Monday, August 5, 2013

"IIFYM & IF: Only for the weak?" 2: Comments and responses.

My original post has been misunderstood greatly. To make everything clear, I'll share 2 comments and my reply to each.

 Anonymous 1:
I cant speak flr IIFYM. butI don't quite agree about IF. It takes a lot of discipline to carry out intermittent fasting. As society evolves , so should people. Just because old school methods work for some people doesn't mean the new ones are bad. At the end of the day, everyone is aiming for results. I'm an avid IF-er for almost a year. Desmond doesn't believe in IF and we have no arguments or problems with it. There's not need to waste time trying to convince people why u think your methods are superior. It's about working smart now, not jjust working hard. If no hard work and discipline is put in, there will not be result no matter what kind of diet a person is on. #justsaying. Everyone is different. If something's IIFYM is good, he can keep doing it. I have friends with great physiques in the US who won nationals using IIFYM. So I'm just saying everyone has a certain way of lifestyle. Just respect what they do and carry on with what you do.


My response:
I agree with you 100%! But I think you've missed my point. Do hear me out
I've stressed in the post I'm not debating which is better and this is merely an example I am trying to make about character. I am by no means a person who has any reputation to talk about which method is superior. But that isn't what I'm trying to get across.

What I'm saying is that some people don't do IF or IIFYM because they actually think it's better. They do it because it's easier to them. That puts them in a weak position because they have made a decision, an action, coming from a place a fear; the fear to work hard. As Ralph Waldo Emerson has said, "Every action is measured by the sentiment from which it proceeds". And in this case, I'm not concerned with their actions, I'm concerned with the sentiment from which they have proceeded. In other words, the "why" for which they chose such dieting methods. This puts the truth of the matter(which is actually better for them in the results point of view) off the table and irrelevant. They have proceeded to make a decision based on and coming from a weak place. Fear. So even if let's just presume IF is superior in this example, they should still choose bro science if that's what they honestly feel is better. I just mentioned to wee kiat just now that I rather fail with the right character(or even because of it) than succeed with(or because of) the wrong character.

Then of course I find it more troubling with people who deny themselves this truth. Because the biggest problem is not knowing that there is even one. At least people who tell themselves they chose IF because it's easier know they come from a weak place. But people who deny themselves this(if it's the truth) don't even realize they aren't the strongest versions of themselves.
Of course what irritates me is when they go on to belittle bro science, sub-consciously part of self assurance to carry on denial. Human nature. Psychology.

So don't get me wrong, this isn't one of those "this is better than that" or "Whichever works best for you" debate/post. It's really nothing to do with fitness(the point I'm making). Just the actions and variables here in this example. And of course, I'm trying to get this idea directed to the fitness people. But the point itself has no relation to bodybuilding or fitness.

 
Anonymous 2:
Hi,

Happened to stumble upon your blog while randomly surfing. Before I begin I'd just like to say that I mean no offense to you in any way and I'm not here to start a fight. I'm here to voice my opinion, open it up for discussion and hopefully in turn we both learn something new from this. If you are however, offended by my post then I apologize in advance and you can just remove this if you deem it to be necessary.

I'd like to start by saying that I don't agree with what you posted in this article. Yes, I am an avid fan of IIFYM and IF but not for the reasons you pointed out.

For one from my inference you lack a clear understanding of how IIFYM works. You failed to point out the importance of fiber which precedes all other nutrients in terms of priority. With that said, to hit that prerequisite amount of fiber one would have to consume largely (80% upwards) 'clean' food as 'bro science' would define it to be. It is due to this same fiber requirement that most of my meals are made up of whole, unprocessed food for it would be next to impossible to hit my numbers with KFC and McDonald's all day. What IIFYM does is allow that one or two slips of what bro scientists would define as 'bad' food in on a daily basis, without compromising whatever goals I'm working towards.

Back to your point on why people use IIFYM. I don't see it as an 'easier' way or delusional way to avoid obsession over food intake. Au contraire, I would say that IIFYM is on par with if not EVEN MORE obsessive than the average bro science diet. While you obsess over meal timings, I obsess over my grams of nutrient intake. I frustrate when it comes to finding food to fit the numbers. I spend time, effort and energy calculating and working out the math to make sure I eat what is right and what is enough. I weigh and measure my food to get an accurate understanding of how much I'm putting into my body. From my perspective, that doesn't seem so much easier than simply eating chicken breast and broccoli 6 times a day.

Elliot Hulse said "Every action is measured from the sentiment of which it precedes". Likewise, I go through so much scrutinizing and details when it comes to my food because I want to know exact quantities of what I am putting into my body to get whatever results I may be achieving. Again, I fail to see how this makes things any bit easier than a bro diet.

I use IIFYM for the fact that it is sustainable. I don't believe one method is superior to another. To me, science and bro science can go fly a kite. If it works, it works. If both methods work then I don't require some endless debacle on which method is superior because they're both going to get me results. But at the end of the day I believe in consistency. If a person is more likely to stay on a bro science diet, then yes, I would encourage him to do that over IIFYM. But for the most part, for most people including myself, IIFYM is something that is more sustainable in the long run. Something that I see myself doing months and years down the road. Not something that I will follow for a while then decide to screw everything up a week later. So my argument here is sustainability. I believe one should follow what he can be consistent with.

I have friends on both ends of the spectrum, with some finding it easier to stick to a bro diet so they don't have to frustrate over counting macros and fitting food and whatnot, while others find it easier to stick to brown rice and tilapia instead. So one is not superior to the other. It's just what you can stay on that matters.

Again I emphasize that I'm not here to start a fight. You are obviously more experienced than me in this area, and thus I took the effort to type all this out. Reason being I want to learn more, so I'd like to hear what you have to say with regards to this. I look forward to your reply.

Cheers.
 
My response:
WJ, first I'll like to say I am not offended one bit! In fact I love hearing different perspectives and points of views. Hard to find people who are interested in speaking about such things and of those who are, in such topics, hard to find people who won't be offended while discussing. And I'm really glad to have someone I don't even know type out such a long post with regards to mine.

You'll be surprised to know but I agree with everything you said. I'm all in for what works best for you. It's music to my ears when someone agrees with that.

I think however, you've slightly misunderstood my post. The fact that you brought up any specific details that is related to either IIFYM, IF, Bro Science suggest I've been misunderstood. Which isn't you fault because a lot of my friends who have read this have misunderstood this as well. Be it because of my poor ability to communicate effectively or that my perspective is really difficult to see/comprehend.
 
I would like to be clear that I did not mention a couple of things you seem to have interpreted.

Firstly, I am not here to discuss which method is better. So any discussion about which works, the science, the practicality, or anything of that nature is irrelevant.

Secondly, I did not mention which method is superior(perhaps the title let you to interpret otherwise)

Thirdly, I did not mention that IIFYM is easier. I mentioned people do it(relax, read fourthly) because they THINK it's easier. The key word is "think". That said, it doesn't matter if it is easier or not. The sentiment from which this person has proceeded was based on what he/she thought to be true, not what actually is true. Hope you get this one, it's really crucial and everyone misses it. I should have emphasized it more.

Fourthly, I did not explicitly say nor imply that everyone who uses IIFYM and IF is under this denial or did it because they thought it was easier. There are people who genuinely think it's better for them and that is the sentiment from which they based their decision and actions on.

Fifthly(just for fun!), Elliot Hulse didn't exactly said that. Well, he did, but he was quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson. :) Glad to know you watch him too, the man is just awesome.

LASTLY(finally..), I did not mention what others to be doing as wrong in any sense of that word. Which is why I said I'm steering this into a whole different perspective. We need to leave this "bodybuilding & fitness" world and step out onto neutral ground. The point I am making in this post has nothing to do with bodybuilding or fitness. If you take your perspective, which is a perspective that I used to have and still understand, respect and sometimes still employ that you do what works for you. If it means you'll stick to it, do it. Whatever will yield you the best end result(physically) at the end of it all, factoring in both scientific theory and practicality issues. Yet all I am doing(you should be familiar with this if you watch EH) is offering a completely different perspective. I'm looking at a bigger picture here. Sure, that will yield you the best results physically. However, the sentiment from which you proceeded(aka choosing one method over the other based on fear or laziness) will transcend into your character. Hence my title with the given question mark. Weak in terms of character. Question mark because I'm not saying it applies to all who use it, so I'm avoiding making a statement while keeping it interesting. So if one were to let fear or laziness dictate the course of action to be different(or even the same!) from what the individual BELIEVES is the better method here, one is very much likely to have this characteristic in all other aspects of life. To which this is weak character to me, but never wrong. There is no wrong to such a thing. Just better or worse. End of the day, my message is bring to light the perspective of how something like this can affect who you are. Or since you're familiar with EH, his philosophy to which I am a big advocate, how this determines whether you are becoming a stronger version of yourself or not.

Hope you see my point. To know if you have seen it, just ask yourself if you feel it disagrees with you points; because it doesn't. I agree to all you have said even before you have said it because I do understand IIFYM and IF quite comprehensively(I know the common misconceptions people have), and I lived by your theories/opinions even before I started this blog! So I can't possibly be disagreeing with you lol!

Cheers buddy!

That's.... long,
 
Think.


No comments:

Post a Comment