IIFYM VS LOW CARB
kelsberry92
Posts: 9 Member
Still hung up about this. I just don't know where to start. Low carb? IIFYM? Counting calories? Someone help. Looking to lose like 60ish pounds hopefully by the beginning of next year. (Aiming high I know)
0
Replies
-
Satiety is very individual. Do whatever best helps you maintain a calorie deficit.
21 -
kelsberry92 wrote: »Still hung up about this. I just don't know where to start. Low carb? IIFYM? Counting calories? Someone help. Looking to lose like 60ish pounds hopefully by the beginning of next year. (Aiming high I know)
Start by eating regular meals of nutrient dense foods. Pay attention to how you feel. Are you still hungry? You may have to tweak your fats and/or protein upward. Do you have less energy? You may need to up your carbs.
Most do well by starting with the MFP macro defaults and adjust as needed. The only thing REQUIRED to lose weight (as demonstrated by the graphic above) is to create a calorie deficit. The rest of it is all about what makes you feel the best.7 -
Calorie counting is king and the bottom line.... how you get there is what is sustainable and realistic for you.
I personally count calories only but shoot to hit protein/fiber/fat goals and fill it in with carbs. I try to keep sodium under 3k. I do have treats that fit in that framework daily.2 -
kelsberry92 wrote: »Still hung up about this. I just don't know where to start. Low carb? IIFYM? Counting calories? Someone help. Looking to lose like 60ish pounds hopefully by the beginning of next year. (Aiming high I know)
Calorie deficit.0 -
Calorie counting is king and the bottom line.... how you get there is what is sustainable and realistic for you.
I personally count calories only but shoot to hit protein/fiber/fat goals and fill it in with carbs. I try to keep sodium under 3k. I do have treats that fit in that framework daily.
I would argue that calories are king for weight loss but calorie counting isn't strictly necessary. A lot of people like it, but a lot of other methods can get someone into the needed calorie deficit without counting calories. I'd say it's important for the OP to play around and see what works best for them.2 -
kelsberry92 wrote: »Still hung up about this. I just don't know where to start. Low carb? IIFYM? Counting calories? Someone help. Looking to lose like 60ish pounds hopefully by the beginning of next year. (Aiming high I know)
Start anywhere! Pick a method that appeals to you and try it out.
Personally, I started with straight calorie counting and then over time I transitioned to a more IIFYM style of eating (after a short detour into low carb). We can't predict what will work best for you. I like calorie counting because of that all important calorie deficit for weight loss, but you might find something else easier for you.1 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Satiety is very individual. Do whatever best helps you maintain a calorie deficit.
You'll loose weight that's not just fat but also potentially muscle. The CICO thinking is shockingly popular on here. I'm certain you can't do a body recomp following a CICO diet which tells me that all calories aren't the same.12 -
You'll loose weight that's not just fat but also potentially muscle. The CICO thinking is shockingly popular on here. I'm certain you can't do a body recomp following a CICO diet which tells me that all calories aren't the same.
You're absolutely, certainly, 100% mistaken.
First of all, you completely misunderstand what CICO is. If you're losing weight on a keto diet, it's due to CICO. If you're losing weight on a vegan, paleo, IIFYM, IF or any other kind of diet, it's due to CICO. CICO isn't a "diet", it's an acronym defining the law of energy balance.
Second of all, keto is probably the worst possible diet to try to recomp or gain muscle. Carbs are anti-catabolic, and keto is lacking in carbs. You don't gain muscle by swilling fat all day long. A balanced diet which is higher in carbs and protein is much more optimal for preserving/building muscle.17 -
You'll loose weight that's not just fat but also potentially muscle. The CICO thinking is shockingly popular on here. I'm certain you can't do a body recomp following a CICO diet which tells me that all calories aren't the same.
You're absolutely, certainly, 100% mistaken.
First of all, you completely misunderstand what CICO is. If you're losing weight on a keto diet, it's due to CICO. If you're losing weight on a vegan, paleo, IIFYM, IF or any other kind of diet, it's due to CICO. CICO isn't a "diet", it's an acronym defining the law of energy balance.
Second of all, keto is probably the worst possible diet to try to recomp or gain muscle. Carbs are anti-catabolic, and keto is lacking in carbs. You don't gain muscle by swilling fat all day long. A diet which is higher in carbs and protein is much more optimal for preserving/building muscle.
Where did I mention keto once?2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »Satiety is very individual. Do whatever best helps you maintain a calorie deficit.
You'll loose weight that's not just fat but also potentially muscle. The CICO thinking is shockingly popular on here. I'm certain you can't do a body recomp following a CICO diet which tells me that all calories aren't the same.
Trying to understand what you are saying here...
Not sure you quite grasp what CICO is - what do you think it is?
What is a "CICO diet"? All weight loss diets have to create a deficit - or don't you think that's the case?
How can calories actually be different when they are units of energy?
Some of the diets mentioned in the chart are worse for muscle retention or building muscle - what are you proposing people should do?6 -
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.12
-
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Think you mean TEF? Which is of trivial importance.
Calories are indeed the same.
I won't try and convince you but why 1500 cals and why such extremes leaving out the middle ground?
You haven't even mentioned protein which is of huge importance when losing weight.
High fat keto diet is very poor choice if muscle retention is your aim, both carbs and protein are muscle sparing.
A large calorie deficit is also a poor choice.10 -
The person that started this thread wants to drop 60 pounds, I assume, as fast as she can. She asked specific questions and someone posted a generic chart I see on here often. I quoted the chart essentially saying it was a lazy response and not directly answering her question.11
-
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Same health results? No. Nutrition is important for health, and there's way more to it than macro split. Who says otherwise?
Same weight loss? Pretty close (except TEF, blah blah blah, which is a pretty minor factor in realistic diets).
But none of this is helping with OP's question.
OP, a couple of thoughts.
The things you list are not mutually exclusive. For example you can calorie count and low carb by logging your eating on MFP. IIFYM, if you're talking about literally tracking/counting each macro, is pretty much equivalent to calorie counting (because each macro has a characteristic calorie level, or close enough).
Since you're here on MFP, why not just set up your profile as honestly as possible, and start logging food and exercise? Eat to your calorie goal, or eat to your macro goals if you wish.
Personally, I'd suggest logging what you eat now for a week, maybe cutting back portions a bit if you wish. With a little data and experience, you can start reviewing your food diary, and finding things that aren't helping you meet calorie or macro goals. Reduce or eliminate those foods, perhaps substituting other foods you enjoy that better meet your goals.
Rinse & repeat, until you find a personal way of eating that's practical for you, that you find tasty, satiating and nutritious, and that results in moderate, sustainable weight loss. Think of the weight loss process as practice for maintaining a healthy weight forever, rather than some exceptional, odd way of eating you wouldn't want to do forever.
There's no need to over-think this or do some fancy, radical, formal program.
BTW: If I'm doing the arithmetic right - often I'm not
- 60 pounds by year end would be around 3.75 pounds per week. Unless you now weigh around 400+ pounds, that's risky and likely to be unhealthily fast. A reasonable rule of thumb is no more than 1% of body weight weekly. and less than that as you're within 50 pounds or so of ultimate goal. I just want you to stay strong & healthy while losing weight!
Losing very rapidly risks losing unnecessarily large amounts of lean tissue alongside fat, among other possible health consequences (hair loss, fatigue, irritability, etc.). Also, a large calorie deficit can be less sustainable, setting us up for periodic desperate bouts of overconsumption. Often, a more moderate weight loss target that's sustainable will result in faster overall loss than an aggressive target with semi-frequent lapses.
Personally, I calorie counted, while losing 50+ pounds in just under a year, down to a healthy weight. (I'm now in my 2nd year of maintenance). It's one way that works for many. But that doesn't mean that's the only way.
Wishing you success!9 -
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Assuming protein was the same in both diets, they would be equal. Carb based diets are more supportive of muscle growth and sustainment. Keto can support muscle sustainment if protein is high, you unlikely to gain any muscle.
The biggest take away is dietaty compliance. High protein diets have been shown to be the best. Carb and fat levels are individualistic. From my observation, volume eaters and those who are insulin sensitive do better on carb diets while those who are IR do better on fat based diets.
OP, id put protein around 1.5 to 2.2g/kg and a moderate deficit. Then play with foods to ser what is the most sustainable and filling.6 -
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Assuming protein was the same in both diets, they would be equal. Carb based diets are more supportive of muscle growth and sustainment. Keto can support muscle sustainment if protein is high, you unlikely to gain any muscle.
The biggest take away is dietaty compliance. High protein diets have been shown to be the best. Carb and fat levels are individualistic. From my observation, volume eaters and those who are insulin sensitive do better on carb diets while those who are IR do better on fat based diets.
OP, id put protein around 1.5 to 2.2g/kg and a moderate deficit. Then play with foods to ser what is the most sustainable and filling.
Over consumption of protein gets stored as glycogen just like carbs.5 -
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Assuming protein was the same in both diets, they would be equal. Carb based diets are more supportive of muscle growth and sustainment. Keto can support muscle sustainment if protein is high, you unlikely to gain any muscle.
The biggest take away is dietaty compliance. High protein diets have been shown to be the best. Carb and fat levels are individualistic. From my observation, volume eaters and those who are insulin sensitive do better on carb diets while those who are IR do better on fat based diets.
OP, id put protein around 1.5 to 2.2g/kg and a moderate deficit. Then play with foods to ser what is the most sustainable and filling.
Over consumption of protein gets stored as glycogen just like carbs.
Whats your point? We have a average storage capacity of 300 to 500g of glycogen... more in those who exercise. And fatty acids are more likely to be stored as fat since its leas metabolically taxing.3 -
The person that started this thread wants to drop 60 pounds, I assume, as fast as she can. She asked specific questions and someone posted a generic chart I see on here often. I quoted the chart essentially saying it was a lazy response and not directly answering her question.
As we cannot answer her question, there is no direct answer to her question - only she can discover what way of eating will best satiate her and make it easiest for her to maintain a calorie deficit.4 -
kelsberry92 wrote: »Still hung up about this. I just don't know where to start. Low carb? IIFYM? Counting calories? Someone help. Looking to lose like 60ish pounds hopefully by the beginning of next year. (Aiming high I know)
Whichever one you will stick with
I would suggest taking a couple of weeks and just calorie counting/logging your food. Also make note each day of how you feel - did you struggle not to eat more? Were you tired or full of energy? How much did you enjoy what you ate? Then go back and look for patterns - What did you eat on the good days? Where did you waste calories? Then go from there.
You don't have to eat in any particular way. I focus number one on hitting my calories. Number two on getting over 80g of protein. Number three on getting 25g of fiber. I find when I do that my other numbers fall into place and I feel fine at my calorie goal.
The whole carb thing differs person to person. Some people find carbs don't fill them up and make them crave more. I actually find carbs fill me up and I have low energy when I happen to eat lower carb. Pay attention to your log and you'll figure it out :drinker:2 -
The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Assuming protein was the same in both diets, they would be equal. Carb based diets are more supportive of muscle growth and sustainment. Keto can support muscle sustainment if protein is high, you unlikely to gain any muscle.
The biggest take away is dietaty compliance. High protein diets have been shown to be the best. Carb and fat levels are individualistic. From my observation, volume eaters and those who are insulin sensitive do better on carb diets while those who are IR do better on fat based diets.
OP, id put protein around 1.5 to 2.2g/kg and a moderate deficit. Then play with foods to ser what is the most sustainable and filling.
Over consumption of protein gets stored as glycogen just like carbs.
Lol, NO. Excess protein goes trough our kidneys and it's basally peed out, while fats are stored as triglicerydes and too much carbs can be converted to triglicerydes in de novo lypogenesis. Don't preach woo here.5 -
Overconsumption of protein, while trendy, does carry with it associated health risks. NIH:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4045293/
2 -
Windrunner666 wrote: »The units of energy are used differently in the body. CICO I assume is "calories in and calories out." You can't convince me that a 1500 calorie diet will yield the same health results if 75% of it is carbs compared to a more specialized diet like the ketogenic where fat is 75% of the calories.
Assuming protein was the same in both diets, they would be equal. Carb based diets are more supportive of muscle growth and sustainment. Keto can support muscle sustainment if protein is high, you unlikely to gain any muscle.
The biggest take away is dietaty compliance. High protein diets have been shown to be the best. Carb and fat levels are individualistic. From my observation, volume eaters and those who are insulin sensitive do better on carb diets while those who are IR do better on fat based diets.
OP, id put protein around 1.5 to 2.2g/kg and a moderate deficit. Then play with foods to ser what is the most sustainable and filling.
Over consumption of protein gets stored as glycogen just like carbs.
Lol, NO. Excess protein goes trough our kidneys and it's basally peed out, while fats are stored as triglicerydes and too much carbs can be converted to triglicerydes in de novo lypogenesis. Don't preach woo here.
Wrong0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Calorie counting is king and the bottom line.... how you get there is what is sustainable and realistic for you.
I personally count calories only but shoot to hit protein/fiber/fat goals and fill it in with carbs. I try to keep sodium under 3k. I do have treats that fit in that framework daily.
I would argue that calories are king for weight loss but calorie counting isn't strictly necessary. A lot of people like it, but a lot of other methods can get someone into the needed calorie deficit without counting calories. I'd say it's important for the OP to play around and see what works best for them.
I agree with that, many people do lose weight without actually counting calories. While I didn't say counting calories was required to lose weight I do still feel that counting calories is king (not the only way, but the gold standard), especially since the OP is still learning what will work for them and asking for advice. My advice is to count calories until you know what works (or forever).
Otherwise I fear OP could fall into the "just eat clean" trap then come back in a month wondering why they aren't losing, just to have everyone pile on that they should be weighing everything and logging.
Edited for clarity :-)2 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Calorie counting is king and the bottom line.... how you get there is what is sustainable and realistic for you.
I personally count calories only but shoot to hit protein/fiber/fat goals and fill it in with carbs. I try to keep sodium under 3k. I do have treats that fit in that framework daily.
I would argue that calories are king for weight loss but calorie counting isn't strictly necessary. A lot of people like it, but a lot of other methods can get someone into the needed calorie deficit without counting calories. I'd say it's important for the OP to play around and see what works best for them.
I agree with that, many people do lose weight without actually counting calories. I do still feel that counting calories is king (not the only way, but the gold standard), especially since the OP is still learning what will work for them and asking for advice. My advice is count calories until you know what works (or forever).
Otherwise I fear OP could fall into the "just eat clean" trap then come back in a month wondering why they aren't losing, just to have everyone pile on that they should be weighing everything and logging.
I agree. Start out simple . . . use the MFP defaults for macros and count the calories. Once a baseline has been established, you can tweak it however works best for you.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions