Does the time you eat affect weightloss?
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
No.0
-
The journal of obesity is available public access via the NIH as I mentioned, full article...for free...is located here.
You just need to know where to look.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3756673/0 -
Oh, I would also add that I have seen this play out first hand. My wife has struggled for years with her weight, trying different methods over the years, some with short term success, but nothing has stuck, so to speak. We have always eaten fairly healthy, mostly lean meats (chicken mainly, pork and minimal beef), lots of greens, no sauces, etc... But, none of that seemed to matter, whenever she lost weight, it always came right back. Now, she does have some increased risk factors due to her PCOS and that has certainly made things more difficult as one of the side effects impacts how her body deals with carbohydrates due to the hyperinsulimia caused by PCOS. Went the doctor route and they had her on some diabetic medication to help with that, but again, no substantial changes. After about 10 years, she finally decided to go see a nutritionist and one of the first things they did was front load her caloric intake (especially carbs). Now she actually eats more than she did before but has lost 55 pounds in the last year (almost, I think we're at 10 months).
That said, I will say that everyone is different and some people may be perfectly able to eat one meal a day, 5 minutes before they go to bed and not gain a pound and maintain a healthy weight. Others, like my wife, must be very conscious of what they eat, when. With everyone else falling somewhere in between. So the last piece of "advice" I'd offer is that if what you are currently doing is working, then great, don't mess with it :happy: However, if it's not working, then looking at what you eat and when you eat may be something that helps you.0 -
I mean the level of misinformation in his posts are incredible. But knowing the posting history it's not surprising.While meal timing has no direct effect on weightloss, it may have an effect on satiety/appetite and therefore how many calories you intake a day.
I find that if I delay eating when I get up in the morning, I eat fewer calories in the day, and can barely squeeze them all in. If I eat breakfast (particularly if it's high carb/sugar like pancakes, waffles, pastry, etc., but even if it's all protein like eggs) then I end up hungry and snacking all day and go way over.
Reason why you are hungry is because of your metabolism. You are digesting to food so quickly for breakfast leaving you hungry the rest of the day. If I eat and I am not hungry 3 hours later than my metabolism has dropped a little.
That makes no sense though...I'm also digesting dinner at the same speed at night, and then going to bed, so if it were just metabolism then why wouldn't I wake up starving? And why would I feel fine and less hungry between lunch and dinner just because I skipped breakfast? Wouldn't I still be digesting lunch at the same speed, especially since I didn't have breakfast and was therefore "empty"?
You do not wake up hungry. I wake up starving and if I do not eat within a half hour my body does something where my stomach feels awful to the point where I have to drink water slowly. There is debate going on now that is trying to figure out if eating smaller frequent meal is better than three standards meal. My nutrition class says it makes no difference but it does for me. I have no fact about it but I think skipping breakfast decline metabolism a lot and when you eat lunch it will digest very slowly because there is a such thing as starvation mode. There are articles on that. I know in me that my body definitely has a starvation mode point.
Wut? I can't even... So very much misinformation.
If you wake up that hungry and feel what is called "tissue hunger" (feels like a black hole in your stomach, quite painful, will prompt you to eat absolutely anything to make it go away) then you're probably hypoglycemic. You might want to schedule a glucose tolerance test.
There is very little "debate" going on about smaller, more frequent meals any more. Study results trend in the direction of "it doesn't matter." What matters is total calories, not when or how frequently you eat them. Your nutrition class was right..
Your metabolism cannot decline just from skipping breakfast, especially if you are eating enough calories throughout the rest of the day. Starvation mode is widely held to be a myth according to the current science, and even if it wasn't, it takes a very long time of consistently undereating before you could even consider it as a problem. We're talking months of huge deficits, not a morning of skipped breakfast when you ate 1500 cals the day before.
I will remember all my so called misinform and misguided information during these post when it is my turn to put up my success story because I will now put mine up very soon.
Are you saying that you're having success because you put your body into starvation mode?
Your success is due to the simple formula of calories in < calories out. It does not matter when those calories go in or out, as long as in is less than out. There's only one way that you could prove that your success was due to the time or frequency of your meals: if you are eating more calories than you burn, but eating them at such times and increments that you lost weight in spite of having a surplus of calories.
I am doing the exact opposite of starvation mode. Calories in< calories out works then you gain it back with the low metabolism you create with only relying on that. Keeping metabolism high or getting higher + calories in <calories out = lifestyle change. Which is what I have figured out.0 -
yopeeps, can you not make outlandish claims then the only evidence you have is that it worked for you.
You do this in every single thread.
You are killing some of this community with your bad information0 -
the answer to the OP is NO, NO, NO, NO and again
Noooooooooooooooo. what is the issue? :huh:
somebody had to post an article....:grumble:0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Well, not sure I implicitly said that everyone was wrong. I was simply pointing out that, contrary to what some folks were saying with respect to no evidence that when you eat is important, there is evidence that when does matter for some people. As to why it doesn't for you but might for others.... Really, so in your opinion everyone is exactly the same? There are no other factors that can impact weight management (stress, hormonal imbalances, environmental factors, food choices, etc...)? It's only a calorie counting game. Right, gotcha.
Yes as you astutely pointed out, the conclusion indicates "may" (which I'm assuming is the word you meant, there wasn't anything bolded in your reply). Not sure I see why that matters, but that might be because I'm of the belief that everything that most things dealing with diet and weight management is a "may".
As far as reading the whole article, I did, however, I used my company's subscription to PubMed when I searched for research on eating timing. Yes my fault, I should have checked to see if the research was available via other sources. Duly noted.0 -
Then explain. Why haven't so many of us gained the weight back? You are also over valuing the amount of metabolic adaptation that occurs in a hypocaloric diet.
I mean the level of misinformation in his posts are incredible. But knowing the posting history it's not surprising.While meal timing has no direct effect on weightloss, it may have an effect on satiety/appetite and therefore how many calories you intake a day.
I find that if I delay eating when I get up in the morning, I eat fewer calories in the day, and can barely squeeze them all in. If I eat breakfast (particularly if it's high carb/sugar like pancakes, waffles, pastry, etc., but even if it's all protein like eggs) then I end up hungry and snacking all day and go way over.
Reason why you are hungry is because of your metabolism. You are digesting to food so quickly for breakfast leaving you hungry the rest of the day. If I eat and I am not hungry 3 hours later than my metabolism has dropped a little.
That makes no sense though...I'm also digesting dinner at the same speed at night, and then going to bed, so if it were just metabolism then why wouldn't I wake up starving? And why would I feel fine and less hungry between lunch and dinner just because I skipped breakfast? Wouldn't I still be digesting lunch at the same speed, especially since I didn't have breakfast and was therefore "empty"?
You do not wake up hungry. I wake up starving and if I do not eat within a half hour my body does something where my stomach feels awful to the point where I have to drink water slowly. There is debate going on now that is trying to figure out if eating smaller frequent meal is better than three standards meal. My nutrition class says it makes no difference but it does for me. I have no fact about it but I think skipping breakfast decline metabolism a lot and when you eat lunch it will digest very slowly because there is a such thing as starvation mode. There are articles on that. I know in me that my body definitely has a starvation mode point.
Wut? I can't even... So very much misinformation.
If you wake up that hungry and feel what is called "tissue hunger" (feels like a black hole in your stomach, quite painful, will prompt you to eat absolutely anything to make it go away) then you're probably hypoglycemic. You might want to schedule a glucose tolerance test.
There is very little "debate" going on about smaller, more frequent meals any more. Study results trend in the direction of "it doesn't matter." What matters is total calories, not when or how frequently you eat them. Your nutrition class was right..
Your metabolism cannot decline just from skipping breakfast, especially if you are eating enough calories throughout the rest of the day. Starvation mode is widely held to be a myth according to the current science, and even if it wasn't, it takes a very long time of consistently undereating before you could even consider it as a problem. We're talking months of huge deficits, not a morning of skipped breakfast when you ate 1500 cals the day before.
I will remember all my so called misinform and misguided information during these post when it is my turn to put up my success story because I will now put mine up very soon.
Are you saying that you're having success because you put your body into starvation mode?
Your success is due to the simple formula of calories in < calories out. It does not matter when those calories go in or out, as long as in is less than out. There's only one way that you could prove that your success was due to the time or frequency of your meals: if you are eating more calories than you burn, but eating them at such times and increments that you lost weight in spite of having a surplus of calories.
I am doing the exact opposite of starvation mode. Calories in< calories out works then you gain it back with the low metabolism you create with only relying on that. Keeping metabolism high or getting higher + calories in <calories out = lifestyle change. Which is what I have figured out.
So you figured out how you can keep your metabolism high (which apparently no one else has) while losing weight right? Why don't you explain to everyone how you have gone about doing that.
I mean last I check I personally have made a lifestyle change. Don't know how I haven't.
Also, how are you making all these claims when you are still so far from your goal? How does that make sense?
Also,
That^^^^yopeeps, can you not make outlandish claims then the only evidence you have is that it worked for you.
You do this in every single thread.
You are killing some of this community with your bad information
How can someone say something has worked for them without even getting to an end result???????
You said it yourself. How can I know something works if im not at the end result and really experience it. I hope that is not how you have been learning. I have already answer the metabolism question you have. You know what you did you disregard my evidence which was a article. You want to know what other people did? They thanked me for the article. Now I am helping them with there weight loss. All of this will come up again during my success story. Maybe then you will actually have a open mind to listen when I am thinner and stronger then the major of Americans ( Where I live). My outlandish claims. LOL0 -
Well, not sure I implicitly said that everyone was wrong. I was simply pointing out that, contrary to what some folks were saying with respect to no evidence that when you eat is important, there is evidence that when does matter for some people. As to why it doesn't for you but might for others.... Really, so in your opinion everyone is exactly the same? There are no other factors that can impact weight management (stress, hormonal imbalances, environmental factors, food choices, etc...)? It's only a calorie counting game. Right, gotcha.
Yes as you astutely pointed out, the conclusion indicates "may" (which I'm assuming is the word you meant, there wasn't anything bolded in your reply). Not sure I see why that matters, but that might be because I'm of the belief that everything that most things dealing with diet and weight management is a "may".
As far as reading the whole article, I did, however, I used my company's subscription to PubMed when I searched for research on eating timing. Yes my fault, I should have checked to see if the research was available via other sources. Duly noted.
People do not realize that hence MFP forums. If it were everyone would just get it done. We all look the way we want.0 -
Then explain. Why haven't so many of us gained the weight back? You are also over valuing the amount of metabolic adaptation that occurs in a hypocaloric diet.
I mean the level of misinformation in his posts are incredible. But knowing the posting history it's not surprising.While meal timing has no direct effect on weightloss, it may have an effect on satiety/appetite and therefore how many calories you intake a day.
I find that if I delay eating when I get up in the morning, I eat fewer calories in the day, and can barely squeeze them all in. If I eat breakfast (particularly if it's high carb/sugar like pancakes, waffles, pastry, etc., but even if it's all protein like eggs) then I end up hungry and snacking all day and go way over.
Reason why you are hungry is because of your metabolism. You are digesting to food so quickly for breakfast leaving you hungry the rest of the day. If I eat and I am not hungry 3 hours later than my metabolism has dropped a little.
That makes no sense though...I'm also digesting dinner at the same speed at night, and then going to bed, so if it were just metabolism then why wouldn't I wake up starving? And why would I feel fine and less hungry between lunch and dinner just because I skipped breakfast? Wouldn't I still be digesting lunch at the same speed, especially since I didn't have breakfast and was therefore "empty"?
You do not wake up hungry. I wake up starving and if I do not eat within a half hour my body does something where my stomach feels awful to the point where I have to drink water slowly. There is debate going on now that is trying to figure out if eating smaller frequent meal is better than three standards meal. My nutrition class says it makes no difference but it does for me. I have no fact about it but I think skipping breakfast decline metabolism a lot and when you eat lunch it will digest very slowly because there is a such thing as starvation mode. There are articles on that. I know in me that my body definitely has a starvation mode point.
Wut? I can't even... So very much misinformation.
If you wake up that hungry and feel what is called "tissue hunger" (feels like a black hole in your stomach, quite painful, will prompt you to eat absolutely anything to make it go away) then you're probably hypoglycemic. You might want to schedule a glucose tolerance test.
There is very little "debate" going on about smaller, more frequent meals any more. Study results trend in the direction of "it doesn't matter." What matters is total calories, not when or how frequently you eat them. Your nutrition class was right..
Your metabolism cannot decline just from skipping breakfast, especially if you are eating enough calories throughout the rest of the day. Starvation mode is widely held to be a myth according to the current science, and even if it wasn't, it takes a very long time of consistently undereating before you could even consider it as a problem. We're talking months of huge deficits, not a morning of skipped breakfast when you ate 1500 cals the day before.
I will remember all my so called misinform and misguided information during these post when it is my turn to put up my success story because I will now put mine up very soon.
Are you saying that you're having success because you put your body into starvation mode?
Your success is due to the simple formula of calories in < calories out. It does not matter when those calories go in or out, as long as in is less than out. There's only one way that you could prove that your success was due to the time or frequency of your meals: if you are eating more calories than you burn, but eating them at such times and increments that you lost weight in spite of having a surplus of calories.
I am doing the exact opposite of starvation mode. Calories in< calories out works then you gain it back with the low metabolism you create with only relying on that. Keeping metabolism high or getting higher + calories in <calories out = lifestyle change. Which is what I have figured out.
So you figured out how you can keep your metabolism high (which apparently no one else has) while losing weight right? Why don't you explain to everyone how you have gone about doing that.
I mean last I check I personally have made a lifestyle change. Don't know how I haven't.
Also, how are you making all these claims when you are still so far from your goal? How does that make sense?
Also,
That^^^^yopeeps, can you not make outlandish claims then the only evidence you have is that it worked for you.
You do this in every single thread.
You are killing some of this community with your bad information
How can someone say something has worked for them without even getting to an end result???????
You said it yourself. How can I know something works if im not at the end result and really experience it. I hope that is not how you have been learning. I have already answer the metabolism question you have. You know what you did you disregard my evidence which was a article. You want to know what other people did? They thanked me for the article. Now I am helping them with there weight loss. All of this will come up again during my success story. Maybe then you will actually have a open mind to listen when I am thinner and stronger then the major of Americans ( Where I live). My outlandish claims. LOL
Yawn.
I have better results than you and I am doing the exact opposite.
Now what?0 -
Then explain. Why haven't so many of us gained the weight back? You are also over valuing the amount of metabolic adaptation that occurs in a hypocaloric diet.
I mean the level of misinformation in his posts are incredible. But knowing the posting history it's not surprising.While meal timing has no direct effect on weightloss, it may have an effect on satiety/appetite and therefore how many calories you intake a day.
I find that if I delay eating when I get up in the morning, I eat fewer calories in the day, and can barely squeeze them all in. If I eat breakfast (particularly if it's high carb/sugar like pancakes, waffles, pastry, etc., but even if it's all protein like eggs) then I end up hungry and snacking all day and go way over.
Reason why you are hungry is because of your metabolism. You are digesting to food so quickly for breakfast leaving you hungry the rest of the day. If I eat and I am not hungry 3 hours later than my metabolism has dropped a little.
That makes no sense though...I'm also digesting dinner at the same speed at night, and then going to bed, so if it were just metabolism then why wouldn't I wake up starving? And why would I feel fine and less hungry between lunch and dinner just because I skipped breakfast? Wouldn't I still be digesting lunch at the same speed, especially since I didn't have breakfast and was therefore "empty"?
You do not wake up hungry. I wake up starving and if I do not eat within a half hour my body does something where my stomach feels awful to the point where I have to drink water slowly. There is debate going on now that is trying to figure out if eating smaller frequent meal is better than three standards meal. My nutrition class says it makes no difference but it does for me. I have no fact about it but I think skipping breakfast decline metabolism a lot and when you eat lunch it will digest very slowly because there is a such thing as starvation mode. There are articles on that. I know in me that my body definitely has a starvation mode point.
Wut? I can't even... So very much misinformation.
If you wake up that hungry and feel what is called "tissue hunger" (feels like a black hole in your stomach, quite painful, will prompt you to eat absolutely anything to make it go away) then you're probably hypoglycemic. You might want to schedule a glucose tolerance test.
There is very little "debate" going on about smaller, more frequent meals any more. Study results trend in the direction of "it doesn't matter." What matters is total calories, not when or how frequently you eat them. Your nutrition class was right..
Your metabolism cannot decline just from skipping breakfast, especially if you are eating enough calories throughout the rest of the day. Starvation mode is widely held to be a myth according to the current science, and even if it wasn't, it takes a very long time of consistently undereating before you could even consider it as a problem. We're talking months of huge deficits, not a morning of skipped breakfast when you ate 1500 cals the day before.
I will remember all my so called misinform and misguided information during these post when it is my turn to put up my success story because I will now put mine up very soon.
Are you saying that you're having success because you put your body into starvation mode?
Your success is due to the simple formula of calories in < calories out. It does not matter when those calories go in or out, as long as in is less than out. There's only one way that you could prove that your success was due to the time or frequency of your meals: if you are eating more calories than you burn, but eating them at such times and increments that you lost weight in spite of having a surplus of calories.
I am doing the exact opposite of starvation mode. Calories in< calories out works then you gain it back with the low metabolism you create with only relying on that. Keeping metabolism high or getting higher + calories in <calories out = lifestyle change. Which is what I have figured out.
So you figured out how you can keep your metabolism high (which apparently no one else has) while losing weight right? Why don't you explain to everyone how you have gone about doing that.
I mean last I check I personally have made a lifestyle change. Don't know how I haven't.
Also, how are you making all these claims when you are still so far from your goal? How does that make sense?
Also,
That^^^^yopeeps, can you not make outlandish claims then the only evidence you have is that it worked for you.
You do this in every single thread.
You are killing some of this community with your bad information
How can someone say something has worked for them without even getting to an end result???????
You said it yourself. How can I know something works if im not at the end result and really experience it. I hope that is not how you have been learning. I have already answer the metabolism question you have. You know what you did you disregard my evidence which was a article. You want to know what other people did? They thanked me for the article. Now I am helping them with there weight loss. All of this will come up again during my success story. Maybe then you will actually have a open mind to listen when I am thinner and stronger then the major of Americans ( Where I live). My outlandish claims. LOL
Yawn.
I have better results than you and I am doing the exact opposite.
Now what?
So you look stronger to everyone including yourself and losing fat simultaneously, Body recomp that is so impossible to do, thats awesome keep it up. But here the things how much room do you have in your lifestyle to change? I still eat fast foods and pizza. Now that I have taken that out. Pounds will melt off even quicker than they are.0 -
Sure time matters.
If you eat all the time you probably gain weight.
If you eat much less of the time you will likely lose weight.
Oh, tha wasnt what you were talking about?
As others state, it doesnt matter. I fast and many times after my fast, when I break my fast (breakfast) is usually after 8pm at night and sometimes later right before bed.0 -
Instead of burning the 420, eat it!! Win win situation!!0
-
....unless you're a GREMLIN!! Don't feed those after midnight !!
This...because that is SCARY! Although, I always wondered...when was it okay to feed them again? No feeding after midnight, but when did their "new" day start? If they wake up at 4 am and are hungry, is it okay to feed them then? These are the things that keep me awake at night
[/quote]
:laugh:0 -
Instead of burning the 420, eat it!! Win win situation!!
This answer = All the awards.:drinker:0 -
the answer to the OP is NO, NO, NO, NO and again
Noooooooooooooooo. what is the issue? :huh:
somebody had to post an article....:grumble:
:laugh:
Message recieved.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Then explain. Why haven't so many of us gained the weight back? You are also over valuing the amount of metabolic adaptation that occurs in a hypocaloric diet.
I mean the level of misinformation in his posts are incredible. But knowing the posting history it's not surprising.While meal timing has no direct effect on weightloss, it may have an effect on satiety/appetite and therefore how many calories you intake a day.
I find that if I delay eating when I get up in the morning, I eat fewer calories in the day, and can barely squeeze them all in. If I eat breakfast (particularly if it's high carb/sugar like pancakes, waffles, pastry, etc., but even if it's all protein like eggs) then I end up hungry and snacking all day and go way over.
Reason why you are hungry is because of your metabolism. You are digesting to food so quickly for breakfast leaving you hungry the rest of the day. If I eat and I am not hungry 3 hours later than my metabolism has dropped a little.
That makes no sense though...I'm also digesting dinner at the same speed at night, and then going to bed, so if it were just metabolism then why wouldn't I wake up starving? And why would I feel fine and less hungry between lunch and dinner just because I skipped breakfast? Wouldn't I still be digesting lunch at the same speed, especially since I didn't have breakfast and was therefore "empty"?
You do not wake up hungry. I wake up starving and if I do not eat within a half hour my body does something where my stomach feels awful to the point where I have to drink water slowly. There is debate going on now that is trying to figure out if eating smaller frequent meal is better than three standards meal. My nutrition class says it makes no difference but it does for me. I have no fact about it but I think skipping breakfast decline metabolism a lot and when you eat lunch it will digest very slowly because there is a such thing as starvation mode. There are articles on that. I know in me that my body definitely has a starvation mode point.
Wut? I can't even... So very much misinformation.
If you wake up that hungry and feel what is called "tissue hunger" (feels like a black hole in your stomach, quite painful, will prompt you to eat absolutely anything to make it go away) then you're probably hypoglycemic. You might want to schedule a glucose tolerance test.
There is very little "debate" going on about smaller, more frequent meals any more. Study results trend in the direction of "it doesn't matter." What matters is total calories, not when or how frequently you eat them. Your nutrition class was right..
Your metabolism cannot decline just from skipping breakfast, especially if you are eating enough calories throughout the rest of the day. Starvation mode is widely held to be a myth according to the current science, and even if it wasn't, it takes a very long time of consistently undereating before you could even consider it as a problem. We're talking months of huge deficits, not a morning of skipped breakfast when you ate 1500 cals the day before.
I will remember all my so called misinform and misguided information during these post when it is my turn to put up my success story because I will now put mine up very soon.
Are you saying that you're having success because you put your body into starvation mode?
Your success is due to the simple formula of calories in < calories out. It does not matter when those calories go in or out, as long as in is less than out. There's only one way that you could prove that your success was due to the time or frequency of your meals: if you are eating more calories than you burn, but eating them at such times and increments that you lost weight in spite of having a surplus of calories.
I am doing the exact opposite of starvation mode. Calories in< calories out works then you gain it back with the low metabolism you create with only relying on that. Keeping metabolism high or getting higher + calories in <calories out = lifestyle change. Which is what I have figured out.
So you figured out how you can keep your metabolism high (which apparently no one else has) while losing weight right? Why don't you explain to everyone how you have gone about doing that.
I mean last I check I personally have made a lifestyle change. Don't know how I haven't.
Also, how are you making all these claims when you are still so far from your goal? How does that make sense?
Also,
That^^^^yopeeps, can you not make outlandish claims then the only evidence you have is that it worked for you.
You do this in every single thread.
You are killing some of this community with your bad information
How can someone say something has worked for them without even getting to an end result???????
You said it yourself. How can I know something works if im not at the end result and really experience it. I hope that is not how you have been learning. I have already answer the metabolism question you have. You know what you did you disregard my evidence which was a article. You want to know what other people did? They thanked me for the article. Now I am helping them with there weight loss. All of this will come up again during my success story. Maybe then you will actually have a open mind to listen when I am thinner and stronger then the major of Americans ( Where I live). My outlandish claims. LOL
Yawn.
I have better results than you and I am doing the exact opposite.
Now what?
So you look stronger to everyone including yourself and losing fat simultaneously, Body recomp that is so impossible to do, thats awesome keep it up. But here the things how much room do you have in your lifestyle to change? I still eat fast foods and pizza. Now that I have taken that out. Pounds will melt off even quicker than they are.
I am always willing to indulge curiosity and suspend belief and learn new things, and I wasn't part of the thread you're referring to with an article, so why don't you do this: In order to help me learn from you, why don't you list your height, weight, age, and then open your diary so that I can run the numbers myself and prove to myself that your method is working?
0 -
i do not log in any workouts. I do not log in all my food. I never log salad dressings.. Never log condiments. I barely count calories in other words. I do not weigh my food out. I do not see the need to do any of this stuff. And plus people don't believe what I have been saying because I am still big. So when I make my success story maybe people will start to read what i say. This weight loss is way easier this time around because there is more than calories in<calories out. Way more factors to look at .There is so much more behind this simple answer because if it was that easy then we would all be able to do it and keep weight off.0
-
The first line makes no sense at all. Yes I said how can you claim something works for you if you haven't actually done it. That is true. You are making claims about these things you read in an article working for you, you are asked to explain and your response is that if we don't believe it then fine but it's working for you. Then you are asked for evidence and you reference an article from the same website. That's just dumb.You said it yourself. How can I know something works if im not at the end result and really experience it. I hope that is not how you have been learning. I have already answer the metabolism question you have. You know what you did you disregard my evidence which was a article. You want to know what other people did? They thanked me for the article. Now I am helping them with there weight loss. All of this will come up again during my success story. Maybe then you will actually have a open mind to listen when I am thinner and stronger then the major of Americans ( Where I live). My outlandish claims. LOL
You hope I haven't been learning how? By reading, understanding, applying the methods and "achieving" the goal? Yes that is one of the ways I've learn. Reading and gathering information is another way. What you fail to realize is you make claims that things can be done that most people dispute and say it can be because of an article when anyone can do that. That means nothing. I can sit here and say I can run a properly structured carb refeed and look much more vascular the next day ready for the beach because I have read about it, however, there is a big difference when I can say I have studied it, have attempted it many times and have gotten consistent positive results by applying what I learned. You unfortunately are missing the application part of your arguments which unfortunately for you is very important given the outlandish claims you like to make.
A perfect example was a claim you just made in another thread where you think you can be in the 200's with a low bf and high lbm "easily" Nd that it's all diet. That's just absolutely delusional. Those are the types of claims you have no right to make. Why? Because you have never done that before. On the other hand me saying something like I can get down to 10% bf while still being able to deadlift over 325 lbs and not even have to blink during the process and it being a walk in the park, is a fact. Why? Because I've been there, myself. Not that I simply read it somewhere.
You claiming people thank you and now you are helping them with their weight loss doesn't impress me. As I've stated in the past, those people are obviously very gullible and naive to believe what you claim just because you link them a T Nation article.
I do not think you got the memo about me stopping using T nation although it is majority of what I have been using. My evidence will only be scholar sources.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
i do not log in any workouts. I do not log in all my food. I never log salad dressings.. Never log condiments. I barely count calories in other words. I do not weigh my food out. I do not see the need to do any of this stuff. And plus people don't believe what I have been saying because I am still big. So when I make my success story maybe people will start to read what i say. This weight loss is way easier this time around because there is more than calories in<calories out. Way more factors to look at .There is so much more behind this simple answer because if it was that easy then we would all be able to do it and keep weight off.
So, for all we know, you're eating 500 calories a day....can you at least understand why your word might be difficult to accept when it goes against the current science and you have absolutely no proof to show us?0 -
As others have said time doesn't really matter. I am one who if I eat breakfast I am starving all day, but if I wait to eat till lunch I do much better and it has not effected me at all.
Me too. I eat the majority of my cals at 8 pm 1200- 1400 or so before bed.0 -
i like to make sure i have a couple hours or more for digestion before going to sleep after a meal or snack, where no nervous energy is digestion food and insulin is down so it wont hinder the body from it's natural hormone production that is produced while your body is sleeping. seen this in a few articles hope this help's0
-
As others have said time doesn't really matter. I am one who if I eat breakfast I am starving all day, but if I wait to eat till lunch I do much better and it has not effected me at all.
Me too. I eat the majority of my cals at 8 pm 1200- 1400 or so before bed.
Same here...if I eat breakfast, I end up snacking half the night. If I skip it and delay lunch a little, I can barely squeeze in my calories. Plus, dividing the bulk of my calories between lunch and dinner, instead of three meals, allows me to eat more of the things I love, like pizza, burgers, burritos and wings.0 -
If time mattered, Spaniards would all be massively overweight (traditionally, a very large dinner is eaten around 10pm).0
-
This content has been removed.
-
i do not log in any workouts. I do not log in all my food. I never log salad dressings.. Never log condiments. I barely count calories in other words. I do not weigh my food out. I do not see the need to do any of this stuff. And plus people don't believe what I have been saying because I am still big. So when I make my success story maybe people will start to read what i say. This weight loss is way easier this time around because there is more than calories in<calories out. Way more factors to look at .There is so much more behind this simple answer because if it was that easy then we would all be able to do it and keep weight off.
So, for all we know, you're eating 500 calories a day....can you at least understand why your word might be difficult to accept when it goes against the current science and you have absolutely no proof to show us?
My daily goal in calories is 1750 which I changed manually from 1500.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions