IIFYM? A Good Option?

[Primal]

Hi all, I hope this won't turn into much of a debate but what is your opinion on IIFYM? I realize a lot of you guys on here are competing bodybuilders, power lifters and such so you might be a bit biased towards anything outside of a strict contest diet... Has anyone ever tried this method? Any thoughts on it? Just curious...

-Primal

[Praetorian]

Its a cookie cutter program that bases your macros on a formula (BMR and TDEE not very accurate) and does not take into account hormones such as insulin etc. Its better then just eating crap or having no plan whatsoever but for a competing BB etc it is way too loosey goosey and needs to be more specific for each individuals needs. If you are a couch potato then its fine.

P

[Primal]

Yeah I heard a bunch of people talking about it in my gym, I also hear about it a lot in these 'broscience' videos and such... Just curious that's all.

-Primal

[jsmills]

Its a cookie cutter program that bases your macros on a formula (BMR and TDEE not very accurate) and does not take into account hormones such as insulin etc. Its better then just eating crap or having no plan whatsoever but for a competing BB etc it is way too loosey goosey and needs to be more specific for each individuals needs. If you are a couch potato then its fine.

P
Depends on how it is done. I am working with a coach who has me on it and I have to say it was the best change I could make. My macros were not based on a formula and my carb intake is adjusted to take into account my work out time. If you also have Fiber as one of the macros you follow you really can't eat too much "junk" food. I've made some amazing gains using it. It also allows me to enjoy a much more diversified diet. Coaches like Layne Norton and Ben Esgro use this with clients all the time. Take a look at Simone Sinclair if you wanna see an IFBB pro who uses the approach. She looks amazing. Just my 2 cents.

[Primal]

Depends on how it is done. I am working with a coach who has me on it and I have to say it was the best change I could make. My macros were not based on a formula and my carb intake is adjusted to take into account my work out time. If you also have Fiber as one of the macros you follow you really can't eat too much "junk" food. I've made some amazing gains using it. It also allows me to enjoy a much more diversified diet. Coaches like Layne Norton and Ben Esgro use this with clients all the time. Take a look at Simone Sinclair if you wanna see an IFBB pro who uses the approach. She looks amazing. Just my 2 cents.

I have heard a TON of people say that they have had great success with this method as well including a lot of physique looking looking men and women. This is the point of why I wanted to bring it up. People either really like it or are completely against it. I do agree with Praetorian that it is off the radar for any serious BB and I completely see why. However there is no denying the fact that there are some pretty good results seen across a wide variety of people who have tried it, including a few people I know. For the record, I'm not saying that I'm trying it or am going to try it, I have just noticed that there isn't a thread on it on this site and I wanted to hear what your guys opinions were about it. Hopefully we can get a few other perspectives into this thread as well!

Thanks!

[Praetorian]

Depends on how it is done. I am working with a coach who has me on it and I have to say it was the best change I could make. My macros were not based on a formula and my carb intake is adjusted to take into account my work out time. If you also have Fiber as one of the macros you follow you really can't eat too much "junk" food. I've made some amazing gains using it. It also allows me to enjoy a much more diversified diet. Coaches like Layne Norton and Ben Esgro use this with clients all the time. Take a look at Simone Sinclair if you wanna see an IFBB pro who uses the approach. She looks amazing. Just my 2 cents.


The diet the OP posted was based on a formula and TDEE if thats not what you are doing then you are not comparing the same things. Also fiber is not a macro. Im not saying you cant use it successfully but both Layne and Ben are tweaking the program to individual clients...again you arent comparing apples to apples. Basing a a diet on what an IFBB pro looks like is to say the least...naive.

P

[natenator]

The diet the OP posted was based on a formula and TDEE if thats not what you are doing then you are not comparing the same things. Also fiber is not a macro. Im not saying you cant use it successfully but both Layne and Ben are tweaking the program to individual clients...again you arent comparing apples to apples. Basing a a diet on what an IFBB pro looks like is to say the least...naive.

P

What diet did the OP post? I don't see a diet listed nor do I see an indication that he edited his original post.

[Primal]

Hey Natenator, you are right, I didn't post a diet at all. I was just referring to the method in general. I think posting a diet would be useless since this diet specifically varies between people on a large scale. I was just curious about the method in general and wanted to hear your opinions on it, or if you have tried it any.

Thanks!

[Praetorian]

Nate IIFYM is based on calculating energy expenditure and BMR....the OP posted IIFYM without any specific variables so I would take that as the basic IIFYM diet.

P

[steve_d]

the way I see it is that when someone says "IIFYM" they mean a looser diet based on hitting certain macro's but not necessarily worrying where those macros come from. The whole concept of it has developed its own misconceptions and is often ridiculed by bodybuilders or other fitness competitors who think IIFYM means you just eat poptarts and a few protein shakes so that your macros add up.

I'll admit I don't actually know the 'real' program or what IIFYM bases their numbers on. But I am for any diet that is easier to follow for the average joe. Sure, it might not work for all competitors since there is always something 'better' you could do. For example, if one guy is on IIFYM and in his day he ends up eating a granola bar, vs. the other guy who is strict and following the traditional bodybuilder diet, and instead of that granola bar, he has whatever it might be - dextrose, oatmeal, a sweet potato, whatever... In that oversimplified example I'd say in the end it really won't make that much of a difference physically.

The difference IMO is mental. if having a piece of a chocolate bar lightens your day, makes things seem easier, than it really doesn't matter that there was a better alternative - if that alternative gets you in a state of pure stress, etc. Bodybuilding isn't for everyone, and getting to absolutely low levels of bodyfat isn't for everyone either.

Personally I guess I sorta follow a version of IIFYM. I'd rather 'feel' normal then eat everything on a traditional bodybuilder list. I'll be the first to admit that there are better ways to diet, but in the end I think the fact that I keep myself mentally strong as long as possible allows me to get the physique to a level I need it to be. Everyone's thresholds are different. Some people feel great eating talipia and nuts all day - but I wouldn't be able to handle it. On the other extreme some people can't eat as 'clean' as me and feel ok, and those people tend to not fit the sport as well.

I say stick to a reasonable diet that you can follow. If you can't then more times than not, getting past that level of bodyfat is simply not worth it in the long run. I can honestly say that at least 2/3 of people who compete should not be competing because they are doing it for the wrong reasons and hurt themselves in the long run more than anything. And I am not talking about drugs - just pure and simple diet and not being able to understand their bodies and minds enough to go through the entire process - from getting lean, to the reverse... and getting back to normal, whatever their normal should be.

[Primal]

the way I see it is that when someone says "IIFYM" they mean a looser diet based on hitting certain macro's but not necessarily worrying where those macros come from. The whole concept of it has developed its own misconceptions and is often ridiculed by bodybuilders or other fitness competitors who think IIFYM means you just eat poptarts and a few protein shakes so that your macros add up.

I'll admit I don't actually know the 'real' program or what IIFYM bases their numbers on. But I am for any diet that is easier to follow for the average joe. Sure, it might not work for all competitors since there is always something 'better' you could do. For example, if one guy is on IIFYM and in his day he ends up eating a granola bar, vs. the other guy who is strict and following the traditional bodybuilder diet, and instead of that granola bar, he has whatever it might be - dextrose, oatmeal, a sweet potato, whatever... In that oversimplified example I'd say in the end it really won't make that much of a difference physically.

The difference IMO is mental. if having a piece of a chocolate bar lightens your day, makes things seem easier, than it really doesn't matter that there was a better alternative - if that alternative gets you in a state of pure stress, etc. Bodybuilding isn't for everyone, and getting to absolutely low levels of bodyfat isn't for everyone either.

Personally I guess I sorta follow a version of IIFYM. I'd rather 'feel' normal then eat everything on a traditional bodybuilder list. I'll be the first to admit that there are better ways to diet, but in the end I think the fact that I keep myself mentally strong as long as possible allows me to get the physique to a level I need it to be. Everyone's thresholds are different. Some people feel great eating talipia and nuts all day - but I wouldn't be able to handle it. On the other extreme some people can't eat as 'clean' as me and feel ok, and those people tend to not fit the sport as well.

I say stick to a reasonable diet that you can follow. If you can't then more times than not, getting past that level of bodyfat is simply not worth it in the long run. I can honestly say that at least 2/3 of people who compete should not be competing because they are doing it for the wrong reasons and hurt themselves in the long run more than anything. And I am not talking about drugs - just pure and simple diet and not being able to understand their bodies and minds enough to go through the entire process - from getting lean, to the reverse... and getting back to normal, whatever their normal should be.

Hi Steve, that was a great post! Thanks for your perspective on the subject! So you tie IIFYM with a mentality approach. I suppose I can relate. I don't usually have cravings but I do understand people that need a break from a bodybuilding diet to regroup both mentally and physically. I have seen videos on pro bodybuilders and how they prepare and eat their food. To be honest, it just doesn't look worth it. Unless you are being paid a ton of money to compete or you really, really want to win a show or competition bad, I know I would just personally stick to a loose diet. At least for an off season period. But what the heck do I know? Just my naive thoughts....

-Primal

[Praetorian]

I would agree that many people make dieting much more difficult than it has to be. They dont use spices, condiments, etc and eat very bland boring food. Some even go so fas as to avoid sodium which is exactly what you dont want to do. Many tend to think a precontest program needs to be extremely difficult to be effective...this couldnt be further from the truth. If you work with the body as opposed to against it things can be much easier then you think.

P

[Delt King]

Having variables that can be interchanged within the meal plan helps with adherance to the plan.
I agree that iifym is ok for offseason although not 100percent ideal.

[steve_d]

Having variables that can be interchanged within the meal plan helps with adherance to the plan.
I agree that iifym is ok for offseason although not 100percent ideal.

^exactly, not 100% ideal. But I'll leave it at this analogy. Would you rather study 100 hours for a test, and get a 98, or study 3 and get a 95? I suppose it depends what else you got going for those missing 97 hours, right?

[Primal]

^exactly, not 100% ideal. But I'll leave it at this analogy. Would you rather study 100 hours for a test, and get a 98, or study 3 and get a 95? I suppose it depends what else you got going for those missing 97 hours, right?

Hahaha! Good analogy Steve. Was just curious about the subject. Thanks all for the input.

-Primal

[IronRobi]

There are 2 types of people that follow this type of diet in my mind. Those that make sensible substitutions to keep things fresh. Instead of red meat, something like salmon. Swap rice for sweet potatoes. Whatever. They stay with good quality foods. But on the other hand there's people that will run to McDonalds and grab a double quarter pounder meal and just trim a few calories from their other meals so it all fits come the end of the day. Too many people use IIFYM as an excuse to be a fat kid.

I'll give a similar example to the second type of person, somebody I know personally who was on a weight watchers diet. She was given a certain number of "points" to eat per day (points are calculated off of macros). So for breakfast she'd have an apple, for lunch she'd have a yoghurt cup. She'd be "saving" her points so she could eat whatever the hell she wanted for supper and still have some points left over so she could snack on some chips and cheesies at night. Every single day she'd hit her points goal, but never lost any weight.

[TT Eric]

This ^.

There is a distinction between sugar and starchy carbs or trans-fat and Omega-3. On paper it might be calculated the same, but the effect on a real body lead to different results.

Eric

[Praetorian]

There is more to dieting than just calories in calories out...its not that simple!

P

[Primal]

There are 2 types of people that follow this type of diet in my mind. Those that make sensible substitutions to keep things fresh. Instead of red meat, something like salmon. Swap rice for sweet potatoes. Whatever. They stay with good quality foods. But on the other hand there's people that will run to McDonalds and grab a double quarter pounder meal and just trim a few calories from their other meals so it all fits come the end of the day. Too many people use IIFYM as an excuse to be a fat kid.

I'll give a similar example to the second type of person, somebody I know personally who was on a weight watchers diet. She was given a certain number of "points" to eat per day (points are calculated off of macros). So for breakfast she'd have an apple, for lunch she'd have a yoghurt cup. She'd be "saving" her points so she could eat whatever the hell she wanted for supper and still have some points left over so she could snack on some chips and cheesies at night. Every single day she'd hit her points goal, but never lost any weight.

Great example! The whole 'points' system is seriously flawed in that sense. Doesn't surprise me that it's from weight watchers. But what you're basically saying is that IIFYM can be great if you are, for example, sick of chicken and rice, you would switch them with salmon and a potato. That seems like a much better option than fitting the macros, but eating crap food.

On an off note, whenever I think of IIFYM, I always think of YOLO... It's sorta the same premise. You only live once right? So do good, help old people across the street, give to your community e.t.c but instead my generation just uses it as an excuse to do stupid thing. Same goes for IIFYM. You give people the leniency of switching their food choices and they end up eating crap to fill their macros... Just a common speculation I noticed...