IIFYM? Does it make a difference?
Options
feathers1981
Posts: 69 Member
I’ve come back to MFP after another failed attempt at Weight Watchers (I don’t do well with the unlimited fruit!). I only have 7 pounds to lose so I know I need to be more strict to get those off.
I’ve been reading about IIFYM, which sound interesting. Has anybody tried this?
It seems like it might be quite time consuming to get your calories distributed to the right amounts between protein, fat and carbs. If I just eat 1500 calories will this have the same effect or do you think the make-up of the calories really makes a difference?
Also, I’ve just started marathon raining again. On long run days or days when I do really hard speed work with my athletics club I’ll need to eat more carbs so want to make sure that whatever I do works taking into consideration the running I do. I only run 4 times a week – I do a bit of strength/conditioning training twice a week but only to compliment my running say 30 mins max.
K
I’ve been reading about IIFYM, which sound interesting. Has anybody tried this?
It seems like it might be quite time consuming to get your calories distributed to the right amounts between protein, fat and carbs. If I just eat 1500 calories will this have the same effect or do you think the make-up of the calories really makes a difference?
Also, I’ve just started marathon raining again. On long run days or days when I do really hard speed work with my athletics club I’ll need to eat more carbs so want to make sure that whatever I do works taking into consideration the running I do. I only run 4 times a week – I do a bit of strength/conditioning training twice a week but only to compliment my running say 30 mins max.
K
0
Replies
-
I'm a runner, and have followed IIFYM for years.
its an eating style more than a diet - its about getting a balance of macros that's right for you.
for me, i aim for 0.8g of protein per lb of bodyweight, and 0.4g of fat and carbs fill in the rest.
i find that long distance running doesn't really work well with losing weight - the runger is real!!!5 -
Setting and tracking macros should make weightloss easier, not harder. IIFYM means that you find a good personal macro split. This will help you with satiety, and thus adherence to calorie goal. Calories in/out regulates weight. There isn't one "right" split for everybody, and possibly many "right" splits for any given individual.
A more organized carb cycling plan can be something for you.3 -
IIFYM doesn't mean you need to have set percentages for your macros or follow the TDEE same every day calorie allowance. (Don't confuse IIFYM the website with IIFYM the eating philosophy.)
I do long distance cycle rides and events so for me both the Myfitnesspal eat back exercise calories method and setting minimum goals for protein and fat works really well. Gives you far more flexibility which for me at least makes adherence far easier as I don't enjoy rigid goals.
In reality protein took a little thought over food choices but fat took care of itself - that's where the Y in IIFYM is very personal. Not time consuming at all beyond thinking "how's my protein goal and calorie goal looking so far today?"
Yes different macros/food choices make a difference (adherence, health, enjoyment and especially for endurance athletes - performance) but it's calorie balance that governs weight loss, gain or maintenance.5 -
IIFYM for me, just means eat enough protein, eat enough, let carbs do what they do making sure I get some starch into my day as that's what keeps me sane.
There are people who get really anal about hitting everything perfectly but that's really not necessary to the average person.6 -
I've been doing IIFYM for about a year. I agree with what others said - weight loss is about calories in vs calories out. IIFYM is just a way to spread those same calories out over protein, carbs and fat.
After finding IIFYM my weight loss really took off and I think it was because I was so mindful about what I was putting into my body. More protein means I'm less hungry throughout the day. When I reach for a snack I always make sure it's protein based.
Once you get the hang of it, and know what foods fit into your macro split, it becomes very easy to do.
This type of eating works well for me. It my not work for some. But the main goal in all of this is eating less calories to create a deficit and to produce weight loss. Nothing more, nothing less.6 -
I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.
If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).2 -
goldthistime wrote: »I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.
If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.
I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.2 -
goldthistime wrote: »I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.
If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.
Sorry, I was unclear. I quoted you because I agreed with your statement, and thought that point was particularly worthy of discussion.
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.
If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.
I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.
There are people believe it or not who do IIFYM by eating garbage food. The website itself had to put a note about it. Unfortunately there are people who do one extreme to another. If you ever watched Maxx Chewning (a youtuber), he tends to eat a lot of processed food in one day and he doesn't even care and says so. They do exist.
I don't even know how they can... unless they get all their protein from shakes...? I can hardly fit a chocolate bar in a normal day!0 -
I love IIFYM. For me protein has to be high (more than 1g per lb) to keep me full. I watch dietary fibre, try to get at least half my fat goal and let the rest fall where they may. Which sometimes means chicken breast, a protein shake, Greek yoghurt and a Mars bar for dinner! Nom.2
-
janejellyroll wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.
If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.
I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.
There are people believe it or not who do IIFYM by eating garbage food. The website itself had to put a note about it. Unfortunately there are people who do one extreme to another. If you ever watched Maxx Chewning (a youtuber), he tends to eat a lot of processed food in one day and he doesn't even care and says so. They do exist.
I'm not sure what you mean by "garbage food," but you can find eating people all kinds of ways. Just because you can find someone eating a certain way doesn't mean that there are people actively advocating for that type of diet -- that's what I mean, I don't see people promoting IIFYM and, at the same time, telling people that it doesn't matter what they eat and that nutritional needs are some sort of myth. I tend not to get my nutrition and fitness advice from YouTube, so if there are people there who are saying that you don't need to meet your nutritional needs . . . I'll have to take your word for it.
That said, the places I've seen IIFYM advocated, I've never seen anybody argue that it isn't necessary to meet your nutritional needs.0 -
feathers1981 wrote: »I’ve come back to MFP after another failed attempt at Weight Watchers (I don’t do well with the unlimited fruit!). I only have 7 pounds to lose so I know I need to be more strict to get those off.
I’ve been reading about IIFYM, which sound interesting. Has anybody tried this?
It seems like it might be quite time consuming to get your calories distributed to the right amounts between protein, fat and carbs. If I just eat 1500 calories will this have the same effect or do you think the make-up of the calories really makes a difference?
Also, I’ve just started marathon raining again. On long run days or days when I do really hard speed work with my athletics club I’ll need to eat more carbs so want to make sure that whatever I do works taking into consideration the running I do. I only run 4 times a week – I do a bit of strength/conditioning training twice a week but only to compliment my running say 30 mins max.
K
Your macro composition isn't really going to so much impact weight loss as it will satiety, possibly body composition, and performance. There is no one size fits all macro composition...an endurance athlete is going to have a different macro profile than a body builder for example.
IIFYM isn't really a "diet"...it is an eating philosophy. It also isn't that website...that website is just capitalizing on the philosophy but has default macros for everyone as if it's universal...it's not.
Calories are what is important for weight management...focus on those first and get that down...then you can start getting into the whole macro thing if you wish.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I don't try to follow IIFYM, but perhaps I accidentally do. I try to eat enough protein and let my carbs and fats fall where they may. I'm more concerned about getting my servings of fruits and veggies in than considering my macros.IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight.
If the real discussion is about whether it's ok to incorporate treats in your diet or not, I vote for getting those healthy habits well established first, then yes, go ahead and incorporate treats in your diet. If you can start off on Day 1 incorporating treats, more power to you. For me, I needed a period of time with very few treats to get rid of the habit of overeating them.
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
I was talking about the main appeal of IIFYM for many people is believing that it means you can lose weight without eating healthy. They are right, but for long term health, they are not helping themselves. Now, if you decide that you want to eat 100% healthy for whatever reason, so be it. There is no rule really on it other than not going over your macros. The rest is up to you to put boundaries, if you want to eat 100% healthy, then go ahead. I prefer 90/10.
I don't know of any advocates of IIFYM that don't acknowledge that we don't also need to eat in a way that allows us to meet our nutritional needs.
There are people believe it or not who do IIFYM by eating garbage food. The website itself had to put a note about it. Unfortunately there are people who do one extreme to another. If you ever watched Maxx Chewning (a youtuber), he tends to eat a lot of processed food in one day and he doesn't even care and says so. They do exist.
I'm not sure what you mean by "garbage food," but you can find eating people all kinds of ways. Just because you can find someone eating a certain way doesn't mean that there are people actively advocating for that type of diet -- that's what I mean, I don't see people promoting IIFYM and, at the same time, telling people that it doesn't matter what they eat and that nutritional needs are some sort of myth. I tend not to get my nutrition and fitness advice from YouTube, so if there are people there who are saying that you don't need to meet your nutritional needs . . . I'll have to take your word for it.
That said, the places I've seen IIFYM advocated, I've never seen anybody argue that it isn't necessary to meet your nutritional needs.
I agree with you, if you go on the IIFYM website, they encourage you to eat healthy, but a lot of people don't go on that website and read that part, that's what I am saying. I am not putting blame on IIFYM, I am just saying that there are people who don't read what IIFYM is really all about, they conclude that it's just an excuse to eat whatever they want.
This 100%0 -
This thread is really confusing when you have no idea, like me, what iifym is. Lol. What is iifym?0
-
I do IIFYM, but remember that IIFYM is not an excuse to eat only junk food to lose weight. It just means that you still have to eat healthy, but if you can incorporate a food of your liking whether it's junk food or not, then go ahead and eat it. I list my priorities in this order when I plan my meals for the day:
1) Make sure I don't go over my calories
2) Hit my minimum protein
3) Get as much micro-nutrients as I can
4) High Fiber foods
5) Any food I like regardless if they are poor nutritionally.
This is sort of what I do. The things I watch the most are fiber, sodium, and calories.0 -
Thanks so much for all the feedback! The reason I failed at WW was because of the no limits, so I would just sit eating fruit all day (which actually never fills me up and just makes me more hungry!). I know that I work better with a clear limit on what I can eat which is why I've ended up coming back to MFP.goldthistime wrote: »
ETA: OP, if the main reason you failed at Weight Watchers was that you ate too many fruits, I'm not sure how you'll fare with IIFYM. If your primary focus becomes eating to your calorie goal, then yes, this is a much better choice (although I would argue that many people would just call that CICO than IIFYM).
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions