If eating every 2-3 hrs...

bcattoes

I never heard that is boosts you metabolism unless you are hypoglycemic like I am. I think a lot depends what you are eating and how your body processes it and the insulin ups/downs.

The reason to eat more often with hypoglycemia is to keep your blood sugar levels more constant, not to boost metabolism.

emilyjross

I have tried everything and cant lose weight! it just keeps goin up and i train 5 times a week!

bcattoes

I have tried everything and cant lose weight! it just keeps goin up and i train 5 times a week!

Have you seen a doctor to see if you have thyroid or other homonal problem?

kiachu

Most of us have no problem with people doing whatever they want.

What I HATE is when people tell other people, especially new people, that they must do things a certain way. It's sad when you see some neophyte posting "I'M NOT HUNGRY AT BREAKFAST, AM I IN STARVATION MODE?!?"

Eat frequently or infrequently as you see fit. Maintain an overall deficit and you will lose weight

true. I guess I just felt this thread was created to mock people that choose to eat every 2-3 hours. I didn't mean to take it our on you individually,

I agree- It bugs me when people say there way is the ONLY GOOD WAY works for everyone! Whether is is vegan or paleo or frequent or fasting.

Incorrect it was to highlight the silliness of eating every 2-3 hrs with the rationale of it speeding up your metabolism, by the same logic, eating even more frequently should really speed up your metabolism

And I get a kick out of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies and sure enough we witnessed a few of those

It can speed up or repair a damaged or slow metabolism. As seen with chronic yoyo dieters or chronic cardiophiles. But the food needs to digest. It doesnt in 15 minutes

Any proof source for that?

Do a google search. Anorexia nervousa treatment. Erik Ledin and Scott Abel specifically work with physique competitors that have starved and cardio-ed their bodies into oblivion. Its not really an issue of fire up the metabolism to burn away the fat in a fitness sense, its to get it's functioning normalized again and regulate hormones.

The majority of people it doesn't matter. Most people that say their metabolism are slow, barring some sort of thyroid dysfunction, are just using it as a excuse for poor dieting habits or lack of energy expenditure. I do it for psychological reasons and the fact I have to eat a lot.

MrDude_1

This is off subject, but this quote got the nerd in me thinking...

Does that mean if I put a gallon of petrol in my car 6 times instead of six gallons in one go, my car will go faster too?

I dont know for sure where the tradeoff is, but think about this:

Gasoline is heavy. 1 US Gallon is 6.1 lb (2.8 kg... or 1 liter is .7 kg aka 1.6 lb )

Filling a tank, like say my Jeep, with 20Gallons is ~120 pounds of fuel.. If I only put 3 gal in, its only ~20 pounds.. Now everywhere I drive, I must haul around an extra 100 pounds because I filled the tank.

At some point there would be a tradeoff on MPG by filling up more often, vs driving around with a full tank.


It may only be a small diff. but I suppose not hauling around 100 extra pounds for 60 miles ( 3gal x 20mpg) would help.. and then not hauling another 94 pounds for the next 20.. and another extra 88 for the next 20...etc

it can only help.


This doesnt account for the offset time at the gas station, and any fuel explicitly spent going to the station multiple times of course.

Acg67

Most of us have no problem with people doing whatever they want.

What I HATE is when people tell other people, especially new people, that they must do things a certain way. It's sad when you see some neophyte posting "I'M NOT HUNGRY AT BREAKFAST, AM I IN STARVATION MODE?!?"

Eat frequently or infrequently as you see fit. Maintain an overall deficit and you will lose weight

true. I guess I just felt this thread was created to mock people that choose to eat every 2-3 hours. I didn't mean to take it our on you individually,

I agree- It bugs me when people say there way is the ONLY GOOD WAY works for everyone! Whether is is vegan or paleo or frequent or fasting.

Incorrect it was to highlight the silliness of eating every 2-3 hrs with the rationale of it speeding up your metabolism, by the same logic, eating even more frequently should really speed up your metabolism

And I get a kick out of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies and sure enough we witnessed a few of those

It can speed up or repair a damaged or slow metabolism. As seen with chronic yoyo dieters or chronic cardiophiles. But the food needs to digest. It doesnt in 15 minutes

Any proof source for that?

Do a google search. Anorexia nervousa treatment. Erik Ledin and Scott Abel specifically work with physique competitors that have starved and cardio-ed their bodies into oblivion. Its not really an issue of fire up the metabolism to burn away the fat in a fitness sense, its to get it's functioning normalized again and regulate hormones.

The majority of people it doesn't matter. Most people that say their metabolism are slow, barring some sort of thyroid dysfunction, are just using it as a excuse for poor dieting habits or lack of energy expenditure. I do it for psychological reasons and the fact I have to eat a lot.

And is it due to increased meal frequency or increased caloric intake that helps people in the situations you described?

mmapags

Most of us have no problem with people doing whatever they want.

What I HATE is when people tell other people, especially new people, that they must do things a certain way. It's sad when you see some neophyte posting "I'M NOT HUNGRY AT BREAKFAST, AM I IN STARVATION MODE?!?"

Eat frequently or infrequently as you see fit. Maintain an overall deficit and you will lose weight

true. I guess I just felt this thread was created to mock people that choose to eat every 2-3 hours. I didn't mean to take it our on you individually,

I agree- It bugs me when people say there way is the ONLY GOOD WAY works for everyone! Whether is is vegan or paleo or frequent or fasting.

Incorrect it was to highlight the silliness of eating every 2-3 hrs with the rationale of it speeding up your metabolism, by the same logic, eating even more frequently should really speed up your metabolism

And I get a kick out of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies and sure enough we witnessed a few of those

It can speed up or repair a damaged or slow metabolism. As seen with chronic yoyo dieters or chronic cardiophiles. But the food needs to digest. It doesnt in 15 minutes

Any proof source for that?

Do a google search. Anorexia nervousa treatment. Erik Ledin and Scott Abel specifically work with physique competitors that have starved and cardio-ed their bodies into oblivion. Its not really an issue of fire up the metabolism to burn away the fat in a fitness sense, its to get it's functioning normalized again and regulate hormones.

The majority of people it doesn't matter. Most people that say their metabolism are slow, barring some sort of thyroid dysfunction, are just using it as a excuse for poor dieting habits or lack of energy expenditure. I do it for psychological reasons and the fact I have to eat a lot.

I will take a look. Thanks

kiachu

It can speed up or repair a damaged or slow metabolism. As seen with chronic yoyo dieters or chronic cardiophiles. But the food needs to digest. It doesnt in 15 minutes

I don't know why I'm bothering to respond to this, but I have to know: why would eating more food stop you from digesting the food you ate 15 minutes ago? Do you have any idea how digestion works? What exactly do you think happens to this food that never gets a chance to digest?

Yes I know how digestion works. Just because food is floating around in stomach doesn't mean your experiencing any energy /nutrient partitioning from that food at that time(that its sitting in your stomach). So eating every 15 minutes won't mean anything in term of arguing about meal frequency vs metabolic rate. Because the act eating food in of itself has nothing to do with it. It is the mechanics of the bodies ability to the put in action the hormonal/chemical functions for nutrient partitioning in a normalized way. It is impractical to eat every 15 minutes for most people so those that need to consume certain quantities of food (on purpose) might make it easier to get some of that out of the gut for the next coming meal. I believe, depending on how dense the food is, your stomach can empty itself about 50-75% 2-4 hours and upward to 6 hours for complete movement from the stomach. Complete digestion (total nutrient absorption and waste elimination) can take a day or more.

kiachu

Most of us have no problem with people doing whatever they want.

What I HATE is when people tell other people, especially new people, that they must do things a certain way. It's sad when you see some neophyte posting "I'M NOT HUNGRY AT BREAKFAST, AM I IN STARVATION MODE?!?"

Eat frequently or infrequently as you see fit. Maintain an overall deficit and you will lose weight

true. I guess I just felt this thread was created to mock people that choose to eat every 2-3 hours. I didn't mean to take it our on you individually,

I agree- It bugs me when people say there way is the ONLY GOOD WAY works for everyone! Whether is is vegan or paleo or frequent or fasting.

Incorrect it was to highlight the silliness of eating every 2-3 hrs with the rationale of it speeding up your metabolism, by the same logic, eating even more frequently should really speed up your metabolism

And I get a kick out of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies and sure enough we witnessed a few of those

It can speed up or repair a damaged or slow metabolism. As seen with chronic yoyo dieters or chronic cardiophiles. But the food needs to digest. It doesnt in 15 minutes

Any proof source for that?

Do a google search. Anorexia nervousa treatment. Erik Ledin and Scott Abel specifically work with physique competitors that have starved and cardio-ed their bodies into oblivion. Its not really an issue of fire up the metabolism to burn away the fat in a fitness sense, its to get it's functioning normalized again and regulate hormones.

The majority of people it doesn't matter. Most people that say their metabolism are slow, barring some sort of thyroid dysfunction, are just using it as a excuse for poor dieting habits or lack of energy expenditure. I do it for psychological reasons and the fact I have to eat a lot.

And is it due to increased meal frequency or increased caloric intake that helps people in the situations you described?

I assume a mixture of both. My assumption would be if hormones are out of whack, leptin and serotonin are low, the metabolism is slow or not working effectively, shoving large meals down these individuals mouths would probably not work. They probably would need something more therapeutic. Slow introduction of foods at timed intervals until the body can do an, "ahhhhh, I'm safe again," . Again I'm assuming.

fitsin10

bump

IronSmasher

Is supposed to rev up your metabolism, why not eat every hour or every half hr or every 15 min? Wouldn't that turbo charge your metabolism and turn you into a fat burning machine?

Haven't you seen people on IV? That's why they get so skinny, even when they are asleep!!!

blues4miles

This is off subject, but this quote got the nerd in me thinking...

Does that mean if I put a gallon of petrol in my car 6 times instead of six gallons in one go, my car will go faster too?

I dont know for sure where the tradeoff is, but think about this:

Gasoline is heavy. 1 US Gallon is 6.1 lb (2.8 kg... or 1 liter is .7 kg aka 1.6 lb )

Filling a tank, like say my Jeep, with 20Gallons is ~120 pounds of fuel.. If I only put 3 gal in, its only ~20 pounds.. Now everywhere I drive, I must haul around an extra 100 pounds because I filled the tank.

At some point there would be a tradeoff on MPG by filling up more often, vs driving around with a full tank.


It may only be a small diff. but I suppose not hauling around 100 extra pounds for 60 miles ( 3gal x 20mpg) would help.. and then not hauling another 94 pounds for the next 20.. and another extra 88 for the next 20...etc

it can only help.


This doesnt account for the offset time at the gas station, and any fuel explicitly spent going to the station multiple times of course.

It's probably more applicable to your car than it is to a human, but following your analogy a little further, your jeep probably weighs about 3800 lbs (dry weight). I prefer the 6.8 lbs per gallon of gas conversion, which would mean an additional 136 lbs every time your car is full. This is a mere 3.5% of your car's total weight. Your car spends a LOT of its running time at idle sitting in the driveway, at stop signs, at intersections etc. In that case, it's burning whatever fuel it burns to maintain idle running and doesn't at all care about the 20-130 lbs excess it's carrying around. Only when it's propelling itself forward does it care as it would require more horsepower at a higher weight to maintain the same speed. But again, if we are talking 3.5% the difference is negligible.

Now if you drove a Boeing 737 to work every day, you'd probably benefit more from carrying only absolutely as much fuel as you need as the fuel in a large jet plane can be up to 40% of its total weight at max capacity. Fuel trucks also go to the Boeing rather than the other way around, so it doesn't lose time/additional fuel in having to drive to the gas station.

As a person however, even one large meal is not a big percentage of your weight. I weigh 170 lbs currently and if I say ate a whole pound of meat for dinner (or some variation) that's only 0.05% of my total body weight that I'm carrying around. Also, as I live a mostly sedentary lifestyle, most of my fuel is burned just by keeping myself running at rest. Times when my body doesn't care if it has an extra pound or two pounds or whatever of a meal in me. That 30 minutes a day you spend working out, your body might care a little more if it's lugging around extra food weight. But given that that exercise period is a mere 2% of my day, the difference is not significant.

Sorry (fellow nerd).

*edited for grammar

xoxobollywood1991

eating every hour sounds like a myth...anyway, here is how i eat.

7am - breakfast
10 am- snack
1.30 pm - lunch
3.30 pm - snack
5.30 pm - dinner
7 pm - snack

gatorginger

I drink diet soda all day, since it tricks my body into thinking I just had real sugar
Keepin my metabolism up

LOL

MrDude_1

This is off subject, but this quote got the nerd in me thinking...

Does that mean if I put a gallon of petrol in my car 6 times instead of six gallons in one go, my car will go faster too?

I dont know for sure where the tradeoff is, but think about this:

Gasoline is heavy. 1 US Gallon is 6.1 lb (2.8 kg... or 1 liter is .7 kg aka 1.6 lb )

Filling a tank, like say my Jeep, with 20Gallons is ~120 pounds of fuel.. If I only put 3 gal in, its only ~20 pounds.. Now everywhere I drive, I must haul around an extra 100 pounds because I filled the tank.

At some point there would be a tradeoff on MPG by filling up more often, vs driving around with a full tank.


It may only be a small diff. but I suppose not hauling around 100 extra pounds for 60 miles ( 3gal x 20mpg) would help.. and then not hauling another 94 pounds for the next 20.. and another extra 88 for the next 20...etc

it can only help.


This doesnt account for the offset time at the gas station, and any fuel explicitly spent going to the station multiple times of course.

It's probably more applicable to your car than it is to a human, but following your analogy a little further, your jeep probably weighs about 3800 lbs (dry weight). I prefer the 6.8 lbs per gallon of gas conversion, which would mean an additional 136 lbs every time your car is full. This is a mere 3.5% of your car's total weight. Your car spends a LOT of its running time at idle sitting in the driveway, at stop signs, at intersections etc. In that case, it's burning whatever fuel it burns to maintain idle running and doesn't at all care about the 20-130 lbs excess it's carrying around. Only when it's propelling itself forward does it care as it would require more horsepower at a higher weight to maintain the same speed. But again, if we are talking 3.5% the difference is negligible.

Now if you drove a Boeing 737 to work every day, you'd probably benefit more from carrying only absolutely as much fuel as you need as the fuel in a large jet plane can be up to 40% of its total weight at max capacity. Fuel trucks also go to the Boeing rather than the other way around, so it doesn't lose time/additional fuel in having to drive to the gas station.

Sorry (fellow nerd).

*edited for grammar

excellent points... I just hope any planes I fly in carry just a little 'extra' fuel.. Just in case.