Layne Norton's New VLOG: IIFYM V.S Clean Eating

[PerpetualMotion]

IIFYM is much easier to remember than CADOMWAMPFWEMAMSAPCEB.

Flexible dieting is much better than IIFYM. I feel Lyle had it right from the beginning by just calling it flexible dieting. I know some people have qualms with the word "dieting" but it is what it is.

[ko300zx]

IIFYM is much easier to remember than CADOMWAMPFWEMAMSAPCEB.

You would think that not being a fuking idiot and understanding very simple concepts would be easy too....however this acronym has certainly proven that wrong.

[Jorge18]

You would think that not being a fuking idiot and understanding very simple concepts would be easy too....however this acronym has certainly proven that wrong.

I agree. You can't hit your macros on ice cream and pop tarts, but you can fit them into your macros with zero ramification.

[PhiSig2298]

This is new.

This is all your fault you know that right?

[alan aragon]

^lul

Erick caused the Downfall of Rome.

[FitnessCPA]

Flexible dieting is much better than IIFYM. I feel Lyle had it right from the beginning by just calling it flexible dieting. I know some people have qualms with the word "dieting" but it is what it is.

DCA or flexible dieting is a better term.

I agree that the idiots who choose to eat only cookies and protein powder are dumbasses.

I just don't like the acronym IIFYM because it just doesn't make much sense if taken literally. But like what has been stated a couple bazillion times already, a little common sense goes a long way.

[PR1MO]

I liked the part where Alan pointed out that IIFYM is not a "dieting philosophy", it was literally a shorthand answer to a bunch of questions that got posted every day, and then everyone continued to debate the flaws of it as if it was a dieting philosophy. Good reading people.

[WonderPug]

it was literally a shorthand answer to a bunch of questions that got posted every day...

It was a countermeasure to stupidity, but stupidly won.

[Chuck2600]

You would think that not being a fuking idiot and understanding very simple concepts would be easy too....however this acronym has certainly proven that wrong.

It amazes me that people claim the advantage bro science has over flexible dieting is that it's easier then counting calories and macros. Counting calories, and macros is just that! Plugging in a number on your smart phone and eating a varied diet without obsessing over minute details. Yet your typical bro science takes a few numbers and replaces it with a million and one complicated rules that don't make ANY sense.. But for some reason that's easier for most people....

[deebee83]

Thought
IIFYM has ruined the nutrition section.
Not because of the concept but because of the misunderstanding, misinformation and misuse

Dont know how many times I have seen, "just hit your macros and eat whatever you want"
"food choice/quality makes no difference"
"a carb is a carb"
:any fat is fine as long as its not trans"
All of these statements need qualifiers.

And just saying to take an 80-20 approach does not work either.
What is one person's percetion of a nutritious food, is not the same as someone else's.
Oatmeal vs oat bran vs All-bran cereal vs Cheerios vs Honey bunches of oats vs chocolate cheerios vs cocoa puffs vs a fudge poptart vs a chocolate frosted donut
Where do you draw your line?

What about they guy in a 20% deficit vs 20% surplus?
One has far more room for discretionary eating.

And just because you arent eating more than 20% crap doesnt mean you are getting a good nutrional foundation.
Claiming to get your vitamins throug a multi rather than fruit/veg/etc, getting all you fat from one source,

But the worst offense is telling people with crappy nutritional backgrounds who are trying to clean up their diet, that they dont need to as long as macros are hit. The likelihood that they will keep hitting macros if they dont clean up their diet is low if they dont make big changes.

Note: I am a HUGE Layne fan and agree with most everything he says.

10/10, would read again

[EjnarKolinkar]

DCA.

Now that solves one problem, but it doesn't address the paucity of common sense problem.

Repped for use of paucity.

I received IIFYM advice, 80/20 advice, flexible dieting advice from this forum and the usual sources on web. I never felt it the onus of the advisor to leave a disclaimer,"Sir please don't be a moron with your food choices!"

Those committed to poor diets looking for a way out will find an excuse to eat poorly readily available from so many sources. I don't thing posting on IIFYM needs to become a three page copy and paste contractural agreement with contingency disclaimers for every possible eventuality.

[ErickStevens]

This is all your fault you know that right?

^lul

Erick caused the Downfall of Rome.

*shrug* At th end of he day, I think the stupid acronym has helped far more people than it's hurt.

[The Solution]

Layne just posted this on his facebook wall.

Good read:

" fantastic must read blog on why eating 'clean' may not be providing you with as many micronutrients as you think:"

http://fitterhappierblog.wordpress.c...foods-paradox/


"Conclusion
So what is the best way to diet? As is the case with most things in life, I believe moderation is key. When it comes to body composition, the most important factor of the diet (by far) is daily macronutrient intakes. My personal belief is that one should aim to satisfy their daily macronutrient targets (and their target for fiber intake) by choosing an overwhelming majority of micronutrient-dense foods, including plenty of fruits and vegetables. Although I take a multivitamin as a bit of “insurance,” I personally aim to achieve the RDI of all micronutrients from my whole food sources.

While the majority of foods should be nutrient-dense, I also believe there is nothing wrong with including other foods that would typically be considered “junk food,” as long as micronutrient needs are met and the foods fit within your macronutrient targets for the day. Incorporating such foods in this context will not disrupt your diet in any way, and taking such an approach provides a much higher chance for long-term diet adherence.

So the take home point is to set appropriate macronutrient targets and use whatever foods you want to hit those targets, as long as daily micronutrient and fiber needs are met. For most people, satisfying these micronutrient and fiber requirements will demand that the majority of food choices will be “cleaner” food sources by default. Once micronutrient and fiber needs are met, knock yourselves out with the elaborate (and very impressive) ice cream and pastry-laden concoctions. And share the recipe."

[PR1MO]

Layne just posted this on his facebook wall.

Good read:

" fantastic must read blog on why eating 'clean' may not be providing you with as many micronutrients as you think:"

http://fitterhappierblog.wordpress.c...foods-paradox/


"Conclusion
So what is the best way to diet? As is the case with most things in life, I believe moderation is key. When it comes to body composition, the most important factor of the diet (by far) is daily macronutrient intakes. My personal belief is that one should aim to satisfy their daily macronutrient targets (and their target for fiber intake) by choosing an overwhelming majority of micronutrient-dense foods, including plenty of fruits and vegetables. Although I take a multivitamin as a bit of “insurance,” I personally aim to achieve the RDI of all micronutrients from my whole food sources.

While the majority of foods should be nutrient-dense, I also believe there is nothing wrong with including other foods that would typically be considered “junk food,” as long as micronutrient needs are met and the foods fit within your macronutrient targets for the day. Incorporating such foods in this context will not disrupt your diet in any way, and taking such an approach provides a much higher chance for long-term diet adherence.

So the take home point is to set appropriate macronutrient targets and use whatever foods you want to hit those targets, as long as daily micronutrient and fiber needs are met. For most people, satisfying these micronutrient and fiber requirements will demand that the majority of food choices will be “cleaner” food sources by default. Once micronutrient and fiber needs are met, knock yourselves out with the elaborate (and very impressive) ice cream and pastry-laden concoctions. And share the recipe."

He also posted this:

"Now it's time to take over iTunes"

So that should end the debate right there.

[rand18m]

Layne just posted this on his facebook wall.

Good read:

" fantastic must read blog on why eating 'clean' may not be providing you with as many micronutrients as you think:"

http://fitterhappierblog.wordpress.c...foods-paradox/


"Conclusion
So what is the best way to diet? As is the case with most things in life, I believe moderation is key. When it comes to body composition, the most important factor of the diet (by far) is daily macronutrient intakes. My personal belief is that one should aim to satisfy their daily macronutrient targets (and their target for fiber intake) by choosing an overwhelming majority of micronutrient-dense foods, including plenty of fruits and vegetables. Although I take a multivitamin as a bit of “insurance,” I personally aim to achieve the RDI of all micronutrients from my whole food sources.

While the majority of foods should be nutrient-dense, I also believe there is nothing wrong with including other foods that would typically be considered “junk food,” as long as micronutrient needs are met and the foods fit within your macronutrient targets for the day. Incorporating such foods in this context will not disrupt your diet in any way, and taking such an approach provides a much higher chance for long-term diet adherence.

So the take home point is to set appropriate macronutrient targets and use whatever foods you want to hit those targets, as long as daily micronutrient and fiber needs are met. For most people, satisfying these micronutrient and fiber requirements will demand that the majority of food choices will be “cleaner” food sources by default. Once micronutrient and fiber needs are met, knock yourselves out with the elaborate (and very impressive) ice cream and pastry-laden concoctions. And share the recipe."

And the bad thing is this^^ has been said here many times by many people and still it isn't understood as illustrated by the reactions on this thread!

I'm still looking for the threads/posts where someone talks about eating nothing but ice cream and pastries etc as an entire diet! I've never seen that in this forum, likely cause it's never happened.

[michaeloey]

Having watched that, i strongly agreed that it's okay to have treats once in a while as long as u fit it in your macros. However, i firmly believe that quality makes a difference though, a 100 grams of carbs from glucose rich source will have different impact than having the same amount from sucrose, which is gonna be different from a pure fructose, even if the fiber intake is the same. The same thing goes with protein, quality matters as well, getting enough proteins from peanut butter is gonna have different impact on the body than chicken breasts, for instance.

[PR1MO]

Having watched that, i strongly agreed that it's okay to have treats once in a while as long as u fit it in your macros. However, i firmly believe that quality makes a difference though, a 100 grams of carbs from glucose rich source will have different impact than having the same amount from sucrose, which is gonna be different from a pure fructose, even if the fiber intake is the same. The same thing goes with protein, quality matters as well, getting enough proteins from peanut butter is gonna have different impact on the body than chicken breasts, for instance.

Your IQ is lower than your rep power

[michaeloey]

Layne just posted this on his facebook


"Conclusion
So what is the best way to diet? As is the case with most things in life, I believe moderation is key. When it comes to body composition, the most important factor of the diet (by far) is daily macronutrient intakes. My personal belief is that one should aim to satisfy their daily macronutrient targets (and their target for fiber intake) by choosing an overwhelming majority of micronutrient-dense foods, including plenty of fruits and vegetables. Although I take a multivitamin as a bit of “insurance,” I personally aim to achieve the RDI of all micronutrients from my whole food sources.

While the majority of foods should be nutrient-dense, I also believe there is nothing wrong with including other foods that would typically be considered “junk food,” as long as micronutrient needs are met and the foods fit within your macronutrient targets for the day. Incorporating such foods in this context will not disrupt your diet in any way, and taking such an approach provides a much higher chance for long-term diet adherence.

So the take home point is to set appropriate macronutrient targets and use whatever foods you want to hit those targets, as long as daily micronutrient and fiber needs are met. For most people, satisfying these micronutrient and fiber requirements will demand that the majority of food choices will be “cleaner” food sources by default. Once micronutrient and fiber needs are met, knock yourselves out with the elaborate (and very impressive) ice cream and pastry-laden concoctions. And share the recipe."

Even if u hit daily RDA for fiber n various micros, u still have to account in differences of food quality, a body responds differently to glucose as it does to fructose and consuming trans fat is not the same thing with consuming saturated fatty acid, which is again different from consuming poly unsaturated fatty acids.......

[michaeloey]

Your IQ is lower than your rep power

Oh yeah, wanna try n test my IQ?? Try n disprove what i just posted, see if that's possible from a sad and miserable brainless brawn, like urself.......

[necon76]

Oh yeah, wanna try n test my IQ?? Try n disprove what i just posted, see if that's possible from a sad and miserable brainless brawn, like urself.......

LMAO. I like this guy.

[0kz]

Oh yeah, wanna try n test my IQ?? Try n disprove what i just posted, see if that's possible from a sad and miserable brainless brawn, like urself.......

But bro you are red

[BroFoods]

But bro you are red

Rep doesn't really matter, he could of been negged simply for disagreeing with someone.

[ApolloD]

@Michaeloey, I don't think it's the difference in actual food that is of concern but rather that person's response to a certain type of food. See my earlier post

[doyoueveneat]

Having watched that, i strongly agreed that it's okay to have treats once in a while as long as u fit it in your macros. However, i firmly believe that quality makes a difference though, a 100 grams of carbs from glucose rich source will have different impact than having the same amount from sucrose, which is gonna be different from a pure fructose, even if the fiber intake is the same. The same thing goes with protein, quality matters as well, getting enough proteins from peanut butter is gonna have different impact on the body than chicken breasts, for instance.

could it be that the macros and micros for those sources will be different?

100g carbs from a glucose rich source...aka bread is going to have different macros and micros compared to sucrose.

pure fructose infusion is going to have different micros and macros to a banana

peanut butter is going to have different micros and macros to chicken breast.

[naturalguy]

Layne just posted this on his facebook wall.

Good read:

" fantastic must read blog on why eating 'clean' may not be providing you with as many micronutrients as you think:"

http://fitterhappierblog.wordpress.c...foods-paradox/


"Conclusion
So what is the best way to diet? As is the case with most things in life, I believe moderation is key. When it comes to body composition, the most important factor of the diet (by far) is daily macronutrient intakes. My personal belief is that one should aim to satisfy their daily macronutrient targets (and their target for fiber intake) by choosing an overwhelming majority of micronutrient-dense foods, including plenty of fruits and vegetables. Although I take a multivitamin as a bit of “insurance,” I personally aim to achieve the RDI of all micronutrients from my whole food sources.

While the majority of foods should be nutrient-dense, I also believe there is nothing wrong with including other foods that would typically be considered “junk food,” as long as micronutrient needs are met and the foods fit within your macronutrient targets for the day. Incorporating such foods in this context will not disrupt your diet in any way, and taking such an approach provides a much higher chance for long-term diet adherence.

So the take home point is to set appropriate macronutrient targets and use whatever foods you want to hit those targets, as long as daily micronutrient and fiber needs are met. For most people, satisfying these micronutrient and fiber requirements will demand that the majority of food choices will be “cleaner” food sources by default. Once micronutrient and fiber needs are met, knock yourselves out with the elaborate (and very impressive) ice cream and pastry-laden concoctions. And share the recipe."

So the take home message is eat more, what you guys call, "bro" foods

[necon76]

So the take home message is eat more, what you guys call, "bro" foods

Whilst not being afraid to include anything else you enjoy, within reason. Pretty simple really.

[WonderPug]

So the take home message is eat more, what you guys call, "bro" foods

Not exactly, for two reasons:

1. It's not the individual food selections, in isolation and sans context, that matters. Rather, it's the specific dose and combination of foods that determine the sufficiency of nutrient intake and the calibration of energy intake to goals. And it's the sufficiency of nutrient intake and energy calibration that is paramount.

2. Many folks that profess to consume "bro"/"clean" diets consume large amounts of processed fast food in the form of protein shakes and other supplements (which I presume they would call "bro" or "clean" food), where ideally the (vast) majority of one's nutrient intake should be derived from whole and minimally processed foods.

[PhiSig2298]

2 quest bars + a multi... All bases covered to eat 8 pop tarts and 6 scoops of whey. IIFYM.

[rand18m]

Not exactly, for two reasons:

1. It's not the individual food selections, in isolation and sans context, that matters. Rather, it's the specific dose and combination of foods that determine the sufficiency of nutrient intake and the calibration of energy intake to goals. And it's the sufficiency of nutrient intake and energy calibration that is paramount.

2. Many folks that profess to consume "bro"/"clean" diets consume large amounts of processed fast food in the form of protein shakes and other supplements (which I presume they would call "bro" or "clean" food), where ideally the (vast) majority of one's nutrient intake should be derived from whole and minimally processed foods.

Pug it has become abundantly clear in this thread that many, or most, don't have a grasp on what is "clean" or "dirty" food, or "bro" foods or whatever stupid moniker people want to put on food products. This apparently is the case even with some of the more knowledgable posters. The idea that we discuss foods in isolation instead of the composition of peoples diets is mind blowing. You would think people on this forum as a whole would be more knowledgable than that!

For example the silliness of a "carb is not a carb" nonsense. I would be more receptive to that discussion if they said something like, "a saccharide is not a saccharide", well maybe then we could discuss the metabolism of those differences, but to say a carb is not a carb is not helpful to anyone. (somehow free glucose and that contained in sucrose are different)

This entire argument is quite dumb really, but it does appear many like the argument because they have been doing so for years!

So for those that think sucrose and other such disaccharides constitute a threat to a bodybuilding diet then abstain, for those that don't and like including sucrose in your diet, then do so, with proper calibration you'll be fine. (for some reason people around here think everyone is insulin resistance)

For those that are convinced that fat is dirty, then stay on the low end of fat consumption, but don't take your phobia too far, because very low fat WILL be detrimental to your goals, however it's very hard to eat very low fat consistently unless you are a veggie or some such extreme dieter.

In the meantime, as Layne and even Pug above suggests, compose a diet that meets all your bodies requirements, do so with foods you enjoy, preferably from as many whole foods as possible, within the energy balance parameters you chose for stated goals and you'll do fine and remain sane. For those whom sanity doesn't appeal, continue to tell yourself that some foods are evil and keep your diet restricted, you'll be happier that way. That comment is not meant to be disparaging, many that engage in bodybuilding are obsessive by nature, that's ok unless you think everyone else should be that way too! Good luck everyone!

[midcoastking33]

I liked the part where Alan pointed out that IIFYM is not a "dieting philosophy", it was literally a shorthand answer to a bunch of questions that got posted every day, and then everyone continued to debate the flaws of it as if it was a dieting philosophy. Good reading people.

I was the first to mention this, alan stole muh thunder