3 meals a day vs snacks

lucym0802

To much info out there over to snack or not to snack what does everyone prefer?
One one hand 3 meals a day encourages the body to use up body fat stored between meals as energy or the other hand snacking keeps metabolism active and burning calories through eating. I’ve tried both and prefer healthy snacks in between as I get the shakes

thelandkraken

I need to snack. Regardless of what I ate at the last meal, I'm always getting hungry again after 2-3 hours. If I wait the full few hours until next meal time, I tend to overeat because I'm ravenous. But if I have a small snack of an apple or something else healthy, then I keep inside my calorie goals.

MikePTY

It doesn't matter. There are no special metabolism benefits to a certain WOE. Some people eat 2 meal a day, others eat 6. It comes down to personal preference and what keeps you feeling satiated.

thanos5

meals vs snacks made no difference for me whatsoever in my weight loss. i experimented with it a bit. 3 meals plus 3 snacks vs just 3 meals and my results were the same. i also achieve the same results if i eat all my calories in one meal vs 3.
i think whatever works for you, as long as you stay under your calorie goal, is fine.

Panini911

whatever makes it easier to keep to your calorie deficit. the calorie deficit is what makes you lose weight not when you eat.

also why 3 meals OR snacks? I eat 3 meals PLUS 3 snacks! yep i eat 6x a day on weekdays (4 on weekends)

zeejane03

Meal timing and meal frequency don't matter, it's a preference thing. What matters is that you're hitting your calorie targets-you can do that with snacks, without snacks, with three meals, without three meals etc.

staticsplit

My day usually goes like this, but not always:

8 - 9 am - milky coffee (hardly ever hungry first thing, though if I am then I have something)

10.30 to 11: snack window

1 to 2: lunch window

3 to 5: snack window

6 to 8 pm: dinner window

9 to 10 pm: snack window

I don't like eating too much and feeling full, plus I get shaky if my blood sugar goes low. I love snacks.

kimny72

It doesn't matter. The idea that you need to keep your metabolism "stoked" is a myth, it's always going, 24/7. It also takes hours for food to work it's way all the way through your digestive system, it is constantly both digesting and utilizing food and burning body fat. It's not like you need to have an empty stomach or intestines to burn fat, it's happening all the time too.

Anna022119

staticsplit wrote: »

My day usually goes like this, but not always:

8 - 9 am - milky coffee (hardly ever hungry first thing, though if I am then I have something)

10.30 to 11: snack window

1 to 2: lunch window

3 to 5: snack window

6 to 8 pm: dinner window

9 to 10 pm: snack window

I don't like eating too much and feeling full, plus I get shaky if my blood sugar goes low. I love snacks.

I'm exactly the same.

missysippy930

3 meals per day and 2 snacks, and stay within my calorie budget.

apullum

lucym0802 wrote: »

To much info out there over to snack or not to snack what does everyone prefer?
One one hand 3 meals a day encourages the body to use up body fat stored between meals as energy or the other hand snacking keeps metabolism active and burning calories through eating. I’ve tried both and prefer healthy snacks in between as I get the shakes

Neither of these statements are true.

Weight loss happens when you burn more calories than your body takes in. The timing of your calorie intake doesn’t matter.

Dreamwa1ker

It is personal preference. Figure out which keeps you feeling satisfied so that you can stay on track with your calorie goal. You can make either work calorie-wise - it all just matters as far as what keeps you from getting too hungry/dissatisfied where you are then at more risk of overeating.

E.g. for me - I skip breakfast. I have never been someone who is very hungry in the morning so I prefer to just be able to have a larger lunch that will keep me full til dinner. When I tried to force breakfast on myself, I ended up eating more calories total in the day because then lunch couldn't be big enough to keep me full long enough. But I know other people who wake up starving and would rather start with a big breakfast and then smaller meals later. Basically, listen to your own body.

puffbrat

I get hungry if I don't snack.

SuzySunshine99

It doesn't matter how you spread your calories out throughout the day. Whatever works to keep you within your calorie goal.

For me, personally, I don't snack. 3 meals a day (2 small and one large). I find that I am better off not eating anything than trying to have "a little something". For some reason, that little something actually makes me more hungry and I want to keep eating.

But, everyone's different.

lorrpb

If you’re ravenous at meals and this tend to overeat, filling snacks can help prevent this. If mindless snacking on high calorie treats undermines your daily goal, cut back on the snacks and/or swap out for higher volume lower calorie items.

Personally I like 3 small meals plus a few snacks.

One approach vs another doesn’t burn more fat or raise your metabolism. Bloggers gotta have something to fill the page.

gaelicstorm

I eat three meals and 2 snacks. I need the snacks to help me stay on track. If I don't have them then I get overly hungry and tend to overeat at the next meal because I feel ravenous.

Just pick whatever works with your goals. Do you like big meals and don't care about snacking? Do you prefer more moderate meals with some snacks throughout the day? Or do you enjoy controlled grazing? How we time our meals is not as important as keeping within our calorie/macro/health goals. Whatever you pick, make sure you are setting yourself up for success.

thanos5

lorrpb wrote: »

Bloggers gotta have something to fill the page.

QFT

kbmnurse1

I prefer 3 meals (smaller) + 2 snacks.

diannethegeek

Meal timing has very little affect on weight loss and the benefits from eating one way or the other, for most people, just gets lost in the noise of CICO. Elite athletes or people with a disease or medications that require them to watch their meal timing need to worry about it. For almost everyone else, sustainability and eating in a way that suits your feelings and schedule best are far more important.

I like two meals and snacks at night. That's what suits me. I've tried three or four other meal schedules and they were all fine and I lost the same amount of weight on each, but this way of eating is what I keep coming back to. Play around with different things and see what you like best.

thanos5

i literally eat one egg for breakfast, 2 oz of turkey and a cup of spinach for lunch, and the rest of my calories are dinner. sometimes my dinner is well over 1000 calories. doesn't matter a bit as far as my weight loss goes. my doctor said i'd never lose weight if i didn't eat 6 small meals a day...meh.

Phirrgus

I snack several times a day some days, not much on others. I try to not get too hungry as I have a tendency to attack the cabinets when I get home after work if I'm running on empty.

I've never really noticed a difference weight wise, loss or gain, either way.

lechesucio

My nutritionist encouraged me to have 5 'snacks' instead of the meals since I had issues with getting hungry. But I found that I wasn't satisfied by the small snacks throughout the day. I much prefer having fewer, more substantial 'meals'. It helps me feel like I'm not on a diet.

texasredreb

If I snack, I have it either between lunch and dinner (if I'm really hungry); or after dinner (if I haven't eaten enough calories).

lemurcat2

lechesucio wrote: »

My nutritionist encouraged me to have 5 'snacks' instead of the meals since I had issues with getting hungry. But I found that I wasn't satisfied by the small snacks throughout the day. I much prefer having fewer, more substantial 'meals'. It helps me feel like I'm not on a diet.

Agreed.

Meals vs snacks (or number of meals and/or snacks) is all just personal preference, but I dislike snacking and very much prefer having just 3 (or sometimes 2) more substantial meals.

mangofish44

I never feel that satisfied with a snack. If I do, it usually will be a few hours before dinner and will be nuts with some manchecgo or parmessian cheese typically. Those foods help fill me up

sijomial

The Thermic Effect of Food is in relation to the total volume of food eaten, not the eating pattern.

From the Office of Made up Statistics.....
99% of what is written about metabolism as regards weight loss is complete twaddle.

csplatt

I like three meals because I like to feel full. When I graze and break it up over many sittings during the day, I am always still kind of hungry. The other way, I get full and don't think about food for several hours.

Athijade

What ever works for you and helps you stay on target is the best way to do it.

Personally I rarely snack. My schedule looks something like this most days:

8am-9am Breakfast

12pm-1pm Lunch

5pm-6pm Dinner

7pm-8pm After dinner tea with a serving of cookies or chocolate

JustAMurmur

Personal preference. It all depends on what works best for your body.

missysippy930

Athijade wrote: »

What ever works for you and helps you stay on target is the best way to do it.

Personally I rarely snack. My schedule looks something like this most days:

8am-9am Breakfast

12pm-1pm Lunch

5pm-6pm Dinner

7pm-8pm After dinner tea with a serving of cookies or chocolate

You say you rarely snack, and list your daily pattern.

Isn’t your 7-8 pm tea and cookies or chocolate a snack?

Danp

Is dessert a snack?

These are the important questions we tack on the MFP forums