I'm a night eater!

monicainacoma

I've struggled with the night time munchies my entire life. If I try to eat a normal breakfast, lunch, and dinner I end up going over my calories. I've tried eating smaller meals more often and that doesn't work for me either. So far I've only had success with my current way of eating, which is to eat a small breakfast.. then usually don't eat for about 8 hours, then have dinner around 9 or 10 at night. Doing this, I'm able to stay under my calories and I don't have to fight my urges to eat when I prefer to eat. Is anyone else like this? Are there any drawbacks that I'm not aware of?

Clonekuh

If you eat more frequently, it will help boost your metabolism.

hackettkate

I try to brush my teeth & go to bed earlier.

BlueEyedMomma88

A bigger breakfast is better for u, because if you eat a big dinner then go to bed soon after it doesnt digest very well. Actually eating every 3-4 hours is better for your metabolism.

mapexdrummer69

If you eat more frequently, it will help boost your metabolism.

False.


Eating more frequently does not "boost" your metabolism, nor is it any better for you.


What you are doing is FINE. Meal timing, size, and frequency are irrelevant in the context of weight loss. Check my diary, you'll see quite the large infrequent meals.

mgreen10

By eating so rarely, you are really doing your body a lot of detriment and lowering your metabolism. Eating a small breakfast, waiting 8 hours, and eating a large dinner at night is so bad because by the time you eat dinner, your metabolism has slowed down so much that most of that food will go to fat storage in your body. Then you go to sleep at night and your body is full of food that it has no use for....you are not expending energy in your sleep..so even more of it goes to fat storage. Plus you are probably hungry all day. So bad!

I eat 5-6 meals a day to keep my metabolism up. But when I can't do that, I eat a medium breakfast at 11, (about 400 calories), larger lunch at 3 (600 calories) and small dinner at 8 pm (200-300 calories). The large lunch helps to keep you full at the time in the day when you are most active and burn most calories...during the day.

mgreen10

If you eat more frequently, it will help boost your metabolism.

False.


Eating more frequently does not "boost" your metabolism, nor is it any better for you.


What you are doing is FINE. Meal timing, size, and frequency are irrelevant in the context of weight loss. Check my diary, you'll see quite the large infrequent meals.

There has been a lot of research on this subject and it mostly points in the direction of smaller frequent meals. I'm glad you found something that works for "you", but generally it's better to eat more frequently.

mapexdrummer69

Eating frequently for the sole purpose of "boosting" your metabolism is simply foolish. Your metabolism does not "slow down" when you take large gaps between meals. There are no studies showing that meal frequency or size plays any role in metabolic rates.

mapexdrummer69

If you eat more frequently, it will help boost your metabolism.

False.


Eating more frequently does not "boost" your metabolism, nor is it any better for you.


What you are doing is FINE. Meal timing, size, and frequency are irrelevant in the context of weight loss. Check my diary, you'll see quite the large infrequent meals.

There has been a lot of research on this subject and it mostly points in the direction of smaller frequent meals. I'm glad you found something that works for "you", but generally it's better to eat more frequently.

Again, false. No studies show this.


I am not just claiming it's irrelevant because it "worked for me". Anecdotal evidence should be disregarded in terms of nutrition.

kdiamond

I've been eating light during the day and heavier at night for 7 years now and I've never seen more than a 5 pound loss or gain over that time. I'm not sure I buy into the whole "keep your metabolism high" thing. As long as I get my daily nutrition in, my body doesn't care what time it is.

mgreen10

I checked your diary...your calorie goal is 2300 and you eat a lot of take-out and large fast-food meals. You went over your goal by over 1000 calories the other day. How is your weight loss success? It says you have not lost any weight. You also have no pictures. I'd like to at least get a handle of the status of your fitness before taking any advice from you.

mgreen10

I checked your diary...your calorie goal is 2300 and you eat a lot of take-out and large fast-food meals. You went over your goal by over 1000 calories the other day. How is your weight loss success? It says you have not lost any weight. You also have no pictures. I'd like to at least get a handle of the status of your fitness before taking any advice from you.

This was not meant for the original poster, but for the person arguing that eating large infrequent meals is best.

mapexdrummer69

I checked your diary...your calorie goal is 2300 and you eat a lot of take-out and large fast-food meals. You went over your goal by over 1000 calories the other day. How is your weight loss success? It says you have not lost any weight. You also have no pictures. I'd like to at least get a handle of the status of your fitness before taking any advice from you.

1. Try looking back past one day. I recently went from 2500 calorie to 2300 due to weight loss.
2. If you consider 315 to 173 as an achievement, then awesome.
3. What's wrong with fast food?

mapexdrummer69

But PLEASE, don't look at my results as evidence. Again, I do not condone taking anecdotal evidence as a basis for changing your diet. Correlation does not imply causation.


I NEVER said it was BEST, I claimed it was IRRELEVANT.


Here is just one study debunking any advantage of meal frequency:


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

mgreen10

Our bodies work hard to digest and absorb the foods we eat, and your metabolism revs up in response. This is called the thermic effect of food. Here are some articles that support this....


http://www.tbfinc.com/metabolism.htm

http://www.livestrong.com/article/410350-does-eating-every-three-hours-really-raise-metabolism/

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/13910708/ns/today-today_health/t/boost-your-metabolism-lose-weight-faster/

http://www.sparkpeople.com/resource/nutrition_articles.asp?id=1144

http://ezinearticles.com/?Boost-Your-Metabolism---Eat-Small-Meals,-Eat-Often&id=581165

http://life.gaiam.com/article/eat-boost-metabolism-and-all-day-energy-meal-planning-guide-recipes

mgreen10

Why is fast food bad for you:

You can just google that question but here's a link:

http://www.personalpowertraining.net/Articles/Why_is_Fast_Food_so_Bad.htm

mapexdrummer69

So you're saying that total TEF changes due to meal frequency or size? False.


TEF and TDEE remain the same, regardless of meal frequency. Your body will expend the same amount of energy breaking down a meal of 1000 calories in one sitting as it would breaking down 4 meals of 250 calories.

monicainacoma

I didn't mean to stir up such a heated debate, but thanks for all the feedback. I tend to agree with mapexdrummer6 when it comes to metabolism. The thermic effect of food is real, but also sort of irrelevant since the extra calories burned are miniscule. So I'm not really concerned about how it effects my metabolism. I was curious about health risks and things like that.

mapexdrummer69

Just a tip of advice...


Don't believe every "study" that ABC News or Yahoo! posts....