ITT: IIFYM doesn't work

[agrier92]

Your 100 percent right man. Great job bro. Your really helping alot of people on this site man.

facepalm please define what healthy is; is it micro nutrients? slow digesting carbs? poly and monos versus saturated and trans? What's your definition of healthy not just 3000 calories of this vs. 3000 calories of that please offer a detailed explanation of what makes one food healthier than another.

[TigerBulk]

Just eat clean breh

[TheJediBrah]

If "If It Fits Your Macros" means: eating anything that fits your macros
then "clean eating" means: washing all your food with soap?

[LiftCore]

If "If It Fits Your Macros" means: eating anything that fits your macros
then "clean eating" means: washing all your food with soap?

Gotta eat clean brah, don't want to get an infection from dirty calories.

[Scott527]

IIFYM simply means incorporating the foods you enjoy in moderation without feeling guilty about them, not stuffing your face with a pack of Oreos and protein shakes and expecting to get the same results as you would get with a traditional bodybuilder's diet. Hit great micros, hit a great fiber intake, indulge in the foods you love whilst hitting your macros with them once in a while, and enjoy life.

[AdCon]

Then don't call it IIFYM. Because thats not the true definition of it, according to you guys. You have to hit your macros but you must eat healthy.

Yet when someone says you must eat healthy, you guys say you are allowed to eat chesse burgers,etc.

Plz do your self a favour and come up with a new meaning of IIFYM

You're treating IIFYM as if it is some crazy, new diet. It isn't. It's just a principle of nutrition that states that if the same macronutrients are consumed in a day then the sources are irrelevant.

What you seem to forget is that for example, Person A could reach their macros with chicken, quinoa and bread (and some Dove to make sure it's all "clean"). Person B could eat "dirty" foods with the same nutritional value.

BOTH people would be doing IIFYM, because, after all, they would both be reaching their macronutrient requirements for the day.

Really, what I'm trying to say is; IIFYM doesn't need some large definition and guidelines because that's not what the phrase was made for. It is just a reminder that flexible dieting can work just as well as "clean eating". It isn't an excuse to go out earing cheese burgers every day and forgetting calories. It is just a way to eat the foods you enjoy on a diet, but ONLY if it fits your macros.

I know I'm just feeding the troll but it's got to be said

[agrie9]

You're treating IIFYM as if it is some crazy, new diet. It isn't. It's just a principle of nutrition that states that if the same macronutrients are consumed in a day then the sources are irrelevant.

What you seem to forget is that for example, Person A could reach their macros with chicken, quinoa and bread (and some Dove to make sure it's all "clean"). Person B could eat "dirty" foods with the same nutritional value.

BOTH people would be doing IIFYM, because, after all, they would both be reaching their macronutrient requirements for the day.

Really, what I'm trying to say is; IIFYM doesn't need some large definition and guidelines because that's not what the phrase was made for. It is just a reminder that flexible dieting can work just as well as "clean eating". It isn't an excuse to go out earing cheese burgers every day and forgetting calories. It is just a way to eat the foods you enjoy on a diet, but ONLY if it fits your macros.

I know I'm just feeding the troll but it's got to be said

this

[JOSEF RAKICH]

Gotta eat clean brah, don't want to get an infection from dirty calories.

Oh my god.. He actually ate it lol..

[kanko]

Everybody is doing IIFYM even Jay Cutler fkn funny how OP thinks upside down.

4 ppl that eat clean and enjoy it keep doing it.

4 ppl that wants to eat the fk they wanna eat keep doing it.

at the end of the day if u get ur macros that will count.
im not saying get all ur carbs from gummi bears everything should be moderated also to much protein will damage the kidneys.

If u want to eat some Doritos chips go do it but let it be in moderation.
I myself eat 8k calories to gain weight how the hell u want to get 8k calories of clean food tell me... i get like 30% Junk food but i still gain a little weight that counts for me.

my work here is done.

[LiftCore]

Everybody is doing IIFYM even Jay Cutler fkn funny how OP thinks upside down.

4 ppl that eat clean and enjoy it keep doing it.

4 ppl that wants to eat the fk they wanna eat keep doing it.

at the end of the day if u get ur macros that will count.
im not saying get all ur carbs from gummi bears everything should be moderated also to much protein will damage the kidneys.

If u want to eat some Doritos chips go do it but let it be in moderation.
I myself eat 8k calories to gain weight how the hell u want to get 8k calories of clean food tell me... i get like 30% Junk food but i still gain a little weight that counts for me.

my work here is done.

6'11'' holy PHUCK.

[RugbyBro]

For the love of god, please tell me you are trolling. IIFYM on a deficit is catabolic? Must mean everyone is going extremely catabolic on their cuts, and probably lose only muscle right? GTFO

You must think that protein shakes and creatine are steroids...

Yea. You will lose muscle on your cut bet you already have.. Why? IIFYM

[petertuck]

that frank yang video completely blew my mind

[kanko]

6'11'' holy PHUCK.

Feels bad man cant find shoes,clothes
Wanna change height? 5'11 is best height

[LiftCore]

Feels bad man cant find shoes,clothes
Wanna change height? 5'11 is best height

Damn brah, but imagine how superior you will look when all dem GAAAIIINZZZ come in. 5'11's alright, 6'0 would be nice lol.

[agrie9]

This. Please Whitekoala do yourself a favor and shut the **** up..with every single post you make, you just make yourself look even more retarded.

lol this

[RugbyBro]

lol this

Aware.

[LiftCore]

inb4 RugbyBro makes follow up thread about how he trolled the phuck out of TBB.

[domenic1995]

the body doesnt look at things as a package, it handles components of foods individually. i dont advocate iifiym but a carb derived from sugar is a carb derived from sugar, regardless of whether or not it comes in whole bread or ice cream. that being said, iifiym doesnt account for fiber, the types of carbs/fat/protein or for micronutrients. yes macros are important. but if all your protein is derived from less anabolic sources like soy then you will see some difference. life goes deeper than the surface structure of things. also just because a food is "clean" and not stigmatized by the public doesnt mean it is automatically the best thing for you at the moment

[dabucche]

Whitekoala, in the IIFYM book it says that you must use common sense. Even if it didn't say that, who the hell wants to eat like that, I want to feel full.

Feels bad man cant find shoes,clothes
Wanna change height? 5'11 is best height

EDIT: probably can't mention the hormones that make you tall. Them mods be ban crazy.

[SethBJJ]

studies proving you can eat w/e u want in ur macros and not effect body comp: 0
amount of talking out of ur ass: a lot

[Eandretta96]

To be honest I don't even know what it means by that. Dude, show me how to reply because apparently, I'm replying to the wrong people, and it seems as if I am attacking them. It's not the first time its happened.

[Eandretta96]

I'm on your team guys. I just posted a wrong definition. Looking back at it, it doesn't make sense at all. I know what IIFYM is.

[LiftCore]

studies proving you can eat w/e u want in ur macros and not effect body comp: 0
amount of talking out of ur ass: a lot

Why waste time trying to educate the sort of people who will respond to nothing. Not everyone has a folder ready full of relevant and reliable studies everytime some retard decides that they are better than biology. If you want studies, go and look for them yourself. Go into Pubmed, google Alan Aragon, Layne Norton, Lyle McDonald, you could probably be directed to studies there. And judging by the fact that you expect others to spoonfeed you studies, you probably won't read through them completely anyway. What I don't get is why it's so hard for people to understand basic principles.

[RugbyBro]

Why waste time trying to educate the sort of people who will respond to nothing. Not everyone has a folder ready full of relevant and reliable studies everytime some retard decides that they are better than biology. If you want studies, go and look for them yourself. Go into Pubmed, google Alan Aragon, Layne Norton, Lyle McDonald, you could probably be directed to studies there. And judging by the fact that you expect others to spoonfeed you studies, you probably won't read through them completely anyway. What I don't get is why it's so hard for people to understand basic principles.

Pubmed has its fair share of bullchit on it. Nice try.

[RugbyBro]

inb4 RugbyBro makes follow up thread about how he trolled the phuck out of TBB.

I'm not trolling.

[LiftCore]

Pubmed has its fair share of bullchit on it. Nice try.

Hence "relevant and reliable studies". Half the retards who demand studies here don't know what to look for in a research document. That's why you have idiots like Dr. Lustig trying to argue the fact of HFCS being directly responsible for health problems, yet uses outdated studies done on overweight sedentary males who were being given 24 soda cans worth a day. Pubmed is a great place if you know how to look, where to look and what to look for. Not that I go on there much anyway.

[SethBJJ]

Why waste time trying to educate the sort of people who will respond to nothing. Not everyone has a folder ready full of relevant and reliable studies everytime some retard decides that they are better than biology. If you want studies, go and look for them yourself. Go into Pubmed, google Alan Aragon, Layne Norton, Lyle McDonald, you could probably be directed to studies there. And judging by the fact that you expect others to spoonfeed you studies, you probably won't read through them completely anyway. What I don't get is why it's so hard for people to understand basic principles.

lol @ basic principles. stop talking our of ur ass bro lmfao. you won't post any studies because none exist. iifym wasn't formed on any rational basis, just some random guy in the nutrition sections opinion.. apparently he is an authoritative figure to some. now if you know anything about the formation of beliefs, you would know that people are more likely to believe an authoritative figure. the funny thing is that people don't believe in iifym more strongly because there is more evidence, but because you come into certain situations and immediately go to iifym as your first resort. people like you keep doing that to further solidify ur original false belief lmao. the real funny thing is you actually convinced yourself that you are right where there is no data to support your claims, you are just repeating information like a mindless drone

i am familiar with the work of all of those people and have not seen anything except their opinion. i have stopped looking into their work because i have not seen any valuable information from any of them. if any recent information has surfaced please feel free to post since you seem to follow them

[agrie9]

lol @ basic principles. stop talking our of ur ass bro lmfao. you won't post any studies because none exist. iifym wasn't formed on any rational basis, just some random guy in the nutrition sections opinion.. apparently he is an authoritative figure to some. now if you know anything about the formation of beliefs, you would know that people are more likely to believe an authoritative figure. the funny thing is that people don't believe in iifym more strongly because there is more evidence, but because you come into certain situations and immediately go to iifym as your first resort. people like you keep doing that to further solidify ur original false belief lmao. the real funny thing is you actually convinced yourself that you are right where there is no data to support your claims, you are just repeating information like a mindless drone

i am familiar with the work of all of those people and have not seen anything except their opinion. i have stopped looking into their work because i have not seen any valuable information from any of them. if any recent information has surfaced please feel free to post since you seem to follow them

u wot m8?

Additionally, no hate bro but all you did was post one study that detailed a possible false positive conclusion.

[SethBJJ]

u wot m8?

Additionally, no hate bro but all you did was post one study that detailed a possible false positive conclusion.

let me rephrase that i have not seen any new & exciting information from them

do u have any studies proving iifym works as well as other approaches? and ok many diet studies dont have a high compliance rate. the important part of the study was the part i posted where weight stayed the same but fat went down. generally when this type of research is done they have methods of determining compliance and they usually throw those results out. i do not know much about digestion and emulsification of fats but as i see it the results are that one group lost 700g of fat while the other group didnt while BW remained the same

[agrie9]

let me rephrase that i have not seen any new & exciting information from them

do u have any studies proving iifym works as well as other approaches? and ok many diet studies dont have a high compliance rate. the important part of the study was the part i posted where weight stayed the same but fat went down. generally when this type of research is done they have methods of determining compliance and they usually throw those results out. i do not know much about digestion and emulsification of fats but as i see it the results are that one group lost 700g of fat while the other group didnt while BW remained the same

See the thing is there are so many factors involved in testing and testing correctly that it rarely is done well. This is why you find an expert that you like and take his word for it as simple as that; unless you're willing to invest the time/effort that he/she has into understanding numerous aspects of physiology and nutrition then you won't understand the breakdown of studies as well as they do. Additionally, I believe the study stated that the difference in fiber could have been the reason the slow digesting group lost more fat than the other.