|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bloopity Bloop
Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Location: Seoul yo
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 7:24 am Post subject: IIFYM - Nutrition made simple + Nutrition myths debunked |
 |
|
In this thread, I will change your life and your entire idea of "healthy" eating.
IIFYM stands for "If It Meets Your Macros"--it also refers to the only nutritional philosophy that merits your attention and adherence.
Most people have this fallacious idea that there are "good" and "bad" foods, but let me blow your mind for a second--there are no such things. That's right, you can have your McDonald's, Twinkies, and Ben & Jerry's AND rock a 6-pack at the same time.
Essentially, IIFYM is all about calories consumed vs spent. Your body can't tell the difference between "bad" foods (e.g., brownies, pizza, burgers, etc.) and "good" foods (veggies, Quaker oats, boiled chicken breast, etc.). It can only register how many calories they contain in 3 main categories of focus: proteins, carbs, and fats.
So... Bloop, what can I do with this information?
Well, you should read the following articles:
- http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=149661773
- http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=121703981
B-b-But... this changes everything I've ever known about nutrition!! What about my precious Atkins/paleo/keto diet? AUGH!! How am I gonna live without Tony Horton?!
Are you really gonna argue with a bunch of BODYBUILDERS about losing weight and getting ripped?
Everything you've been taught about nutrition has most likely been pseudoscience fed to your by corporate interests. Take these myths for example (I also gleaned these off the bodybuilding forums--if you want scientific links to back the following up, search the forums):
- Meal timing is a waste of time. Eat when you want. If you could eat all the calories you needed for a day (which I hope you've calculated using the second link I posted *HINT HINT*) in one meal, it'd be the exact same thing as spreading them over 5 to 6 small meals as so many "nutritional experts" will tell you to do.
- Unless you're diabetic, throw the Glycemic Index out the window. Your body won't implode from having a sudden influx of donuts and apple fritters.
- Your body won't instantly begin storing fat after the first hunger pang. Don't fear hunger. And if you're hungry, EAT!
Do with this information what you will. I've given you the key to leading a healthy, happy life. In terms of fitness, diet will always > exercise. You need both, obviously, but most people seem totally clueless about how to feed themselves properly.
Eat that burger without guilt. Have that frap without a 45-minute cardio sesh. Everything in moderation really does mean EVERYTHING in moderation (and within your TDEE  )
Your welcome!
I'll try to answer any questions as best as I can. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ghostrider
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Phelps used to eat two large pizzas and a pound of pasta a day during training season. He was in excellent shape. So much for the low carb fad.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:00 am Post subject: Re: IIFYM - Nutrition made simple + Nutrition myths debunked |
|
|
| Bloopity Bloop wrote: |
Are you really gonna argue with a bunch of BODYBUILDERS about losing weight and getting ripped?
|
This reminded me of something I recently read on Tim Ferriss' blog:
"Arthur Jones, founder of Nautilus, when asked how to gain muscular mass quickly, recommended the following (I paraphrase): Approach the biggest bodybuilder at your gym, ideally a ripped 250�300-lb professional, and politely ask him for detailed advice. Then do precisely the opposite. If the T-Rex�size meathead recommends 10 sets, do one set; if he recommends post-workout protein, consume pre-workout protein, etc.
"Jones�s tongue-in-cheek parable was used to highlight one of the dangers of hero worship:
"The top 1% often succeed despite how they train, not because of it. Superior genetics, or a luxurious full-time schedule, make up for a lot."
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/the-4-hour-chef-meta-sampler/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fermentation
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're telling me, my health and performance will be the same whether I eat fried chicken or a plate of salad as long it meets my nutritional requirements?
Which corporate interests does eating 5 meals a day serve?
What does "results" here mean? Is it just about being ripped, or does it also include athletic performance? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jyang486
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ghostrider wrote: |
| Michael Phelps used to eat two large pizzas and a pound of pasta a day during training season. He was in excellent shape. So much for the low carb fad.... |
He also trained all day in one of the most energy intensive sports. He needed those carbs. He's obviously going to have to change his diet habits after retirement. Let's not use Olympic athletes, or any professional athletes, as examples as to why certain types of diets are worthless.
@ kepler: A majority of bodybuilders are part of the 99%, who have day jobs just like any of us. They just train much more during their spare time and don't half ass their training regimens, i.e. don't skip workout days. Can't assume every bodybuilder you see at the gym has superior building muscle genetics or spend every waking hour at the gym. You can get as big as them if you eat right and train right. Keep at it for a consistently long period of time, and you'll achieve whatever results you are shooting for.
@ fermentation: Healthwise, maybe not so much. No matter if it fits your macros, there's no way fried chicken would be equally healthy to a plate of salad. IIFYM is about achieving results. And by results, it's about setting your macros to what your goals are, such as: cutting, maintaining, or bulking. It'll be hard to fit eating fried chicken into your macros if you're cutting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, I see the overall benefit from looking at macros... but I do not believe that when it comes down to the health and breakdown of timing, that it matters. Maybe not to everyone on every level... but it matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:00 pm Post subject: Re: IIFYM - Nutrition made simple + Nutrition myths debunked |
|
|
| Bloopity Bloop wrote: |
| Meal timing is a waste of time. Eat when you want. |
Q: Is this some sort of new science-fad in the US? Like the "protien diet" failed, and the "cabbage soup diet" failed, and so now it's the eat "whatever/whenever diet"? Everyone keeps saying this new fantastic theory on the internet like they have unlocked the secrets of nature!
Yet the Koreans believe you should not eat after dinner hour, and you should be careful about the quality of the food, and they are thin, and USAers are fat.
So it's obvious who is correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hugo85
Joined: 27 Aug 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 2:16 am Post subject: Re: IIFYM - Nutrition made simple + Nutrition myths debunked |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| Bloopity Bloop wrote: |
| Meal timing is a waste of time. Eat when you want. |
Q: Is this some sort of new science-fad in the US? Like the "protien diet" failed, and the "cabbage soup diet" failed, and so now it's the eat "whatever/whenever diet"? Everyone keeps saying this new fantastic theory on the internet like they have unlocked the secrets of nature!
Yet the Koreans believe you should not eat after dinner hour, and you should be careful about the quality of the food, and they are thin, and USAers are fat.
So it's obvious who is correct. |
Well, if you try to claim that this method is right without understanding what it says, then the person will think that way.
Basically it says that the majority of your calories should be balanced between fat, protein and carbohydrates to fuel your body and that the rest of the calories needed for body mass conservation can come from any source.
If you make the mistake of thinking that according to this it doesn't matter what you eat and you eat only twix all day then you are certainly going to be lacking in the protein department. You are not following what is said.
If you think it doesn't matter how much you eat as long as you are following your macros and you are getting 3 extra large fries along with a McD hamburger and a extra large coke then your calories will be way above what is recommended in the diet.
This said, I think meal timing and what you eat has a significance, but that overall following the suggestions is much healthier than most people are doing. If you control your calories according to the given formulas and make sure to hit all your macros then you will already be pretty healthy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Cosmic Hum
Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 3:56 am Post subject: Re: IIFYM - Nutrition made simple + Nutrition myths debunked |
|
|
| Bloopity Bloop wrote: |
| - Meal timing is a waste of time. Eat when you want. If you could eat all the calories you needed for a day (which I hope you've calculated using the second link I posted *HINT HINT*) in one meal, it'd be the exact same thing as spreading them over 5 to 6 small meals as so many "nutritional experts" will tell you to do. |
If your intention is to be helpful, you might want to be careful making statements like this.
Do you really believe that statement?
People can easily eat all the calories that they need for a day in one meal.
Are you seriously suggesting it would be the exact same? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
An obesity researcher comments:
"Over hundreds of millions of years, we've evolved sophisticated systems that maintain 'energy homeostasis'. In other words, these systems act to regulate fat mass and keep it within the optimal range. The evolutionary pressures operating here are obvious: too little fat mass, and an organism will be susceptible to starvation; too much, and an organism will be less agile and less efficient at locomotion and reproduction. Energy homeostasis is such a basic part of survival that even the simplest organisms regulate it....
"Let's dig deeper. There are many studies in which rodents are made obese using industrial high-fat diets made from refined ingredients. The rats eat more calories (at least in the beginning), and gain fat rapidly. No big surprise there. But what may come as a surprise to the calorie counters is that rodents on these diets gain body fat even if their calorie intake is matched precisely to lean rodents eating a whole food diet (4, 5, 6). In fact, they sometimes gain almost as much fat as rodents who are allowed to eat all the industrial food they want. This has been demonstrated repeatedly.
"How is this possible? The answer is that the calorie-matched rats reduce their energy expenditure to a greater degree than those that are allowed free access to food. The most logical explanation for this behavior is that the 'set point' of the energy homeostasis system has changed. The industrial diet causes the rodents' bodies to 'want' to accumulate more fat, therefore they will accomplish that by any means necessary, whether it means eating more, or if that's not possible, expending less energy. This shows that a poor diet can, in principle, dysregulate the system that controls energy homeostasis."
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.kr/2010/11/twinkie-diet-for-fat-loss.html
So a low calorie junk food diet is fattening. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a question - how much protein can be digested in one sitting? 10 grams? 20? 50? 100? 200?
If you 'need' 200 grams of protein per day, and you pound it back ALL in one sitting/session - are you good? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
Here's a question - how much protein can be digested in one sitting? 10 grams? 20? 50? 100? 200?
If you 'need' 200 grams of protein per day, and you pound it back ALL in one sitting/session - are you good? |
Yep and here's why.
The body absorbs depending on need. There is NO upper limit on protein digestion...that's a myth that the protein drink companies push.
Let's use a hypothetical example.
If you require 3000 calories per day and you eat 3 meals per day (at 1000 calories per meal) you are obviously getting your requirements caloric wise.
Now let's assume that these 3000 calories come nearly all from protein. (with some healthy fats added in) Let's also assume that the supplement/protein drink companies are right and there is a limit of 100 grams per meal (most say 30 but let's say 100).
According to this version you'd only digest and use 300 grams (or 1200 calories). What happens to the rest...does it magically disappear? Get converted into waste?
Well magic doesn't work in this world and if the excess converted into waste...you'd starve to death. Remember you require 3000 calories and if the supplement companies are right...you can only use 1200. The body is smarter than that.
The body will use the protein it needs and the rest will be converted into glucose (gluconeogenesis) or stored as fat.
And this also is why timing doesn't matter (apart from the "window" after training).
However the flip side of this if you DID only eat one meal a day, you'd likely end up fatter and with a significantly lower metabolism. Which means the moral is...just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You don't starve to death on 1200 calories. You start to lose weight, and eat away at various reserves, but chances are slim you'd starve to death. No doubt though over time you'd develop various health issues if you intake was so severely limited though.
I've never heard of 100 grams per sitting for protein. It was a doctor that told me 40 (on average)- not a magazine or company.
Yes, much of what we ingest is either expelled as waste, or stored as fat. No one is talking about magic. We're talking about the body's ability to digest protein into amino acids -if you're eating protein for conversion into glucose/energy, you're going about it ass backwards.
edit:
Here's a proposition for you guys that dig this approach - do it! Try it for 6 months, or a year. Eat ALL of your daily caloric needs in ONE SITTING for the whole time. Take before and after pics/stats.
Lets see how it plays out for ya.
Last edited by Captain Corea on Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:19 pm Post subject: Re: IIFYM - Nutrition made simple + Nutrition myths debunked |
|
|
| Bloopity Bloop wrote: |
In this thread, I will change your life and your entire idea of "healthy" eating.
IIFYM stands for "If It Meets Your Macros"--it also refers to the only nutritional philosophy that merits your attention and adherence.
Most people have this fallacious idea that there are "good" and "bad" foods, but let me blow your mind for a second--there are no such things. That's right, you can have your McDonald's, Twinkies, and Ben & Jerry's AND rock a 6-pack at the same time.
Essentially, IIFYM is all about calories consumed vs spent. Your body can't tell the difference between "bad" foods (e.g., brownies, pizza, burgers, etc.) and "good" foods (veggies, Quaker oats, boiled chicken breast, etc.). It can only register how many calories they contain in 3 main categories of focus: proteins, carbs, and fats.
|
Untrue...the body CAN tell the difference (in several ways). Here's one of them
| Quote: |
| The body converts dietary fat into body fat more efficiently than it converts carbohydrates into body fat. Studies show that when the body gets 100 extra calories from fat, only 3 calories are used to convert them, with 97 calories burned for energy or going to storage as fat to be used later for energy. For every extra 100 carbohydrate calories you consume, about 23 will be burned up just in processing them. Only 77 calories will burned or stored as fat. |
http://heart.kumu.org/cho.html
A calorie from any of the three macronutrients is treated differently than a calorie from the other two. Your body is smarter and more complex than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
You don't starve to death on 1200 calories. You start to lose weight, and eat away at various reserves, but chances are slim you'd starve to death. No doubt though over time you'd develop various health issues if you intake was so severely limited though.
I've never heard of 100 grams per sitting for protein. It was a doctor that told me 40 (on average)- not a magazine or company.
Yes, much of what we ingest is either expelled as waste, or stored as fat. No one is talking about magic. We're talking about the body's ability to digest protein into amino acids -if you're eating protein for conversion into glucose/energy, you're going about it ass backwards. |
Re:the 1200 thing. You could still end up dead whatever the cause and likely would if you stayed on that long enough. And yeah I know the 100 grams is higher than anything I've heard either...I was simply using that number to show that even a much higher rate of protein absorption isn't going to work.
40 grams a sitting? Once again I've never seen any basis for any upper limit. Why would the body (if it requires a certain number of calories) not absorb that much? And if protein is the primary source (which it was in my example...why would it stop at 40 if it requires more?
That makes no sense. The body utilizes what it needs and will expel or convert the excess which brings me to my last point.
No one said anything about eating protein for conversion into glucose/energy. We are talking about someone eating a high protein diet and if you don't have sufficient carbs in your diet for the body to change into glucose then it will use some of the protein for that. I'm describing what happens not what you should eat it for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
