Breakfast or no breakfast?

2»

Replies

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    MrM27 wrote: »
    b3fc96e813bfb7d38126ba5e51d0948d20e050dc6f6b5d4e8eee64920aad5f69.jpg

    MarvelScientists.jpg

    LOL ….
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    MrM27 wrote: »
    b3fc96e813bfb7d38126ba5e51d0948d20e050dc6f6b5d4e8eee64920aad5f69.jpg

    MarvelScientists.jpg

    bill_murray_ghostbusters.gif
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,336 Member
    You can argue all you like. I have done this and have several friends I have helped lose the weight and become healthy with my help.. It is proven and true. All are healthy and fit.. and even do Spartan races now (or other events)...
    I wouldnt say something that isnt true and that isnt proven. You cant always believe what you read. If you dont believe me then try it for yourself.

    You are making the classic mistake of confusing a correlation with a causation. You lost weight because you consumed less calories than you ate. The fact you did it eating breakfast every day and all the rest is irrelevant in terms of weight loss. It may have assisted your compliance with a calorie deficit, but in itself the meal timing and frequency made no difference. If you take people and divide them into groups and put them all on the same number of calories but one group has 6 meals the day and the other has say 1 or 2, the overall weight loss will be the same. What matters is calories in versus calories out.

    There are several studied done on meal timing which I happen to have on hand, although there are likely newer ones as well, and all of them point to the same thing, when you eat does not matter. They did everything from one meal a day to several meals a day. In 2007 Stote et al in the A Journal of Clinical Nutrition did a study of people half the group eating one meal a day (dinner in early eveing). The other half did three meals a day. After the test time they let the whole group eat as they normally would for 11 weeks to normalize their eating pattern, then the switch the groups around. The study time was 8 weeks, and they were eating enough to maintain their body weight. The results, 3 meals a day no change in weight. 1 meal a day lost 3 pounds and an average of 4.6 pounds of fat (probably because it is difficult to eat all your calories in one meal). That is not old science, it is recent. When you eat makes no difference. See also Smeets et al British Journal of Nutrition 2008 finding no metabolic rate change between 2 or 3 meals a day; and Farshchi et al Am Jrnl of Clinical Nutrition 2005 using 3, 6 or 9 meals a day again finding no change in metabolic rate.

    The multiple meals a day may help you feel more satisfied, it may, but it will do nothing to significantly increase your calorie burning. I believe the numbers for calories burned for 100 calories of protein is like 10. You would be better off not eating that rather than thinking eating something will help you lose weight.

    As Parks et al say in their article in the Am Jrnl of Clinical Nutrition, "Simply put, the question of whether there is a health benefit from the consumption of multiple small meals will ultimately depend on how much energy is consumed, as opposed to how often or how regularly one eats."

    So to the OP, eat with the pattern that helps you stick to your daily calorie goal best.
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,573 Member
    IMO...eat if you are hungry, don't eat breakfast if you aren't.

    For real. I don't know why breakfast threads annoy me so much. They're on par with TOM threads for me but I understand some people are just reaalllly into breakfast, I guess.
  • This content has been removed.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    arditarose wrote: »
    IMO...eat if you are hungry, don't eat breakfast if you aren't.

    For real. I don't know why breakfast threads annoy me so much. They're on par with TOM threads for me but I understand some people are just reaalllly into breakfast, I guess.

    i hate when people say it is the "most important meal of the day" or "it stokes the metabolism" ….give me a break..as if your metabolism is something you can reach out and touch ...
  • eric_sg61
    eric_sg61 Posts: 2,925 Member
    You should always eat breakfast. When you dont eat breakfast you are increasing the amount of time that your body is going without food. Therefore you are training it to starve. Which in turn will affect your metablism... as your body will feel the need to hord all the food and store it as FAT... which is what you DONT want.
    You should always eat breakfast.. and the majority of your Carbs shouls be eaten in the morning and then as few as possible during the day... This is because Carbs are the bodies fuel for the day.. if you eat them early you have time to burn them off.. by eating carbs at night and late in the day you dont have a chance to burn them off (unless you do crazy cardio at the gym).. which will mean your body will store them as fat!!

    So in summary, YES PLEASE DO EAT BREAKFAST EVERY MORNING

    I feel like I'm reading bodybuilding.com circa 2008
    what_year_is_it.jpg


  • BombshellPhoenix
    BombshellPhoenix Posts: 1,693 Member
    <~~~wakes up at 6 am, doesn't eat breakfast until noon. Loses 53 lbs, goes from 32% BF to 17%

    p1nasu9svbsz.gif
  • Alluminati
    Alluminati Posts: 6,208 Member
    Where Steve at?
  • BombshellPhoenix
    BombshellPhoenix Posts: 1,693 Member
    OdesAngel wrote: »
    Where Steve at?

    Anxiously awaiting his Google image avi.
  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,562 Member
    OdesAngel wrote: »
    Where Steve at?

    Probably still busy complaining about carbs
  • This content has been removed.
  • ithrowconfetti
    ithrowconfetti Posts: 451 Member
    I'm skeptical of most diets/food programs, because I find them to be unsustainable. You'll want to do something that you can practise for the rest of your life. I do intermittent fasting, and eat 2 nutrient-dense, satisfying meals a day, within a 4-hour feeding window. So I technically fast for 20 hours or more each day. I find this works best for me. Early meals make me ravenous to no end. Like most people have said, do work out what's best for you. At the end of the day, calories in vs. calories out is what matters. None of that starvation mode or metabolism slowing down tosh.
  • 365andstillalive
    365andstillalive Posts: 663 Member
    Breakfast literally means to break a fast; which is essentially what you're doing while sleeping.

    So your "breakfast" can be at 7am or 2pm; do what works for you. Meal timing, in actual medical journals and not bro-science, has been proven to have no effect on actual weight loss. There's pluses to different plans; fewer meals mean bigger meals, smaller meals mean that you often won't go long periods of time feeling hunger, for example.

    Basically, find what works for you and make sure you have a caloric deficit and you will lose weight. You don't need to pay for or make a permanent meal plan, just be mindful and log what you eat.
  • liftingandlipstick
    liftingandlipstick Posts: 1,857 Member
    edited October 2014
    But seriously, OP, it all comes down to personal preference. Do you feel better eating 6 small meals per day? Or three larger meals? Are you hungry right away when you wake up? Then eat. Do you not get hungry until later? Wait.

    Think about it in terms of cookies (just go with it). You get 6 magical cookies every day that fulfill all of your dietary/calorie/macro needs. You can eat one cookie every 2-3 hours. If you're a grazer, this might be your best option. Or you can eat two cookies every 4-6 hours. If you prefer a full feeling, go with this option. Or if you really want, you can eat all 6 cookies at once. Your body will process food exactly the same no matter how much of it you eat how often, provided you stay within your caloric goals- INCLUDING not habitually going waay under. But that's another thread hijack . . .
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Alluminati
    Alluminati Posts: 6,208 Member
    OdesAngel wrote: »
    Where Steve at?

    Anxiously awaiting his Google image avi.

    mMMMMMmmm hubba hubba
  • This content has been removed.
  • SherryTeach
    SherryTeach Posts: 2,836 Member
    Anecdotal evidence is not science. Eat when you want. I have never read a study that proved that meal timing affected weight loss. It is true that people with specific medical needs need to time their meals, especially diabetics, but that has nothing to do with weight loss.
  • FunkyTobias
    FunkyTobias Posts: 1,776 Member
    Eagerly awaiting the arrival of our favorite sock-puppet
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,302 Member
    My personal experience: I always eat a light breakfast, especially when I am going to work. Otherwise I get too sluggish and hungry too soon before my lunch break.

    However this isn't something thing I changed when I decided to lose weight - I ate breakfast like this when I was overweight and same when I was losing weight and same now I am maintaining.

    Of course, my total calories for the day did change ;)