big meal for breakfast? lunch? suppertime?

PNWriter

I am toying with the idea of having my "big" (well, not as big as it used to be) meal at lunch instead of suppertime. My thought is that maybe I'll get my metabolism going earlier in the day and have time for my body to use all the calories. I'm afraid if I move it back to breakfast I'll be starving by the end of the day. Thoughts?

Nomomush

I spread my meals evenly throughout the day-- 6 meals and eating every 2-3 hours then no complex carbs for my last 3 meals.

Supermel

I sort of break my day down as follows:

300 cal's breakfast

350 cal's lunch

200 snack-

350 cal's dinner

I usually put my dinner in ahead of time, if i am having a heavier calorie dinner, i adjust my snack and/or lunch as needed. If i don't work out, i don't have a pm snack - if i do work out, i usualy eat those calories after the workout.

gargoyle999

I work a compressed shift so on days I work I get up at 4am and not home until almost 7pm. I need around 1800 calories but am trying to keep my dinner to 400 calories or less since I don't eat until almost 7pm. Then after I eat I get on the treadmill until I get to 400 calories burned (or more). But I really only eat two other times on work days so it's breakfast and lunch and I'm planning those out for around 700 calories each. It's more then I would like to eat all at once but I'm on my feet a lot and walking a lot with work.

My feeling is that even if I'm under or at my calorie goal for the day it can't be good to have a "big" meal then go to bed 2 or 3 hours later and not get time to work it off so to speak. My wife keeps telling me so and so on such and such TV show says as long as it' 2 or more hours before going to bed it's ok, but I don't buy it.