Does anyone else NOT snack?

Sammybunny711

I stopped snacking altogether when I started the "No S" diet some time ago. It's No Snacks, No Seconds, No Sweets except sometimes on days that start with "S". There is a website if you just google No S Diet. I prefer to have fuller meals and use my calories that way than to eat snacks between meals. Does anyone else do this as well?

I have been wondering whether it would jump start my metabolism more to snack (healthily) between meals or if it would just spread out the calories more evenly throughout the day. Does anyone have any personal experience with snacking vs. not snacking? I'd love to hear feedback on the pros of snacking versus the cons.

My pros of NOT snacking: enjoying larger meals at mealtimes/ avoiding binge eating/ stomach shrinking so less hungry at mealtimes--get fuller quicker, etc.

Cons: sometimes low energy between meals. Possible slower metabolism (not sure)

sammys1girly

I literally couldn't make it if I didn't snack...I get SO hungry and lightheaded if I don't eat between meals. I snack at least three times a day and it keeps my blood sugar more even. I hate eating a huge meal and feeling all stuffed and bloated, so I just cut my food amounts down at meals and snack mid morning, mid afternoon and mid to late evening.

giammarcor

I'm no nutritionist but everything I've always read has said it's best to eat 5 or 6 times a day so your body is continuously working burning calories.

Peridotite

I don't usually snack (unless I am going to the gym at lunchtime and need the energy boost and then it is usually a piece of cheese or a yogurt). I just don't find I get hungry enough to snack until about an hour before my meal time and then I just wait it out. I do record things in my diary as snacks but they are usually eaten within a half an hour of my meal . But like you I rather eat fuller meals that keep me satisfied for the hours between meals :happy: .

oxFaithxo

i love the thought of that diet... I try not to snack because once i start i dont stop. BUT yes i heard you are suppose to keep ur metabolism running by eating 5-6 small meals a day.

BUT the no seconds and no sweets... is an awsome concept!

taso42_DELETED

What does "snack" really mean any way? There's something irritating about that term. When I first started, I started with the "6 meals a day" paradigm. If you're going to eat, eat a meal, meaning, include some complex carbs, lean protein, keep sugar low. I guess some meals feel "snackier" than others (e.g., compare oatmeal with peanut butter and a small whey shake vs a chicken, brown rice, and spinach dinner), but they have the same basic parameters.

What do most people think of when they think snack? Is it junk food? If so then, yes, I would agree to eliminate or severely restrict it. Or is it an "incomplete meal", like a handful of nuts? Even in that case, I still tend to think that snack ought to be balanced out to include some good carbs and probably a bit more protein than the nuts alone provide, for example.

cocoanicky

Im the type of person who dont like to be hungry and dont like to be full. Im on the lean shake diet and its driving me crazy! Because its not making me full like it suppose to. I just want to eat and be happy and its hard to find a diet like that.

jwaitman

I would not make it without snacking. It helps to regulate your blood sugar even if you aren't a diabetic to eat smaller meals throughout the day too. I find that if I snack I am less likely to over eat at a meal because I am starved. Good luck.

Elleinnz

I agree with taso - what does snacking mean to you....
I find that the time between lunch around 12:30 and dinner - around 7pm is just too long to go without eating something, so I will have small meal at about 4 pm. This would normally be something like a fruit, a cup of home made soup, or some cottage cheese and a ryvita cracker.....you could call that a snack I suppose (less than 150 cal meal)

cocoanicky

Plus im not a snacker im just the type of girl who likes a burger from applebees now and then.

bruceseverson

I really don't have a hard and fast rule about it. Generally I don't allow myself to snack anytime I want to anymore (what I used to call "grazing"), but if I eat something not during a normal "mealtime", I just make sure I log it in. Not a big deal. If I am working out, I often bring something like a protein bar along so that if I start to feel my energy level dropping, I can have something quick to make it through the rest of my workout. I think it is more important to make sure that your Fat/Carb/Protein balance is maintained and that you eat enough fiber and water, and limit your sugar.


Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Free Calorie Counter

EDesq

I stopped snacking altogether when I started the "No S" diet some time ago. It's No Snacks, No Seconds, No Sweets except sometimes on days that start with "S". There is a website if you just google No S Diet. I prefer to have fuller meals and use my calories that way than to eat snacks between meals. Does anyone else do this as well?

I have been wondering whether it would jump start my metabolism more to snack (healthily) between meals or if it would just spread out the calories more evenly throughout the day. Does anyone have any personal experience with snacking vs. not snacking? I'd love to hear feedback on the pros of snacking versus the cons.

My pros of NOT snacking: enjoying larger meals at mealtimes/ avoiding binge eating/ stomach shrinking so less hungry at mealtimes--get fuller quicker, etc.

Cons: sometimes low energy between meals. Possible slower metabolism (not sure)

There are "Grazers" and Eaters. Either is Ok if you don't exceed your caloric limit, nor exceed your nutritional limits. This "jump" starting your metabolism is a crock. Metabolism dos not work like a fire that went out. People like to use that analogy but it does not work like that. It does not matter when you eat or how many meals you eat. Eating small meals or snacks are recommended to people for many reasons very few have to do with losing weight>>>Indigestion, hernias, colon/bowel problems, for people who have low energy levels, blood sugar levels for diabetics...

Your Body is ALWAYS metabolizing and losing weight if you are alive! That is why we have a BMR...it takes "Energy/Calories" just for the Body TO LIVE!

NoWeighJose74

There are "Grazers" and Eaters. Either is Ok if you don't exceed your caloric limit, nor exceed your nutritional limits. This "jump" starting your metabolism is a crock. Metabolism dos not work like a fire that went out. People like to use that analogy but it does not work like that.

I would fall under the "Grazers" category... Like how a swarm of locusts grazes

milaxx

I snack, but not consistently. I snack in the morning if I am going to the gym or having a I can't face breakfast day. If it's been a busy day I sometimes need a snack in the evenings. I really focus on well rounded meals and use snacks on an as need basis. I also think the more wight you have to lose, the morning important snacking is to keep the metabolism going and fight off hunger.

BR1986FB

I eat twice a day with a 14-16 hour intermittent fast in between so no, I don't snack often.

_eislek_

I don't snack. I don't care to. I just don't get hungry enough to. I don't think it's hurt my metabolism or weight loss.

RillSoji

I'm one of the (apparently?) few who can't really snack all day. I just cannot eat 5-6 smaller 'meals' per day. It makes me feel terrible! Sick to my stomach, hungry and cranky all day. I handle the 3 meals routine much better. So I'd rather have slightly higher calorie meals that keep me plenty full and a small snack like an apple or roll or something during the day *IF* I want/need it. Most of the time though my snack is a sugar free werther's to fight off the cookie craving that USED to be my snack. ~_^

Gettinfit2

I am learning to decrease my snacking. Currently, I'm eathing three meals about four hours apart and one snack between lunch and dinner. When I eat a wholesome breakfast I don't get hungry before lunch, but I usually need something inbetween lunch and dinner. I've pretty much eliminated any snack after dinner.

oxFaithxo

Your Body is ALWAYS metabolizing and losing weight if you are alive! That is why we have a BMR...it takes "Energy/Calories" just for the Body TO LIVE!
[/quote]


i am curious... so ur metabolism doesnt slow down inbetween meals or "snacking"?

oxFaithxo

sorry i cant figure out this QUOTE thing LOL

Valtishia

Some people can do that and it absolutely works for them. Myself however, I need to eat all the time throughout the day for the safety of everyone around me. I am VERY CRANKY when I am hungry lol

bloodbank

Unless I'm going out for a meal with friends, I pretty much only "snack". I've always preferred to eat something small about a million times a day.

mpfand

I eat when I'm hungry. If that means having a mid morning snack or a mid afternoon snack or an evening snack then I have it. I get migraines if I go too long without eating so having an apple and a handful of almonds to ward off a migraine is worth it to me! I also find it easier to not over eat at meal time if I'm not starving.

Musicmedicine

My understanding is that your body will burn more of, say, 1500 calories divided between 6 meals than 1300 calories divided in 3 meals. It's because your metabolic rate remains higher the more times you have to digest meals. Like I said, this is my understanding, and I think it makes sense.

heart_explodes

I couldn't make it either without snacking. If I don't snack because I'm too busy, I'm out etc. I start to feel nauseous. I don't know if that's normal or not, but I find if I have one or two snacks between meals I feel much better.

withchaco

I'm the opposite. I never snacked UNTIL I began my diet/ exercise regimen. Before, I just had huge meals. Everyone I've talked to (including a doctor) recommended breaking it down into smaller meals throughout the day, so that's what I did, and so far it's working.

Every body is different, though. So if the No S thing is working for you, that's great, keep at it.

alirpd

You do what works for you and it never hurts to try new or different wayss for a limited time and then guage the results - positive or negative.

BigBoneSista

I don't snack. I have 5 small meals a day. 6 if I strength train in the form of a protein drink. All of my meals consist of protein & good carbs in the form of fruit or veggies. My weightloss has been steady eating like this and I never find myself hungry.

mapexdrummer69

I don't snack either. I eat one or two large meals a day. Keeps me very full.

dad106

My trainer suggested I started snacking more but I'm a substitute teacher's aid.. and you can't exactly break out a snack in the middle of the school day.

What I do is eat 3 meals but they are very full meals..and so far that has been working for me. If I happen not to be working, then I may snack.. but for the most part I don't.

Nikiki

i'm a grazer, if I try to eat just 3 bigger meals I feel more tired, cranky, and way too full at the meals. I do best when I have 3 300-400 calorie meals and 2 150-250cal snacks.

*edited to add: my snacks are for the most part whole healthy foods, not empty calories: kind bar, apple or banana, spirutein shake (love the chocolate made with almond milk!) 100 calorie cliff or raw revolution bar, almonds, raw veggies, popcorn or a dark chocolate covered banana in the evening ect... I've found that since I've stopped eating the empty calories I feel fuller, so no more pretzels or rice cakes or 100 calorie cookie packs. my blood sugar seems to be a lot better this way too