Is a glass of milk a valid mid morning snack?

danigirl1011

I mean the whole eating every couple of hours to keep your metabolism up

That's a myth. Total calories is what matters, not what time you eat.

I disagree with this. Most fitness programs, including the ever popular P90x state that your body is like a machine and to get the best performance out of it you need to put fuel in every couplle of hours. You are basically saying she could save 100% of her calories from the day and eat it all for dinner and still get the same nutrition/outcome. That's crap. To answer the start of the thread though, although milk is good on nutrients, etc it's probably not that filling. I would add protein powder to it or maybe have a handful of nuts with it or some dried fruit.

baybeejulia

I mean the whole eating every couple of hours to keep your metabolism up

That's a myth. Total calories is what matters, not what time you eat.

I disagree with this. Most fitness programs, including the ever popular P90x state that your body is like a machine and to get the best performance out of it you need to put fuel in every couplle of hours. You are basically saying she could save 100% of her calories from the day and eat it all for dinner and still get the same nutrition/outcome. That's crap. To answer the start of the thread though, although milk is good on nutrients, etc it's probably not that filling. I would add protein powder to it or maybe have a handful of nuts with it or some dried fruit.

I agree. When I started eating 6 times a day I noticed a massive difference in my weightless progress. And over Christmas despite not exercising and eating junk food all the time I found that I was still burning enough calories to continue losing weight despite my diet. I owe that to my increased metabolism which I believe has to do with eating 6 meals a day.

myak623

[/quote]
"I disagree with this. Most fitness programs, including the ever popular P90x state that your body is like a machine and to get the best performance out of it you need to put fuel in every couplle of hours. You are basically saying she could save 100% of her calories from the day and eat it all for dinner and still get the same nutrition/outcome. That's crap. To answer the start of the thread though, although milk is good on nutrients, etc it's probably not that filling. I would add protein powder to it or maybe have a handful of nuts with it or some dried fruit."
[/quote]


This is actually incorrect. You could lose weight by eating all your calories and macros at one meal as you could by eating several meals throughout the day. As long as you are creating a deficit.

RonSwanson66

I mean the whole eating every couple of hours to keep your metabolism up

That's a myth. Total calories is what matters, not what time you eat.

I disagree with this. Most fitness programs, including the ever popular P90x state that your body is like a machine and to get the best performance out of it you need to put fuel in every couplle of hours. You are basically saying she could save 100% of her calories from the day and eat it all for dinner and still get the same nutrition/outcome. That's crap. To answer the start of the thread though, although milk is good on nutrients, etc it's probably not that filling. I would add protein powder to it or maybe have a handful of nuts with it or some dried fruit.

I agree. When I started eating 6 times a day I noticed a massive difference in my weightless progress. And over Christmas despite not exercising and eating junk food all the time I found that I was still burning enough calories to continue losing weight despite my diet. I owe that to my increased metabolism which I believe has to do with eating 6 meals a day.

Fiction:

Br J Nutr. 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70.
Meal frequency and energy balance.
Bellisle F, McDevitt R, Prentice AM.
Source

INSERM U341, Hotel Dieu de Paris, France.
Abstract

Several epidemiological studies have observed an inverse relationship between people's habitual frequency of eating and body weight, leading to the suggestion that a 'nibbling' meal pattern may help in the avoidance of obesity. A review of all pertinent studies shows that, although many fail to find any significant relationship, the relationship is consistently inverse in those that do observe a relationship. However, this finding is highly vulnerable to the probable confounding effects of post hoc changes in dietary patterns as a consequence of weight gain and to dietary under-reporting which undoubtedly invalidates some of the studies. We conclude that the epidemiological evidence is at best very weak, and almost certainly represents an artefact. A detailed review of the possible mechanistic explanations for a metabolic advantage of nibbling meal patterns failed to reveal significant benefits in respect of energy expenditure. Although some short-term studies suggest that the thermic effect of feeding is higher when an isoenergetic test load is divided into multiple small meals, other studies refute this, and most are neutral. More importantly, studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation.


Peer reviewed science > "Most fitness programs"

rm830

I just put a spoon of Nescafé with milk and microwave it. It's amazing!

mmmm love that!!!!!

baybeejulia

I mean the whole eating every couple of hours to keep your metabolism up

That's a myth. Total calories is what matters, not what time you eat.

I disagree with this. Most fitness programs, including the ever popular P90x state that your body is like a machine and to get the best performance out of it you need to put fuel in every couplle of hours. You are basically saying she could save 100% of her calories from the day and eat it all for dinner and still get the same nutrition/outcome. That's crap. To answer the start of the thread though, although milk is good on nutrients, etc it's probably not that filling. I would add protein powder to it or maybe have a handful of nuts with it or some dried fruit.

I agree. When I started eating 6 times a day I noticed a massive difference in my weightless progress. And over Christmas despite not exercising and eating junk food all the time I found that I was still burning enough calories to continue losing weight despite my diet. I owe that to my increased metabolism which I believe has to do with eating 6 meals a day.

Fiction:

Br J Nutr. 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70.
Meal frequency and energy balance.
Bellisle F, McDevitt R, Prentice AM.
Source

INSERM U341, Hotel Dieu de Paris, France.
Abstract

Several epidemiological studies have observed an inverse relationship between people's habitual frequency of eating and body weight, leading to the suggestion that a 'nibbling' meal pattern may help in the avoidance of obesity. A review of all pertinent studies shows that, although many fail to find any significant relationship, the relationship is consistently inverse in those that do observe a relationship. However, this finding is highly vulnerable to the probable confounding effects of post hoc changes in dietary patterns as a consequence of weight gain and to dietary under-reporting which undoubtedly invalidates some of the studies. We conclude that the epidemiological evidence is at best very weak, and almost certainly represents an artefact. A detailed review of the possible mechanistic explanations for a metabolic advantage of nibbling meal patterns failed to reveal significant benefits in respect of energy expenditure. Although some short-term studies suggest that the thermic effect of feeding is higher when an isoenergetic test load is divided into multiple small meals, other studies refute this, and most are neutral. More importantly, studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation.


Peer reviewed science > "Most fitness programs"

I guess there are arguments for and against. Everybody is different, I don't know about the science behind it but 6 meals a day definitely helped me lose my weight. I used to eat once or twice a day but never really ate more than 1300-1500 calories. So I know it couldn't have been my calorie intake that caused my weightloss.

ramseyrose

Milk has carb, fat (depnding what sort) and protein. Proteins fill you up. I think its a perfectly fine snack anytime of day.

Also just in case people dont know, never add anything to a liquid after microwaving - it can explode

beckylawrence70

A snack is whatever u want it to be.......:)

PercivalHackworth

The only vague memory regarding the intake is related to the energy required in order to assimilate a meal. Thus that would means the more meals you have, the more energy is required, but I'm not sure.
Anyway, +1 the whole 3 meals a day is nothing but a cultural burden

Edit :
our ancestors didn't had 3 meals a day, and were more shapped than us
Edit 2 :
I won't add the IF which is a kicks-*kitten* way of burning fat and keeping muscles

torie079

I love ice cold milk:) I drink a glass of 1% after my work outs.. I just love it.