I know there is some conspiracy here about bodytypes.. such as labeling one a ectomorph but this is denying the fact that some individuals will be able to handle more calories, be leaner, and attain more muscle mass purely on genetics. These cases will allow IIFYM of course, without much consequence if any.
However telling a natural fatty to eat in that way is ridiculous, honestly i didnt put on much muscle, just fat when I did IFFYM. When i switched to eating more whole foods with the same amount of calories i put on 4lbs of muscle on some weeks. all my lifts increased dramitically and my physique drastically improved. IMO
IIFYM = bad for endomorphs
thoughts?
|
-
01-06-2012, 03:34 PM #1
IIFYM = Bad advice to give people with slow metabolisms.
-
01-06-2012, 03:38 PM #2
-
01-06-2012, 03:40 PM #3
-
01-06-2012, 03:46 PM #4
-
-
01-06-2012, 03:46 PM #5
BS, you know giving this advice will lead to, people hitting there daily fat and protein maybe at 2k of calories and they will eat 1k of ice cream and expect to gain muscle because this idea is spread like aids
how about you do iifym with 8 twinkies a day next time you bulk for a prolonged period of time? when you gain muscle doing this I will agree with this theory
-
01-06-2012, 03:52 PM #6
The point of IIFYM is whether or not you can FIT SOMETHING INTO YOUR MACROS. You can eat anything you want, but you must get sufficient amounts of protein and fat in your diet (carbs are a nonessential macro and can vary from person to person). So for most people that means that their diet consists primarily of whole foods anyway. If you are lucky and your daily calorie allotment is high (3500+), you could probably enjoy 8 twinkies while still getting sufficient macros but that is more than likely not going to be the case.
P.S. I hate you.
-
01-06-2012, 03:56 PM #7
-
01-06-2012, 03:57 PM #8
-
-
01-06-2012, 03:57 PM #9
-
01-06-2012, 03:58 PM #10
hey retard if it was that simple you wouldnt need extra calories, everyone would simply eat 90g of fat and 200g of protein a day and gain pure muscles. Why the fcuk do you think we need a calorie surplus to gain muscle? to build new muscle. Good luck doing that with twinkies.
try eating maintenance calories to hit all your macros and then eat the rest of your calories in twinkies
dumbass, i will laugh at your fatas s after you do this, but i bet your not confident enough in your ****ty iifym theory to even try right?
-
01-06-2012, 04:00 PM #11
-
01-06-2012, 04:02 PM #12
-
-
01-06-2012, 04:03 PM #13
-
01-06-2012, 04:05 PM #14
-
01-06-2012, 04:06 PM #15
-
01-06-2012, 04:08 PM #16
-
-
01-06-2012, 04:09 PM #17
-
01-06-2012, 04:11 PM #18
-
01-06-2012, 04:23 PM #19
-
01-06-2012, 04:33 PM #20
-
-
01-06-2012, 04:42 PM #21
-
01-06-2012, 04:45 PM #22
-
01-06-2012, 04:50 PM #23
-
01-06-2012, 04:58 PM #24
-
-
01-06-2012, 05:00 PM #25
-
01-06-2012, 05:05 PM #26
-
01-06-2012, 06:36 PM #27
You obviously don't understand the basics of macros.
A gram of protein, carbs, or fat is exactly that to your body, regardless if whether it comes from a maccas burger, a steak and veggies, or a meal replacement.
If you are getting a different body composition from what you are eating now than what you were eating before, (assuming calories stayed the sane) then clearly the macros aren't the same, period.
There's no point in flaming replies op just because they're not telling you what you want to hear (which is clearly contrary to some basic facts regarding nutrition).
-
01-06-2012, 07:21 PM #28
-
-
01-06-2012, 08:23 PM #29
-
01-06-2012, 10:50 PM #30
haha lol thank you kindly sir "
Got negged after negging a popular member, but generally try not to spout out crap or pretend to be an expert.
This board has been great dispelling a lot of myths regarding nutrient timing, "clean" macro-nutrients etc. Certainly simplifies nutrition for training (now that I'm not frantically trying to squeeze in a meal every 3 hours and thinking my muscles will catabolise because I didn't have a PW meal/protein shake!).
Thank goodness, he was carrying on like a complete gimp, and that's not even including the inferences he made in this thread..
Bookmarks