IIFYM Help -- Getting varying, conflicting macro suggestions
JuneyCleaves
Posts: 92 Member
Trying to establish my macro counts, and getting a very large variance depending on which calculator I use (one suggested 50g carbs, another 180?!) -- using the same input information.
Can anyone make a suggestion on which calculator to use so that my starting point isn't flawed?
With thanks,
JC
Can anyone make a suggestion on which calculator to use so that my starting point isn't flawed?
With thanks,
JC
0
Replies
-
Macros are about satiety. You need to tweak the percentages as you go along. I don't really track my macros, I eat what I like. But I am also bad, I really should eat more protein. So, do as I say, not as I do. LOL1
-
I understand being about satiety, but what I can't grasp is such a large variance in one macro between 2 calculators.0
-
Which calculator are you using?0
-
The largest difference I noticed was through the IIFYM website (50g) and the Lifesum app (184g).0
-
Not sure why they would be different. What is your goal? To lose, gain, maintain?0
-
Pretty sure IIFYM carbs are based on whatever calories are left after protein and fat have been accounted for. How high did you set your protein and fat grams to be - was this unnecessarily high?0
-
Fat loss.
IIFYM site set 133gP/67gF
Lifesum app set 74gP/49gF
So there's even a pretty big disparity in the protein as well.0 -
JuneyCleaves wrote: »Fat loss.
IIFYM site set 133gP/67gF
Lifesum app set 74gP/49gF
So there's even a pretty big disparity in the protein as well.
What g/lb did you use for protein and fat on IIFYM? And what are your stats?0 -
The Y is an important part of IIFYM. Your macros, not the macros someone else gives you. How do YOU want to structure your diet?1
-
They don't have options for g/lb, it's preset/built in.
184 to 160, 5'5, likely around a 30% BF.
IIFYM site pumped out 1330 cal / 136P, 43C + 68F
Fitlabs site pumped out 1472 cal / 125P, 130C + 50F
Lifesum app pumped out 1471 cal / 74P, 184C + 49F
While the latter two are more closely matched, there's still a huge variance in some of the macros, which is kinda the point of following this method. So I'm left a bit confused.0 -
I understand the Y is an important variable. But because this is the first time I'm really looking at macros, my Y is really an undetermined variable. Which is why I was seeking assistance.
I'd love to go 90/5/5 C/F/P but that is obviously not realistic or sustainable.
I knew there'd be some tweaking after the onset, but I consulted these calculators with the idea of fat loss at the forefront, expecting that there'd be a consistent jumping off point in order to facilitate that.
I'm left wondering how accurate these suggestions are because of the variance.
So I came here to ask.0 -
Pick one. If you don’t like it, pick another.1
-
JuneyCleaves wrote: »Fat loss.
IIFYM site set 133gP/67gF
Lifesum app set 74gP/49gF
So there's even a pretty big disparity in the protein as well.
There has to be, for equivalent calorie count, you can't have a disparity in just one macro.
There are different assumptions about what the right macro mix is. There is no definitive answer. Or more exactly - there is no one size fits all answer. Some people do better upping carbs. Others do better upping fats. Still others are happiest when focused on protein.
Find out which is you, and do that.
IIFYM is (I believe) setting protein and fat levels, so carbs are assigned whatever is left. Older style calculators generally use the "food pyramid" macro ratios, which tend to be higher carb. There is no wrong answer - follow the model that makes it easiest to stick to the plan.I'm left wondering how accurate these suggestions are because of the variance.
They're all "accurate". The issue here is...what's the question?
It's not "what should my macros be for X calories" - it's "what should my macros be for X calories, these dietary preferences, and that activity level".
2 -
Helpful.
...thanks.0 -
In my experience, IIFYM.com gives very high protein numbers. It wouldn't be my choice for a macro calculator, but others like going higher protein. There really is no way to guess which one you'll find better for you. They're all fine splits.0
-
I get that. But if I knew what macros worked best for me, I wouldn't be seeking the help of a calculator or a forum. I obviously need assistance in finding a starting point.
What I am failing to grasp is why, if the model is the same, 3 different calculators would pump out 3 different solutions when asking the same questions to reach the answer.
And because they did, I'm wondering where I should start.
If the best solution was to just "pick one and go with it," I could have just arbitrarily assigned my percentages on MFP. I was hoping that by using these tools, their educated guess would be more educated than mine.
What I am hearing here is that it is not.0 -
JuneyCleaves wrote: »I get that. But if I knew what macros worked best for me, I wouldn't be seeking the help of a calculator or a forum. I obviously need assistance in finding a starting point.
What I am failing to grasp is why, if the model is the same, 3 different calculators would pump out 3 different solutions when asking the same questions to reach the answer.
And because they did, I'm wondering where I should start.
If the best solution was to just "pick one and go with it," I could have just arbitrarily assigned my percentages on MFP. I was hoping that by using these tools, their educated guess would be more educated than mine.
What I am hearing here is that it is not.
I think, one is not more advantageous. It’s more about adherence.0 -
Why not just put your stats in to MFP and use that?1
-
JuneyCleaves wrote: »I get that. But if I knew what macros worked best for me, I wouldn't be seeking the help of a calculator or a forum. I obviously need assistance in finding a starting point.
What I am failing to grasp is why, if the model is the same, 3 different calculators would pump out 3 different solutions when asking the same questions to reach the answer.
And because they did, I'm wondering where I should start.
If the best solution was to just "pick one and go with it," I could have just arbitrarily assigned my percentages on MFP. I was hoping that by using these tools, their educated guess would be more educated than mine.
What I am hearing here is that it is not.
To the bolded - It is not.
Several have mentioned HOW each site is starting out - they do NOT start the same. Hence difference results.
Even the IIFYM site uses different calculator for the TDEE - even if you honestly answer the same (did you? or did you say sedentary when you plan on working out?)
I'm going to suggest you are going to have a very difficult time if you are getting this hung up about it - you are thinking it's going to be this exact.
Oh, your first day when you hit 38% of something and want 40% - not sure what you'll do.
Honest comment on what's been seen many times.
Yes - you could have made up %'s - but then again - would yours have been in the range you now have?
Yes - then great - go for it.
As commented above a couple times - IIFYM's is going for usually desired protein and fat levels when in a diet - carbs get the rest.
Other sites - who knows.
And the % is merely a way of looking at it - that math on minimums is actually grams per day - you have to calculate that into what you'll actually be eating to get %.
I've just read the entire thread at once - the answer are in there - suggest you go back and reread all at once and carefully.
Don't imagine you aren't getting the answer you want - you actually are - you just don't understand the question to ask it well to match.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions