Lots of meals, or lots of snacking?

hem576

Hi guys!
I find that I'm now eating snacks throughout my days just to bulk out my daily calories and reach my minimum 1,000 calories a day and it got me thinking - which is better, having more meals in a day, or snacking throughout the day with your 3 square meals?

Tacklewasher

Whichever works for you, except 1000 cals a day is not enough unless you are really tiny.

cwolfman13

There is no "better"...

kommodevaran

It doesn't matter. I think you should tighten up your logging and find out how much you really are eating, and if it turns out you are in fact only eating 1000 calories per day, eat more, and if you really have trouble reaching 1000 calories, seek professional help as soon as possible.

fr33sia12

Isn't a snack a meal too? I count a snack as a meal anyway so makes no difference.

Wendyanneroberts

Weighing and accurate logging, is what is essential. Meeting essential nutritional needs is important. How many "snacks" or "meals" and timing of said meals is irrelevant.

GottaBurnEmAll

Why on earth are you only eating 1000 calories a day?

I sincerely hope you're not logging accurately and that your daily intake is actually higher than that.

If I were you, I'd (as suggested upthread) tighten up my logging (there are stickies in the main forums telling you how to log properly) so you can know exactly how much you're eating.

Saying that...

It doesn't matter if you eat once a day or six times a day. What matters is that you eat an appropriate number of calories (of mostly nutrient-dense food with some treats here or there) to support your goals (weight loss, maintenance, or gain).

malibu927

Whatever helps you get an appropriate number of calories, which 1000 is not

lemurcat12

Snacking is good if you need it to increase calories, but why are you having trouble getting up to 1000 (I agree that's not enough)? If this has been an issue for a while, have you consulted a doctor?

sosteach

I eat 1200 a day (I had 100 pounds to lose) and eat 3 meals plus 2 or 3 snacks a day. If you are having a hard time eating 1200 calories I don't get it but would suggest you add some calorie dense foods like nuts and cheese and oil.

jenilla1

Some meals and some snacks. I don't eat "lots" of either...But I do aim for way more than 1000 calories total for sure.

Azdak

Can't we have both?

LiftHeavyThings27105

I do eat several smaller meals a day. And, I usually eat while in the office. Not exclusively, but essentially. I am considering, after some 18 months of this, to changing to four larger meals a day. We will see. And, that is just me.

As many have stated, there is no "better" and there is no "right" or "wrong" way. I would encourage you to play with this......but, I would encourage you to pick a solution and to stick with it for three months. Yep! 12 - 13 weeks. Do this with a few different solutions. Then, pick the one that works best for you. That one, whatever that one might be, is the "right" answer - for you!

Will also express some concern of the 1,000 calories a day. Generally speaking, that is a very low number. I am hopeful that you are in an aggressive cut and that this 1,000 calories a day is a very short term thing.

There is something called the Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR). This is the number of calories that we humans need to consume, on a daily basis, to just survive. Yes....no activity at all. Just sitting there, vegging. The human body is comprised of a lot of systems, and each of these systems does things....even if we are unaware. Well, each process requires energy. That energy comes in the form of calories.

The BMR is calculated using formulas. MFP has a formula (in the APPS section) where all you do is plug in your gender, your age, your height and your weight. The formula used by MFP is one of three main formulas.

There is another formula out there (well, actually, there are a couple of others out there). This formula is 100 years old and has been modified a couple of times. That formula (one for men and another for women) looks like this:

*Women: BMR = 655 + (4.35 x weight in pounds) + (4.7 x height in inches) – (4.7 x age in years)
*Men: BMR = 66 + (6.23 x weight in pounds) + (12.7 x height in inches) – (6.8 x age in years)


Both give you slightly different values. For me, a 50yo male who is 6'0" at 212lbs, the MFP BMR Value is 1850 while the formula that I posted provides me a BMR Value of 1937.

Either way, a formula is a formula is a formula. Consider it a starting point. Clearly, we would like to start as close to 'accurate' as possible.....but either way we have to acknowledge that this is a generic value and that it is a starting point and that our actual value will likely be a little bit different. These formulas do not take genetics or nutritional history into account.....so, the results will likely never be 100% accurate for 'me'! But, we have a pretty close idea.....far better than guessing, right?

So, I would encourage you to look at your BMR.....use whatever formula you like....shoot, I would encourage you to use both (Thank you to "Si" for pointing a few things out in another post)....and to see what those results are. Remember, the BMR is the number of calories that you need just to survive while doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

So, I am curious......if you do not mind sharing, what is your BMR according to both formulas (the MFP and the one that I provided)?

Need2Exerc1se

hem576 wrote: »

Hi guys!
I find that I'm now eating snacks throughout my days just to bulk out my daily calories and reach my minimum 1,000 calories a day and it got me thinking - which is better, having more meals in a day, or snacking throughout the day with your 3 square meals?

Wow, I have no idea. I eat 2 meals a day, rarely snack and my dinner is almost always more than 1000 calories before I even pour the wine to go with.