Three meals or six small

rileysowner

Eating 4-7 smaller meals instead of 3 large meals a day tend to keep the hunger pangs away a little better. If you're on a low-carb diet, then it really doesn't matter either way.

That is only true for some people. When I eat a bunch of small "meals", which in my book are not meals at all, I am always hungry. When I eat 2-3 large meals I am very satisfied and not hungry between them. Also, whether low-carb or not, meal frequency makes no difference in terms of weight loss if the calories a kept the same.

To the original poster, do what will make you more likely to stick to your calorie goals. If that is eating 3 meals a day, do it. If it is 6 meals, do it. Just realize it is not the meal frequency that makes any difference, it is the overall daily calorie deficit.

JoJo__Fit

It doesn't matter, I have 6 becuase I'm always hungry but I'm working on 3 big ones

rileysowner

I tend to eat 3 main meals a day and 2 snacks. I do this to keep my body burning calories for most of the day.

Regardless of eating your body burns calories all day. If it didn't you would be dead. If by this you mean that is keeps your metabolism going fast, that has been shown to be false. Meal frequency has no effect on total daily metabolic rate.

If you ate all your calories at two meals, lunch and dinner let's say, your body will burn those slower because it has to save the energy (food you ate) until tomorrows lunch. If your body gets more meals and snacks from the same amount of food it does not try to conserve its energy (the food you eat) but goes ahead and keeps on burning energy.

I think you are misunderstanding how our bodies work. Your body simply does not handle food that way. It does not try to conserve energy in any way like you described it.

When it comes down to it, meal frequency has no effect on metabolism, or weight loss assuming calories are kept the same. The only value it has is in compliance to one's calorie goals. So if your 3 meals and 2 snacks works for you, great, but realize it is the calorie restriction that is causing the weight loss, not the meal timing.

FoxyLifter

It depends. I like to eat 5-6 small meals during the week. Sometimes on the weekend, I prefer to have a big breakfast and dinner with a very light lunch. It's a personal choice. Meal timing has no effect on weight loss.

rachrach7595

Whatever works for you.

I don't eat breakfast. I rarely snack, if I do its mid afternoon between lunch and dinner.
I eat big lunches and dinners.

I used to get the munchies late at night but I have started going to bed early so that took care of that.

I don't think it really makes a difference and I have read here more of the same.

soozey1

I think the saying goes eat like a king for breakfast, prince for lunch and a pauper for dinner.
But I find three lager meals and three small snacks is good for me. Stops me getting hungry and it is much easier to stick to a plan when you are not hungry.

JeffBrown3

I honestly only eat two to three meals a day.. And have lost 23 pounds in the past month. So I don't really think it matters how many meals, more so calories in general. I do believe that having smaller more frequent meals makes your metabolism run more efficiently.

Nicolee_2014

Whatever works for you will be best

rondaj05

Some people do better with 3 big meals, I prefer multiple smaller meals, or my blood sugar will crash too much.

^ This is me also! I don't think it matters how or when you choose to eat. Do what works best for you and your lifestyle.

CkepiJinx

I eat three smallish meals most days and have snacks all day. I am a snacker, I have always been a snacker I just snack smarter now. There is no one right way, you need to eat however works for you.

susannamarie

Whichever way makes you more likely to stick to your calorie limit without fainting from hunger.

usmcmp

I tend to eat 3 main meals a day and 2 snacks. I do this to keep my body burning calories for most of the day. My snacks are usually 100 calories or less but filling. My main meals I try to keep between 35-50 carbs. Your metabolism is what dictates how fast you burn the calories. If you ate all your calories at two meals, lunch and dinner let's say, your body will burn those slower because it has to save the energy (food you ate) until tomorrows lunch. If your body gets more meals and snacks from the same amount of food it does not try to conserve its energy (the food you eat) but goes ahead and keeps on burning energy. I hope this make a little sense to you because it took me a little bit to figure it out years ago. I just chose not to make good choice in the food I put into my body, but now I'm more than willing and it is working for me. Down 22 pounds since 01/02/14.

This is highly incorrect. Your body burns calories all day (and even when you sleep). You could be thinking about the Thermic Effect of Food, which is the spike in calorie burn when you eat. The spike is proportional to the amount of calories you've eaten and to a degree the macros you have eaten.

I frequently only eat lunch (followed immediately by my snack) and dinner (followed immediately by a snack if I have the calories). That's essentially only two meals a day. I am not very hungry in the morning and I like the full feeling I get eating two large meals. That's what keeps me on track.

Eat however you want as long as your calorie intake is appropriate for your goals.

Rayman79

I'll refer you to Ray's hierarchy of caloric intake (patent pending). :laugh:

This is what I think is the order of importance when it comes to meal size and timing. It should be noted that this is not taking into consideration performance or athletic goals or any type of medical condition, it is purely for weight/fat loss:

1. Total caloric intake
2. Total caloric intake
3. Macronutrient composition
4. Adequate micronutrient levels
5. Total caloric intake (for further emphasis)
6. Meal timing and frequency

Mess around with meal timing to see what works for you. I've tried 16:8, one day per week fasting, big breakfasts and light lunches, 3 strict meals, 5 meals, meals and snacks...... Just figure out what works for you personally and go with it. It will undoubtedly change over time and that's ok too.

Ophidion

Concerning meal timing...


Lyle McDonald has some great information on it here:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/meal-frequency-and-energy-balance-research-review.html

The take home from Lyle's article, in terms of practicality and application, would probably be this quote, this is Lyle here:


* If eating more frequently makes it easier to control/reduce calories, it will help you to lose weight/fat.
* If eating more frequently makes it harder to control/reduce calories, or makes you eat more, you will gain weight.
* If eating less frequently makes it harder for you to control/reduce calories (because you get hungry and binge), it will hurt your efforts to lose weight/fat.
* If eating less frequently makes it easier for you to control/reduce calories (for any number of reasons), then that will help your efforts to lose weight/fat

Or in other words, personal preference.


Some peer reviewed studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9155494
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17483007

The full link...

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/820577-meal-frequency-rev-up-that-furnace-lol

Waits for IF mob to debate...