Is it okay to save my calories for dinner everyday?

shadow2soul

You can get away with a lot when you are young. But when the body begins to age, it does get hurt by this eating regime you are describing. That is, eating this way does not keep blood sugars stable and also it can lead to higher triglycerides; and probably other negative metabolic consequences that I'm not aware of. So, if you are looking for a sustainable healthy eating plan for life, you should consider something different.

Weird, I talked to my Dr. about this and he told me that it doesnt matter when you eat calories, and it will have no effect on my metabolism. where did you get this info?

I got this information from my doctor. But, you see, I have insulin resistance/prediabetes and high triglycerides. If you don't have those things, you're doctor would likely be OK with your program.

I think for most healthy people, meal timing is irrelevant. I can honestly see where certain health issues (like diabetes) would require more frequent smaller meals.

Berkables

I used to do this! I was on weight watchers and would save about 75% of my points for dinner.

I agree with everyone that it's about what works for you, but you might want to ask yourself a bit more about why you do that. For me, at least, it was because I would get panicky if I had what I thought were too few points/calories left for the day, so I would save them for dinner. I liked being full at night. That worked fine for me for a while, but then I fell off the wagon because I couldn't sustain being so hungry all afternoon. Also because a mid-day BBQ or lunch event would totally mess with me and I had trained myself to have a huge dinner, so I couldn't adjust for it.

I'm doing much better this time around spending a few cals on breakfast and much more on lunch than I used to. So, again, whatever works for you and if you're not hungry during the day, then bless you and continue. But sometimes it's easier to sustain a diet plan when it more closely resembles what non-dieters do and how they eat (so that social functions don't completely throw you off track) and trains you psychologically for flexibility. Again, entirely just my own opinion!

mabug01

That would make more since if you have sugar issues. I had high triglycerides 10 months ago when i started MFP, now mine are well within normal range.

That's terrific. Do you attribute that to something specific you are doing or eating, or to weight loss in general. Mine are pretty stubborn so I'd like some advice.

Charlotta1997

It's fine, I'm bulking and I do it all the time. And I save lots of carbs as well cuz they help me sleep.

tarcotti

I do this, but sometimes I don't like how it makes me feel during the day, even after eating lots of low cal protein and healthy vegetables totaling around 100-200 calories for lunch, I still feel super hungry between 2 and 4pm. But then again, I'm doing 1200 so its pretty low already. I'm going to up the whole calorie count soon anyway.

I do want to say that its possible that mabug01 may be right, I know a lot of you were in disagreement, but what she described could possibly be true for SOME people, like her. Not everyone. And since mostly everyone on this forum is still young and probably haven't been doing this long term then its possible that it could have long term effects years from now if you eat like that continually for years. Its possible. I'd want to get a second opinion on this from several doctors and nutritionists before disagreeing completely.

Lyndonbearsmommy

The fitness gurus always recommend eating small portions more frequently and to never skip breakfast. This is what gets your metabolism going and keeps your blood sugar at a regular level.

rachelslaytontucker

fyi…..Doctor's spend a total of about 3 hours studying nutrition.

Charlotta1997

Broscience

rachelslaytontucker

but many of these fitness experts, are not experts in nutrition. Ask them where they received their nutrition degree. Believe me, i used to be one of those "fitness experts".

lindsey1979

You can get away with a lot when you are young. But when the body begins to age, it does get hurt by this eating regime you are describing. That is, eating this way does not keep blood sugars stable and also it can lead to higher triglycerides; and probably other negative metabolic consequences that I'm not aware of. So, if you are looking for a sustainable healthy eating plan for life, you should consider something different.

Weird, I talked to my Dr. about this and he told me that it doesnt matter when you eat calories, and it will have no effect on my metabolism. where did you get this info?

I got this information from my doctor. But, you see, I have insulin resistance/prediabetes and high triglycerides. If you don't have those things, you're doctor would likely be OK with your program.

You may want to look into IFing. I don't know how it affects the triglycerides, but certain types of IFing (like 5:2) have been shown to actually increase insulin sensitivity. I too have insulin resistance and it's one of the reasons I gave IFing a try. I personally found it much more manageable and my 6-7 week stall, despite consistent weekly calorie deficits, finally started moving again. I personally found it to be a much easier way of eating than a daily deficit -- and on fast days, I save all my calories for dinner and on non-fast days, my biggest meal is still dinner.

Iwishyouwell

You can get away with a lot when you are young. But when the body begins to age, it does get hurt by this eating regime you are describing. That is, eating this way does not keep blood sugars stable and also it can lead to higher triglycerides; and probably other negative metabolic consequences that I'm not aware of. So, if you are looking for a sustainable healthy eating plan for life, you should consider something different.

So how did the billions of human beings throughout history, and across the world, survive before made up concepts like "3 meals a day" or the latest "5-6 small meals a day" existed?

Having one large meal a day isn't new, it isn't revolutionary, and in many parts of the world, and history, it isn't even uncommon.

Berkables

You can get away with a lot when you are young. But when the body begins to age, it does get hurt by this eating regime you are describing. That is, eating this way does not keep blood sugars stable and also it can lead to higher triglycerides; and probably other negative metabolic consequences that I'm not aware of. So, if you are looking for a sustainable healthy eating plan for life, you should consider something different.

So how did the billions of human beings throughout history, and across the world, survive before made up concepts like "3 meals a day" or the latest "5-6 small meals a day" existed?

Having one large meal a day isn't new, it isn't revolutionary, and in many parts of the world, and history, it isn't even uncommon.

I don't actually have an opinion on this particular issue, I just gotta say that arguments likes this drive me insane, lol. The billions of human beings throughout history died by age 30 and did not have access to the same types, variety, and amounts of food we do today. Asking for advice for optimal health or optimal weight loss has nothing to do with how people have survived. It has to do with how people can THRIVE.

lindsey1979

You can get away with a lot when you are young. But when the body begins to age, it does get hurt by this eating regime you are describing. That is, eating this way does not keep blood sugars stable and also it can lead to higher triglycerides; and probably other negative metabolic consequences that I'm not aware of. So, if you are looking for a sustainable healthy eating plan for life, you should consider something different.

So how did the billions of human beings throughout history, and across the world, survive before made up concepts like "3 meals a day" or the latest "5-6 small meals a day" existed?

Having one large meal a day isn't new, it isn't revolutionary, and in many parts of the world, and history, it isn't even uncommon.

I don't actually have an opinion on this particular issue, I just gotta say that arguments likes this drive me insane, lol. The billions of human beings throughout history died by age 30 and did not have access to the same types, variety, and amounts of food we do today. Asking for advice for optimal health or optimal weight loss has nothing to do with how people have survived. It has to do with how people can THRIVE.

True, true, but there is something to be said about being cognizant of our evolutionary history. We didn't evolve in a time of ever plentiful food supply -- that is something very modern, in evolutionary terms. What may be optimal for our biology isn't necessarily optimal for the current landscape -- as you see in the incredible amounts of obesity. That's far from thriving.

buffywhitney

Calories don't care what time it is.

waterboat1956

No, and why would you want to walk around all day long torturing yourself via food deprivation?

All the research (legit, that is) tells us that it's:
1.) unhealthy to skip meals - our blood sugar plummets and there's no fuel in our "engine" to help us think clearly, work, stay focused, etc.
2.) We need breakfast that focuses on good protein (egg whites, 4 oz steak, fish, chicken, etc.). Protein helps wake us up, fuels our furnace, and helps prevent the crash that comes when we rely on a.) Sugary food, or b.) carbs that quickly convert to sugar in our bodies.
3.) Depending on who you are, you can eat 3-5 times a day.
a.) Keep snacks at or under 300 calories. Use protein, vegetables, a few complex carbs.
4.) When you think you are hungry, drink 8 oz. of good water (not out of a plastic bottle, please!)

Above all, do your own research, avoid "anger balls" trying to tell you everybody is wrong except them, and remember this, my young friend:

" If I had known I was going to live this long, I would have taken better care of myself!"

Cheers,

K (57)

P.S. Calories DO CARE what time it is - that's why no one suggests you eat a huge meal and then go straight to bed! Food is fuel and we need it when we awaken in the morning because we've just spent 8-9 hours in fasting mode; hence the name of the first meal of the day "BREAK" "FAST".

MKEgal

If I don't eat a larger dinner, I'm starved by the end of the day and extremely hungry by the next morning.
So a lot of the time I will save the majority of my calories for the evening.
I will have something with 100-150 calories for breakfast, skip lunch (unless I'm really hungry, and then I will have soup or something low in calories), and a snack (100-200 calories).

Depends on what you're trying to do.
Having a large breakfast, medium lunch, and small dinner is a good way to lose weight, so it stands to reason that eating most of your calories at dinner would be a good way to maintain your weight, or even gain some. (Witness the gal who commented that she does what you're doing & is bulking up.)

The deficit is what's important, not when you eat the calories ...
meal timing is not very important ...
meal timing is irrelevant

Not true.
For those who have been asking to see research, here you go.
This study compared eating a small breakfast, medium lunch, and large dinner, [200, 500, 700 cal]
with eating a large breakfast, medium lunch, and small dinner [700, 500, 200 cal].

"The [large breakfast] group showed greater weight loss and waist circumference reduction ... fasting glucose, insulin [&] triglycerides ... decreased significantly to a greater extent in the [large breakfast] group."
In addition, hunger was less and satiety was greater.

Here's a summary: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23512957

Here's a PDF of the whole article.
http://genetics.doctorsonly.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Jakubowicz-at-al-Obesity-2013-oby20460.pdf

You'd probably be happier, less hungry, if you ate more throughout the day.
Try maybe 400 / 300 / 700 if you want to keep having a larger evening meal. Or 500 / 900 if you want to skip lunch.

For reference, I'm a 20 year old female, 5'6'' tall, 146.2 lbs., and am eating around 1,200 calories a day.

120 (1200 cal) is kinda toward the bottom end of the healthy BMI range for your height. 142 is sort of top of the middle.
http://www.shapeup.org/bmi/bmi6.pdf
So you could go up a couple hundred calories and still maintain a healthy weight.
(10x your goal weight is a decent approximation of the calories you should be eating.)

I had high triglycerides 10 months ago when i started MFP, now mine are well within normal range

Do you attribute that to something specific you are doing or eating, or to weight loss in general

When I was getting a workup in January before seriously starting work on weight loss, my cholesterol was 212, triglycerides were 183, LDL was 124.
At the end of May: 178, 84, 111.
In between I ate lower fat, more fruits & veggies, and worked out at least a half hour nearly every day (usually closer to an hour) - cardio & weightlifting.
My doctor says that consistent exercise and eating lower fat (esp. dairy, which kills me 'cause I love cheese... so I just eat less of it), lower alcohol, and lower carbs has a big effect on triglycerides.

Iwishyouwell

You can get away with a lot when you are young. But when the body begins to age, it does get hurt by this eating regime you are describing. That is, eating this way does not keep blood sugars stable and also it can lead to higher triglycerides; and probably other negative metabolic consequences that I'm not aware of. So, if you are looking for a sustainable healthy eating plan for life, you should consider something different.

So how did the billions of human beings throughout history, and across the world, survive before made up concepts like "3 meals a day" or the latest "5-6 small meals a day" existed?

Having one large meal a day isn't new, it isn't revolutionary, and in many parts of the world, and history, it isn't even uncommon.

I don't actually have an opinion on this particular issue, I just gotta say that arguments likes this drive me insane, lol. The billions of human beings throughout history died by age 30 and did not have access to the same types, variety, and amounts of food we do today. Asking for advice for optimal health or optimal weight loss has nothing to do with how people have survived. It has to do with how people can THRIVE.

I wasn't referring exclusively to the past.

You do realize, right, that there are plenty of societies across the contemporary world where the eating pattern is one large meal a day, with light eating throughout the rest of the day? Societies thriving, not merely surviving and dying by 30.

Sobus76

That would make more since if you have sugar issues. I had high triglycerides 10 months ago when i started MFP, now mine are well within normal range.

That's terrific. Do you attribute that to something specific you are doing or eating, or to weight loss in general. Mine are pretty stubborn so I'd like some advice.

Dropping the weight, and not eating fast food, and other junk all the time is likely why my numbers are all normal now,

thavoice

So, I'm home during the day and go to my boyfriend's every evening. If I don't eat a larger dinner, I'm starved by the end of the day and extremely hungry by the next morning. So a lot of the time I will save the majority of my calories for the evening. For instance, I will have something with 100-150 calories for breakfast, skip lunch (unless I'm really hungry, and then I will have soup or something low in calories), and a snack (100-200 calories). This way, the majority of my calories are left for dinner. Is this okay to do? I just want to make sure that it isn't somehow hurting my body by saving my calories for later in the day instead of evenly spacing them throughout the day.

For reference, I'm a 20 year old female, 5'6'' tall, 146.2 lbs., and am eating around 1,200 calories a day.

Check out FASTING and its benefits. If you are saving all for one meal a day and not much else in between you may also see the great benefits that fasting brings to the table.

nomorebingesgirl2014

Ohhhh great post