Eat breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince(ss) and dinner like a beggar

rainbow198

You have to try different things and see what sticks.

I tried eating small meals all day, but it made me hungrier so I ate more.

I'm not hungry in the mornings and I like big, satisfying meals so what works for me is eating all of my calories (2 - 3 meals, no snacks) from late morning to early evening and close the kitchen until the next day. I hit my macros for the day and my meals are all well-balanced.

I've lost and kept of 80 lbs and been maintaining for 2 years. My weight has also remained stable the entire time.

My body is very happy with this way of eating.

P.S. I love the rainbow font.

KombuchaCat

I used to be one of those OMG you can NEVER skip breakfast people. However I have had success and feel great if I intermittent fast at least 2-3 days/week. I just continue my overnight fast through lunch. Once I learned about the ancestral/paleo typ way of eating this made sense. Our bodies are designed to adapt and it's actually good for them to not be on some kind of set in stone meal clock each day.

KombuchaCat

earth_echo wrote: »

I disagree. I've found that a large breakfast increases my appetite all day long. I'll be hungrier all day and definitely eat more all around. A small late breakfast works best for me. And that's the thing, you have to try different things to know what works for you.

I'm to lazy to find a link now but I remember a few years ago hearing about an interesting German study that pans this out. You think you'd be less hungry all day after a huge breaky but you eat the same at following meals if not more.

Hollywood_Porky

lemurcat12 wrote: »

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

Breakfast is the important meal of the day.

What was the name (or "name") of that anti breakfast guy? I kind of want him back, and I love breakfast.

I believe, even if it's based on myth, that it sets the "tone" for the rest of my day. If you eat eggs in butter, you will find yourself feeling fuller much longer - and that will help reduce calorie intake the rest of the day.

I eat the same whether I eat eggs or not (oatmeal is my usual alternative), so long as I keep the general calories and protein content consistent and don't go too low on fat). I've been experimenting with this. Butter is tasty but has 0 effect on my satiety. Veggies, on the other hand, are important for me.

I often end up eating less if I skip/eat light for breakfast (which is rare), because I do it when I'm busy and have set plans for my other meals that I stick with. If one were eating based on perceived hunger rather than logging or having trouble meeting a calorie goal I can see how it would make a difference, though, IF you are someone who tends to feel hungrier if you don't eat breakfast.

I personally prefer breakfast, but I hate when people generalize about things that are individual.

I recommend experimenting to see what actually works for you, vs. feeling like you need to meet some rule that maybe works on average, but not for everyone.

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety. Further, a poster from above has provided the necessary information available that does stipulate to the fact that eating breakfast does have a profound impact on the rest of your day's caloric intake as well as positive cognitive function.

Here's information on the use of eggs in the morning to promote satiety:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16373948

Butter is a high fat component that when added to the meal will help promote satiety further. That's proven fact.

In addition, adding a veggie component will further add to the mix. In my diary, I mash a LARGE Hass Avocado and salt it lightly - then use 3 eggs scrambled in butter and there's a breakfast that's under 600 calories.

Right now as I sit here - having eaten that breakfast 3 hours ago, I am still feeling full. Nothing else has been eaten since. I can last all the way until 11am.

rawk_fairy_666

I have actually found that eating my calories in that sort of order works really well for me. I started off with small breakfast, medium lunch, big dinner, but felt weak through the day and then struggled to eat enough in the evening to hit my calorie goal. I feel much better when eating a big breakfast, medium lunch and smallish dinner. I think its an individual thing really.

Sweets1954

I noticed when I lived in Europe the largest meal of the day was often in the middle of the day. Having the big meal in the evening is an American concept. My grandparents were farmers and they tended to have a big breakfast and dinner in the middle of the day and a lighter meal in the evening. I have gotten so I don't like to eat a heavy meal at any time. I have gotten so I eat more at breakfast than I use too. I have found as I have gotten older that if I eat a heavy meal too late in the evening I don't sleep well. Being diabetic my goal is to keep my blood glucose levels fairly even throughout the day.

Sarasmaintaining

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

Breakfast is the important meal of the day.

What was the name (or "name") of that anti breakfast guy? I kind of want him back, and I love breakfast.

I believe, even if it's based on myth, that it sets the "tone" for the rest of my day. If you eat eggs in butter, you will find yourself feeling fuller much longer - and that will help reduce calorie intake the rest of the day.

I eat the same whether I eat eggs or not (oatmeal is my usual alternative), so long as I keep the general calories and protein content consistent and don't go too low on fat). I've been experimenting with this. Butter is tasty but has 0 effect on my satiety. Veggies, on the other hand, are important for me.

I often end up eating less if I skip/eat light for breakfast (which is rare), because I do it when I'm busy and have set plans for my other meals that I stick with. If one were eating based on perceived hunger rather than logging or having trouble meeting a calorie goal I can see how it would make a difference, though, IF you are someone who tends to feel hungrier if you don't eat breakfast.

I personally prefer breakfast, but I hate when people generalize about things that are individual.

I recommend experimenting to see what actually works for you, vs. feeling like you need to meet some rule that maybe works on average, but not for everyone.

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety. Further, a poster from above has provided the necessary information available that does stipulate to the fact that eating breakfast does have a profound impact on the rest of your day's caloric intake as well as positive cognitive function.

Here's information on the use of eggs in the morning to promote satiety:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16373948

Butter is a high fat component that when added to the meal will help promote satiety further. That's proven fact.

In addition, adding a veggie component will further add to the mix. In my diary, I mash a LARGE Hass Avocado and salt it lightly - then use 3 eggs scrambled in butter and there's a breakfast that's under 600 calories.

Right now as I sit here - having eaten that breakfast 3 hours ago, I am still feeling full. Nothing else has been eaten since. I can last all the way until 11am.

Whereas I'm sitting here, at 9:10am, with no hunger either and I haven't had anything except for tea (I've been up since 5:30am). I don't break my daily fast till around 11am. It really does come down to different people have different preferences, and as long as we're hitting our daily/weekly calorie goals then it's all good

lemurcat12

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety.

This is silly. How can a study prove that eating eggs or butter will fill ME up more. My personal experience is all that is relevant to that. The study can provide support (not "prove") for a hypothesis that a particular way of eating will have a particular effect ON AVERAGE. You do realize that there can be a statistically significant effect on a study population without that particular effect being felt by everyone, right?

Further, a poster from above has provided the necessary information available that does stipulate to the fact that eating breakfast does have a profound impact on the rest of your day's caloric intake as well as positive cognitive function.

False. I think the study you are talking about may be the one that dealt with women with metabolic syndrome, but even if not the problem is as stated above.

Here's information on the use of eggs in the morning to promote satiety:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16373948

This doesn't say that eggs (and certainly not eggs with butter, as opposed to, say, olive oil) are magically satiating. It says that ON AVERAGE they are more satiating than equal calories in just a bagel. I'm certain that's true and it's not surprising, but it doesn't address my point above where I referenced keeping protein roughly equal and including other foods that didn't happen to be basically just refined carbs.

Of course, there are weirdos who probably even find a plain bagel more satiating than eggs, because people are different.

Frankly, just eggs (in butter or otherwise) aren't that satiating for me on their own either. More than a bagel? Probably.

Butter is a high fat component that when added to the meal will help promote satiety further. That's proven fact.

You seem to have a weird idea about what "a proven fact" is.

I am perfectly happy with my breakfast options, thanks! And I already eat a pretty big breakfast from my perspective, which I enjoy--I see 0 benefit to me to increasing the calories to 600 or 700 or 50% of my total calories, all of which would make me LESS happy. Being less happy would not help me maintain my loss. It would lead to me feeling deprived and being tempted to go over my maintenance calories.

lemurcat12

Sweets1954 wrote: »

I noticed when I lived in Europe the largest meal of the day was often in the middle of the day. Having the big meal in the evening is an American concept. My grandparents were farmers and they tended to have a big breakfast and dinner in the middle of the day and a lighter meal in the evening.

True, but if anything I think this proves that huge breakfasts are hardly needed for weight loss/maintenance. continental Europeans managed to be thinner on average than people in the US and UK despite the US and UK apparently having a greater cultural preference for larger breakfasts, after all.

When I've been in France and Italy people have breakfasts like the ones they tell you will make you fat over here, and yet the US is much fatter.

(Like I said above, I personally prefer having a larger breakfast--about equal to my lunch and dinner more often than not--but this claim that one must eat a huge breakfast is so irritating and places emphasis on details rather than what really matters, thereby probably making it harder for lots of people.)

Alatariel75

lemurcat12 wrote: »

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety.

This is silly. How can a study prove that eating eggs or butter will fill ME up more. My personal experience is all that is relevant to that. The study can provide support (not "prove") for a hypothesis that a particular way of eating will have a particular effect ON AVERAGE. You do realize that there can be a statistically significant effect on a study population without that particular effect being felt by everyone, right?

Further, a poster from above has provided the necessary information available that does stipulate to the fact that eating breakfast does have a profound impact on the rest of your day's caloric intake as well as positive cognitive function.

False. I think the study you are talking about may be the one that dealt with women with metabolic syndrome, but even if not the problem is as stated above.

Here's information on the use of eggs in the morning to promote satiety:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16373948

This doesn't say that eggs (and certainly not eggs with butter, as opposed to, say, olive oil) are magically satiating. It says that ON AVERAGE they are more satiating than equal calories in just a bagel. I'm certain that's true and it's not surprising, but it doesn't address my point above where I referenced keeping protein roughly equal and including other foods that didn't happen to be basically just refined carbs.

Of course, there are weirdos who probably even find a plain bagel more satiating than eggs, because people are different.

Frankly, just eggs (in butter or otherwise) aren't that satiating for me on their own either. More than a bagel? Probably.

Butter is a high fat component that when added to the meal will help promote satiety further. That's proven fact.

You seem to have a weird idea about what "a proven fact" is.

I am perfectly happy with my breakfast options, thanks! And I already eat a pretty big breakfast from my perspective, which I enjoy--I see 0 benefit to me to increasing the calories to 600 or 700 or 50% of my total calories, all of which would make me LESS happy. Being less happy would not help me maintain my loss. It would lead to me feeling deprived and being tempted to go over my maintenance calories.

Buttery eggs in the morning would make me barf. How does that rate with the satiety?

MKEgal

lemurcat wrote:

I do believe that on average people do better eating breakfas
(I personally do), but I don't believe that means that every person does better eating breakfast.

Well, of people on the National Weight Control Registry (have lost at least 30 lb & maintained it for
at least 1 year), a large majority eat breakfast.

http://www.nwcr.ws/
"There is variety in how NWCR members keep the weight off... 78% eat breakfast every day."
(Nothing is said about how many never eat first thing after they wake.)
((And yes, technically _everyone_ eats breakfast.))

.

lisa wrote:

I would never want to eat a large meal for breakfast when I've only been up less than an hour

For me, half my calories would be 700.
This morning, I had a cup of skim milk, 2T peanut butter, 1 piece of whole-wheat toast, and a banana.
That's about 460 cal.
To get to 700 I could add yogurt (90 cal for Yoplait light) & 2 hard-boiled eggs (140 cal).
Or instead of the second egg, another piece of fruit... maybe a cup of strawberries, or change the
lite yogurt to vanilla Greek yogurt.
That's not a huge meal, but has enough protein & fat to keep me sated for a while.

.

crystal wrote:

I have to eat every 2-3 hours to keep my metabolism out of kryostasys mode

WTH is that? I even googled it and came up with nothing.
Is this the newest fad, like 'starvation mode' has been? (Which is real, yes, but not as easy as most
people seem to think.)

.

spyro wrote:

If you are active in the day and eat a big meal at breakfast time then you will work off the calories

It takes a while for the food to be broken down & digested, brought across the intestinal wall, and
that has to happen before the energy can be used or the bits of protein can be made into more
muscle, or the other nutrients can be put to use.
It's not like you eat an egg and in 20 minutes it's running around in your bloodstream.
Fast carbs are an exception - that's why they're called fast. They will be absorbed fairly quickly, which
causes your blood sugar to spike.

Sarasmaintaining

MKEgal wrote: »

lemurcat wrote:

I do believe that on average people do better eating breakfas
(I personally do), but I don't believe that means that every person does better eating breakfast.

Well, of people on the National Weight Control Registry (have lost at least 30 lb & maintained it for
at least 1 year), a large majority eat breakfast.

http://www.nwcr.ws/
"There is variety in how NWCR members keep the weight off... 78% eat breakfast every day."
(Nothing is said about how many never eat first thing after they wake.)
((And yes, technically _everyone_ eats breakfast.))

.

lisa wrote:

I would never want to eat a large meal for breakfast when I've only been up less than an hour

For me, half my calories would be 700.
This morning, I had a cup of skim milk, 2T peanut butter, 1 piece of whole-wheat toast, and a banana.
That's about 460 cal.
To get to 700 I could add yogurt (90 cal for Yoplait light) & 2 hard-boiled eggs (140 cal).
Or instead of the second egg, another piece of fruit... maybe a cup of strawberries, or change the
lite yogurt to vanilla Greek yogurt.
That's not a huge meal, but has enough protein & fat to keep me sated for a while.

.

crystal wrote:

I have to eat every 2-3 hours to keep my metabolism out of kryostasys mode

WTH is that? I even googled it and came up with nothing.
Is this the newest fad, like 'starvation mode' has been? (Which is real, yes, but not as easy as most
people seem to think.)

.

spyro wrote:

If you are active in the day and eat a big meal at breakfast time then you will work off the calories

It takes a while for the food to be broken down & digested, brought across the intestinal wall, and
that has to happen before the energy can be used or the bits of protein can be made into more
muscle, or the other nutrients can be put to use.
It's not like you eat an egg and in 20 minutes it's running around in your bloodstream.
Fast carbs are an exception - that's why they're called fast. They will be absorbed fairly quickly, which
causes your blood sugar to spike.

I got my initial NWCR packet in the mail this weekend and will be filling it out today. Looking at their stats though, I pretty much do the opposite of the majority and I'm successfully maintaining. I like to live on the dangerous side lol.

lemurcat12

Alatariel75 wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety.

This is silly. How can a study prove that eating eggs or butter will fill ME up more. My personal experience is all that is relevant to that. The study can provide support (not "prove") for a hypothesis that a particular way of eating will have a particular effect ON AVERAGE. You do realize that there can be a statistically significant effect on a study population without that particular effect being felt by everyone, right?

Further, a poster from above has provided the necessary information available that does stipulate to the fact that eating breakfast does have a profound impact on the rest of your day's caloric intake as well as positive cognitive function.

False. I think the study you are talking about may be the one that dealt with women with metabolic syndrome, but even if not the problem is as stated above.

Here's information on the use of eggs in the morning to promote satiety:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16373948

This doesn't say that eggs (and certainly not eggs with butter, as opposed to, say, olive oil) are magically satiating. It says that ON AVERAGE they are more satiating than equal calories in just a bagel. I'm certain that's true and it's not surprising, but it doesn't address my point above where I referenced keeping protein roughly equal and including other foods that didn't happen to be basically just refined carbs.

Of course, there are weirdos who probably even find a plain bagel more satiating than eggs, because people are different.

Frankly, just eggs (in butter or otherwise) aren't that satiating for me on their own either. More than a bagel? Probably.

Butter is a high fat component that when added to the meal will help promote satiety further. That's proven fact.

You seem to have a weird idea about what "a proven fact" is.

I am perfectly happy with my breakfast options, thanks! And I already eat a pretty big breakfast from my perspective, which I enjoy--I see 0 benefit to me to increasing the calories to 600 or 700 or 50% of my total calories, all of which would make me LESS happy. Being less happy would not help me maintain my loss. It would lead to me feeling deprived and being tempted to go over my maintenance calories.

Buttery eggs in the morning would make me barf. How does that rate with the satiety?

Chances are less sated after barfing, although it also might make you less inclined to eat.

Overall, I'm thinking poor strategy, but perhaps Ted would disagree. ;-)

Also, I just realized that he is promoting his 600 cal buttery eggs as magically satiating because he's full 'til 11. Only full 'til 11 would be a failure in my book, and my (large, IMO) breakfast is more like 400 cals, and I eat around 5:30 am.

lemurcat12

MKEgal wrote: »

lemurcat wrote:

I do believe that on average people do better eating breakfas
(I personally do), but I don't believe that means that every person does better eating breakfast.

Well, of people on the National Weight Control Registry (have lost at least 30 lb & maintained it for
at least 1 year), a large majority eat breakfast.

Again, that something works on average doesn't mean it works for everyone.

I've always enjoyed breakfast, so am not surprised that it works for lots of people. That doesn't mean it works for everyone (or that when I'm at maintenance I should be eating 1000 calories at breakfast, ugh).

My suspicion is that lots of people who would prefer to eat breakfast (like me, once upon a time) skip it due to poor planning or eat breakfasts that don't really work for them for the same reason (like a bagel, which I also used to eat). Changing this tends to be a helpful change. But it doesn't mean that people who aren't inclined to eat breakfast in the morning would do better if they would force themselves. For me, including a real breakfast in my day makes me happier and is something I enjoy about how I currently eat--it makes it more sustainable. But if it felt miserable and like I was forcing myself to eat when I didn't want to and I ended up hungrier afterwards, then trying to do that because of what others report would be self-sabotage.

Same with the advice to eat 6 mini meals a day or eat dinner before 6 pm or whatever. The most important thing is what works for you and enables you to come up with a sustainable plan that makes you satisfied and happy.

As for being sated, I'm perfectly sated until lunch now (and was when I was doing 1250 calories and ate maybe 250-300 for breakfast, although I do 400 now), so I'm not concerned about that. Being overly hungry was never my problem.

This morning, I had a cup of skim milk, 2T peanut butter, 1 piece of whole-wheat toast, and a banana.
That's about 460 cal.

I wouldn't find this satisfying at all (less so than the smaller breakfasts I used to eat). That's because people are different.

dragonmaster69

I don't agree with it, but I love the choice of text color

P0PTART

I think it's each individual. My day starts at 4:30am, work starts 6:30am, don't get home until 7:30-8:00 pm, and try to be in bed by 9:30-10 pm. If I eat a big meal too close to bed, I feel sick & don't sleep well. For me, eating breakfast isn't just important, it's also my favorite meal.

Athijade

Eating in the morning makes me ill. I get nauseated and might or might not keep the food down. I have been this way for as long as I remember. So I skip it. As for the rest of the day, it depends on what my work schedule is like. Dinner is normally my largest meal unless I have to work one of my jobs as I don't have access to a fridge or microwave. Those days my lunch is my largest meal.

joejccva71

None of it matters because in the end all you need to do is eat a calorie deficit under your TDEE.

If my TDEE is 3000 calories and I were to skip breakfast and lunch and eat 2500 calories at dinner, I would still lose 1 pound per week of bodyfat as long as I ate enough protein and did some sort of weight resistance training.

lavaughan69

I don't even eat breakfast! I consume 300 cals around mid day and the balance is dinner and an evening snack. I choose to eat this way because it suits my lifestyle, and I wanted to create a methodology of eating that I would continue for life...I know there's no way I would stick to doing something that is so opposite to how I was raised and how the rest of my family likes to eat.

JoRocka

people do better not eating later because they tend to over eat later... so it's easier to restrict that- for me- I can't do that- I don't like it- so I won't do it. Plain and simple. Id' rather be hungry in the morning than hungry at night.

Mr_Knight

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety.

For some people, yes. I can easily take down a dozen eggs worth of scramblies in a meal, and two hours later, I'll be hungry again.

There are very few universals...

JoRocka

Mr_Knight wrote: »

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

It's proven that eggs and butter do have a profound impact on satiety.

For some people, yes. I can easily take down a dozen eggs worth of scramblies in a meal, and two hours later, I'll be hungry again.

There are very few universals...

nods
I can put away 6 + veggies and a side of a bacon and be hungry later as well.

I mean- usually it's my dinner- so I go to bed and I don't notice but yeah- I mean- they are good and all but they don't fill me up like a giant steak- sweet potatoe and a whole bucket of veggies do.

WeddedBliss1992

it's funny b/c i just posted something similar to this. if i eat in the mornings, i am usually so hungry afterward. if i skip breakfast, i can go all day w/o being hungry and w/o eating. so just for me personally, that statement isn't true.

970Mikaela1

DeguelloTex wrote: »

MKEgal wrote: »

Once again, let's add some science to the discussion, instead of relying on opinions & anecdotes.

You can science all you want, but a big breakfast makes me hungrier all day.

My opinion is that a smaller breakfast -- or no -- works better for me, regardless of whether it works better for others.

That and the science only adds up to 1400 total calories which is about what my dinner usually is.

shelleyrhoads

This was a great idea back in the day when most people got up and plowed fields all day. but for most people these days it's not necessary.

Alatariel75

I was really hoping "kryostasys" would have been explained by the time I got up this morning.

blossomingbutterfly

I prefer it the other way around.

kristydi

Alatariel75 wrote: »

I was really hoping "kryostasys" would have been explained by the time I got up this morning.

Kryostasys is what Hydra puts the Winter Soldier in between assignations. So if your metabolism goes into kryostasys you have to wake it up before it can assassinate the food you eat. Duh!

mkakids

jnv7594 wrote: »

I completely disagree. In fact, my eating pattern is the exact opposite of that. But you will get various opinions as different things work for different people.

This. I eat a large percentage of my daily calories after 8pm....like 50%+

Alatariel75

kristydi wrote: »

Alatariel75 wrote: »

I was really hoping "kryostasys" would have been explained by the time I got up this morning.

Kryostasys is what Hydra puts the Winter Soldier in between assignations. So if your metabolism goes into kryostasys you have to wake it up before it can assassinate the food you eat. Duh!

*head slap* I only watched Avengers last night, I so should have known that!! I wonder if the Choc-Top I ate during the movie put my metabolism into kryostasys? It was pretty cold!!