IIFYM

drkidd5316
drkidd5316 Posts: 19 Member
in Food and Nutrition
I'm curious, what do y'all think about the "If It Fits Your Macros" type of nutrition for bulking and for fat loss?

Replies

  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    edited August 2017
    Considering it is technically based on calories (like all ways of eating), it works for both weightloss, maintenance and gaining.
    Some may say it's too macro focussed, and hitting exact numbers is not necessary - using minimums for fat/protein may be a less restrictive approach as you have some freedom around the rest of your calories.
  • drkidd5316
    drkidd5316 Posts: 19 Member
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Considering it is technically based on calories (like all ways of eating), it works for both weightloss, maintenance and gaining.
    Some may say it's too macro focussed, and hitting exact numbers is not necessary - using minimums for fat/protein may be a less restrictive approach as you have some freedom around the rest of your calories.

    I guess my biggest concern is with the IIFYM, the program wont count artificial sweeteners. So basically if i have 30 calories left for the day and I'm hungry a coke zero is better than having a fruit smoothie.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    edited August 2017
    drkidd5316 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Considering it is technically based on calories (like all ways of eating), it works for both weightloss, maintenance and gaining.
    Some may say it's too macro focussed, and hitting exact numbers is not necessary - using minimums for fat/protein may be a less restrictive approach as you have some freedom around the rest of your calories.

    I guess my biggest concern is with the IIFYM, the program wont count artificial sweeteners. So basically if i have 30 calories left for the day and I'm hungry a coke zero is better than having a fruit smoothie.

    Uh. What?

    No way of eating counts artificial sugars. You choose to consume those yourself. They have little to no calories.

    Coke zero is not food.

    If you have used up all your calories, any food is going to put you over your calories. Consistently eating excess calories of anything will lead to weight gain. Hunger is normal, feeling hungry is fine. I'd say expected. If you plan carefully you can minimise your feelings of hunger.
  • seska422
    seska422 Posts: 3,217 Member
    drkidd5316 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Considering it is technically based on calories (like all ways of eating), it works for both weightloss, maintenance and gaining.
    Some may say it's too macro focussed, and hitting exact numbers is not necessary - using minimums for fat/protein may be a less restrictive approach as you have some freedom around the rest of your calories.

    I guess my biggest concern is with the IIFYM, the program wont count artificial sweeteners. So basically if i have 30 calories left for the day and I'm hungry a coke zero is better than having a fruit smoothie.

    Since fruit smoothies have calories and artificial sweeteners don't have calories, that's the proper thing to do. 30 calories wouldn't get you much in the way of a fruit smoothie.
  • need2belean
    need2belean Posts: 358 Member
    drkidd5316 wrote: »
    I'm curious, what do y'all think about the "If It Fits Your Macros" type of nutrition for bulking and for fat loss?

    Love it. Couldn't have gotten this far without it.
  • kwtilbury
    kwtilbury Posts: 1,234 Member
    IIFYM is simply a flexible approach to dieting. Rather than prescribing specific types of foods, you can eat whatever you want...as long as it fits your macros. In essence, MFP is set up to facilitate IIFYM.
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    I eat a low carb diet of IIFYM. My macros are just a little different than most people's. ;)
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    drkidd5316 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Considering it is technically based on calories (like all ways of eating), it works for both weightloss, maintenance and gaining.
    Some may say it's too macro focussed, and hitting exact numbers is not necessary - using minimums for fat/protein may be a less restrictive approach as you have some freedom around the rest of your calories.

    I guess my biggest concern is with the IIFYM, the program wont count artificial sweeteners. So basically if i have 30 calories left for the day and I'm hungry a coke zero is better than having a fruit smoothie.

    Huh? Not really seeing what you are getting at.
    Like all calorie restricted diets calories are restricted....
    If there's very few calories in something there's very little to count. For weight loss then of course not going over your calorie limit is "better". It can't be extrapolated that coke zero and a fruit smoothie are seen as the same nutritionally.

    BTW - important to make a distinction between IIFYM the website and IIFYM the eating philosophy.
    The former I would find dreadfully restrictive, the latter can be extremely flexible.

    BTW2 - hitting your personal macro choices, the Y in IIFYM the philosophy, isn't contradictory to also hitting micro nutrient needs or a license to eat an overall poor diet.
  • cs2thecox
    cs2thecox Posts: 533 Member
    It works for me.
    It took a while to figure out a macro combo that balances my energy levels, satiety and my body recomp goals, as it's pretty much trial and error around a theoretical starting point, but I seem to be there now.

    Weirdly, tracking macros doesn't lead to the same sort of obsessive behaviour for me that counting calories has done in the past. Makes zero sense seeing as it's basically the same thing in the end, but I'll take it.

    (PS if you have 30 calories left and are hungry, then eat, like, 30 calories of celery or something like that with a ton of fibre and basically nothing else? I'm not sure what that in particular has to do with IIFYM, but then again I just use the acronym to justify fitting doughnuts into my diet, not anything on the website of the same name!)

Categories