile. In particular, it can be useful to make sure one is consuming enough protein during weightloss. Some people also find eating enough fat is helpful in maintaining satiety.

As philosophies, both CICO and IIFYM are in opposition to the idea that one needs to eat specific foods, or specific types of foods, and avoid others in order to lose weight.

earlnabby wrote: »

Most people only need to count calories to lose weight. If you have specific fitness goals or dietary needs, you may want to count macros instead.

A lot of people do a hybrid which combines the two. They count calories as their main focus, but try to reach a specific macro goal also. I do a hybrid because I am T2Dm. I count calories BUT I have a maximum number of carbs each day I try to not go over (160 grams) in order to manage my blood sugars. I also try to reach or exceed my protein goal and let the fats fall where they will.

I guess I do a hybrid also since I have 1g P/lb of lean mass as my starting point... then fats at 60g cause I like my hair and carbs fall where they will but if my macros are sloppy here and there I don't really stress.