Meal Timing and Weight Loss??

13»

Replies

  • missblondi2u
    missblondi2u Posts: 851 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    Any time you turn to research to answer questions you should consider not only the study design but also what other studies exist that may be relevant. Then you take in all of that data collectively to see if it leans in one direction or another.

    Alan Aragon just wrote about it here for Men's Health. There's been eight studies done and collectively they DON'T point towards AM or PM calories being superior.

    If it were better to eat more calories in the AM then you would expect the research to lean heavily in that direction.

    Now for the sake of discussion with your friends, this link won't help because the studies aren't attached, so showing them this article won't really do you any good, and rightfully so in a way since you should be showing them the research demonstrating the opposite. I'm aware of a couple of studies but I'd need to reference Alan's research review to pull them -- chances are he's reviewed all of them as this is a topic he's covered at length.

    http://www.menshealth.com/nutrition/late-night-snacking?utm_content=buffer25146&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

    Thanks for the link.
  • missblondi2u
    missblondi2u Posts: 851 Member
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Were these two groups under surveillance the whole 12 weeks? What were they eating the rest of the time? How do we no the other group wasn't popping twinkies in between meals?
    I'm all about CICO.

    The groups were not under direct observation, and the researchers relied on self reporting. However, both groups were observed under identical conditions, so I would think both groups would have a similar "cheating error." That is unless, as someone pointed out above, the big breakfast group was just less hungry throughout the day and therefore cheated less.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    missblondi2u wrote: »
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Were these two groups under surveillance the whole 12 weeks? What were they eating the rest of the time? How do we no the other group wasn't popping twinkies in between meals?
    I'm all about CICO.

    The groups were not under direct observation, and the researchers relied on self reporting. However, both groups were observed under identical conditions, so I would think both groups would have a similar "cheating error." That is unless, as someone pointed out above, the big breakfast group was just less hungry throughout the day and therefore cheated less.

    I didn't look at the full study but it could also be relevant what their food habits were before they started the trial in terms of how that may effect diet adherence.
  • missblondi2u
    missblondi2u Posts: 851 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    missblondi2u wrote: »
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Were these two groups under surveillance the whole 12 weeks? What were they eating the rest of the time? How do we no the other group wasn't popping twinkies in between meals?
    I'm all about CICO.

    The groups were not under direct observation, and the researchers relied on self reporting. However, both groups were observed under identical conditions, so I would think both groups would have a similar "cheating error." That is unless, as someone pointed out above, the big breakfast group was just less hungry throughout the day and therefore cheated less.

    I didn't look at the full study but it could also be relevant what their food habits were before they started the trial in terms of how that may effect diet adherence.

    The participants were assigned randomly to each group, so I'm not sure prior habits would have a significant effect on the differences between groups.
  • SuggaD
    SuggaD Posts: 1,369 Member
    If meal timing mattered, I'd weigh about 200 lbs. lol Since I often workout after work, I have dinner at 11 regularly. I also eat a huge breakfast. Timing doesn't matter at all.
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    missblondi2u wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    missblondi2u wrote: »
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Were these two groups under surveillance the whole 12 weeks? What were they eating the rest of the time? How do we no the other group wasn't popping twinkies in between meals?
    I'm all about CICO.

    The groups were not under direct observation, and the researchers relied on self reporting. However, both groups were observed under identical conditions, so I would think both groups would have a similar "cheating error." That is unless, as someone pointed out above, the big breakfast group was just less hungry throughout the day and therefore cheated less.

    I didn't look at the full study but it could also be relevant what their food habits were before they started the trial in terms of how that may effect diet adherence.

    The participants were assigned randomly to each group, so I'm not sure prior habits would have a significant effect on the differences between groups.

    My logic was this, I believe that most people eat breakfast. I also believe that most people eat a breakfast larger than 200 cal.

    So is it possible that the reduction in breakfast size causes adherence problems for the small breakfast group.


  • missblondi2u
    missblondi2u Posts: 851 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    missblondi2u wrote: »
    SideSteel wrote: »
    missblondi2u wrote: »
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    Were these two groups under surveillance the whole 12 weeks? What were they eating the rest of the time? How do we no the other group wasn't popping twinkies in between meals?
    I'm all about CICO.

    The groups were not under direct observation, and the researchers relied on self reporting. However, both groups were observed under identical conditions, so I would think both groups would have a similar "cheating error." That is unless, as someone pointed out above, the big breakfast group was just less hungry throughout the day and therefore cheated less.

    I didn't look at the full study but it could also be relevant what their food habits were before they started the trial in terms of how that may effect diet adherence.

    The participants were assigned randomly to each group, so I'm not sure prior habits would have a significant effect on the differences between groups.

    My logic was this, I believe that most people eat breakfast. I also believe that most people eat a breakfast larger than 200 cal.

    So is it possible that the reduction in breakfast size causes adherence problems for the small breakfast group.


    Oh, I see. But conversely, I'd bet that more people eat dinner, and that it's well over 200 calories. It could be that reducing dinner was easier for the participants to handle, but that certainly contradicts what the majority of people here are saying (that they find it easier to stick with a deficit by allowing a large dinner and/or late snack). I think that if I had only a 200 calorie dinner, I wouldn't be able to adhere very long.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    Here's Alan Aragon's take on it (in case you didn't know, Alan is a well-known trainer and fitness/nutrition researcher): Men's Health - Late Night Snacking?

    (Forgive the fact that it's in Men's Health magazine. Alan does occasionally make it in the mainstream fitness rags, bringing a touch of truth to their usual fiction.)

Categories