Two Meals a Day Is Ideal, But Which Two Is Up to You. It ok?

NewHealthyBug

Two Meals a Day Is Ideal, But Which Two Is Up to You

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/09/21/amp/intermittent-fasting-calorie-restriction.aspx

It this ok do? Or?

AnvilHead

First off, ignore anything and everything MercoLOLa says. He's a crackpot and not worth paying attention to.

malibu927

AnvilHead wrote: »

First off, ignore anything and everything MercoLOLa says. He's a crackpot and not worth paying attention to.

Yep

Meal timing, frequency, etc. is personal preference for most people

bpetrosky

I prefer three a day. Mercola can stuff it.

RodaRose

Here is a group that times meals: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/49-intermittent-fasting

usmcmp

The number of meals that is ideal is however many are sustainable for you.

midlomel1971

I don't buy that all. That being said, I could totally eat a huge breakfast, large lunch and skip dinner altogether. In fact, I used to eat that way before I was married and had a family to feed at supper.

Sabine_Stroehm

Intermittent fasting is *interesting* and may have benefits. (I'm experimenting with it with menopause.) Consider a different source, however. Mercola is kinda out there.

sardelsa

I have 3 meals and 3 snacks per day which is ideal for me. But what... I don't fast, I eat right before bed, I eat carbs every few hours. Guess my body isn't burning fat? .... Not sure where he is getting his info from

Alatariel75

If eating 2 meals a day suits you, go for it.

AnvilHead

Alatariel75 wrote: »

If eating 2 meals a day suits you, go for it.

Absolutely. Two meals a day is fine. So is one. So are three, four, five, six or sixteen. As long as one maintains a consistent caloric deficit, they'll lose weight/fat.

But Mercola tho......

Alatariel75

AnvilHead wrote: »

Alatariel75 wrote: »

If eating 2 meals a day suits you, go for it.

Absolutely. Two meals a day is fine. So is one. So are three, four, five, six or sixteen. As long as one maintains a consistent caloric deficit, they'll lose weight/fat.

But Mercola tho......

Hahaha even a stopped clock is right twice a day

NewHealthyBug

I found this website for Intermittent fasting! I think it better.
https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/a-beginners-guide-to-intermittent-fasting/

bpetrosky

If, after a year and a half, you still need a beginners guide to IF, then it seems that it's not that intuitive or easy for you.

Some people find it easy to do and that's great, but it's still just am eating pattern and there's no metabolic magic behind it.

And Mercola can still stuff it.

NewHealthyBug

I didn’t do it right first time. So I’m start all over again.

bpetrosky wrote: »

If, after a year and a half, you still need a beginners guide to IF, then it seems that it's not that intuitive or easy for you.

Some people find it easy to do and that's great, but it's still just am eating pattern and there's no metabolic magic behind it.

And Mercola can still stuff it.

JBanx256

I eat 5 to 6x per day, which works well for me (from both a performance and a physique standpoint).

If 2x per day works for you, roll with it.

sijomial

Had a quick skim through the Nerdfitness article - some good points, some absolute nonsense such as "all calories are not created equal". That to me undermines the author's credibility completely if they can't grasp the simple concept that a calorie is simply a measurement of energy. Not nutrition, just energy.
Don't you find the RANDOM use of CAPITAL letters and exclamation points a bit childish?
No? Maybe it's me then!!!

What was your main take away points from the article OP?
What version (of the many IF protocols) are you planning on doing?

callsitlikeiseeit

it doesnt matter if you eat once, twice or 8 times a day as long as you are in a calorie deficit.

Machka9

I graze all day long.

Phirrgus

NewHealthyBug wrote: »

I didn’t do it right first time. So I’m start all over again.

bpetrosky wrote: »

If, after a year and a half, you still need a beginners guide to IF, then it seems that it's not that intuitive or easy for you.

Some people find it easy to do and that's great, but it's still just am eating pattern and there's no metabolic magic behind it.

And Mercola can still stuff it.

I might be a bit off, but I believe it's a process. Learning a new habit/way of eating/etc is a process. Stay with it, refine your goals and foods as you go along and try to not be too rigid with yourself. You'll see improvement over time. Hang in there.

staticsplit

sardelsa wrote: »

I have 3 meals and 3 snacks per day which is ideal for me. But what... I don't fast, I eat right before bed, I eat carbs every few hours. Guess my body isn't burning fat? .... Not sure where he is getting his info from

Thisss! I hate that empty low blood sugar shaky feeling, which I tend to get if I don't eat for more than 4-5 hours. Give me regular small snacks and meals (with carbs!) and I'm happy.

greyparks206

Eating only 1 or 2 meals a day is what got me into the situation of needing to lose 70 pounds, so....No, for me, this would NOT be an at all ideal strategy for weight loss. I'd skip breakfast and/or lunch and be STARVING by the time I left work in the evening, leading to going out for dinner or eating everything in sight at home. Little by little, my weight crept up because, at only 5'1", it's REALLY easy for me to exceed my maintenance calories in a single meal. For me, using the opposite strategy - pre-planning three meals and two snacks every day - keeps me from getting so hungry that I blow my calorie deficit in a single meal.

Weight loss ultimately comes down to energy balance (calories in < calories out), but the best strategy for getting there is not universal.

NewHealthyBug

I don’t follow mercola no more! I do different way now it nerdfitness.

NewHealthyBug wrote: »

Two Meals a Day Is Ideal, But Which Two Is Up to You

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/09/21/amp/intermittent-fasting-calorie-restriction.aspx

It this ok do? Or?