Eating three vs. five times a day

valeriejrice

I don't think there is good evidence to support 3 or 6 times a day being better. I personally find that I am more satisfied eating a larger meal three times a day. I'd like to see evidence for "pancreas working constantly" or "intestines resting" before I used them for making changes. I think this one comes down to personal preference.

Aurorakitty

I want to eat when i'm hungry not at certain times of the day. My schedule changes every day except Tuesday so I very when I eat breakfast and lunch with dinner always being around 6-6:30 I usually eat four meals a day regardless with dinner/supper being the heaviest meal. Do you think it makes a difference if lunch is the heavier meal?

zaph0d

Do you think it makes a difference if lunch is the heavier meal?

No

FitandFab33

Listen to your body, eat when you're hungry. The body is much smarter than people give it credit.

THIS^^^

We (that hated whollistic, as a society "we") have learned to ignore our own bodies- our bodies give us hunger cues for a reason.. there are complex physiological processes that our bodies are constantly going through that are 'designed' (if you will) to let us know when we're hungry, when we're full, when we're lacking a particular nutrient or macromolecule. If we could strip it back and just LISTEN to our bodies (and then obey), we would be healthier, slimmer people.

Edited to add: And I eat something almost every two hours, but I'm also breastfeeding and having a hard time getting enough calories everyday.

amunet07

Well, personally I rather eat when I'm hungry, rather than waiting 3 more hours and then eat too fast or too much because I've been hungry for several hours. Usually I have to eat every 3-4 hours - but is a piece of fruit really a "meal"?

^this^

danasings

I think everyone just needs to find what works for THEM and stop worrying about this study or that study or whatever.

I agree. I think you should eat when you are hungry. Learn your body's hunger cues, and feed it appropriately. This can take a long time...it's something that many people who are overweight have to figure out for themselves.

Some days I eat four times, others I eat five or six. I eat only when I am hungry most of the time. I still mindlessly eat and/or binge on occasion, but that's part of my learning curve. best of luck! :bigsmile:

love4fitnesslove4food_wechange

I found some interesting info from peer reviewed studies. Basically the conclusion is that (when affected at all) cortisol, insulin, and even energy intake are positively impacted by REGULAR (which in this case means 6 meal feedings) meal frequency compared to irregular. I think consistency in how you fuel your body is MOST important, not necessarily eating 3 vs 5 times a day. This is my PERSONAL observation--when I follow a certain pattern my body becomes accustomed to meals at those times...I begin getting hungry if I skip a typical meal and my body is just "primed" (for lack of a better word) to have a meal. I think that this makes sense based on the conclusions of the studies I read. Of course you can ALWAYS find opposing evidence but I'll stick with what works for me.

I'll post the abstracts which include the conclusions.

Metabolic advantages of spreading the nutrient load: effects of increased meal frequency in non-insulin-dependent diabetes.
D J Jenkins, A Ocana, A L Jenkins, T M Wolever, V Vuksan, L Katzman, M Hollands, G Greenberg, P Corey, and R Patten
+ Author Affiliations

Department of Nutritional Sciences and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract

The acute effect of increasing meal frequency as a model of slow absorption was studied for 1 d in 11 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes. On 1 d they took 13 snacks (the nibbling diet) and on another day the same diet was taken as three meals and one snack (the three-meal diet). The nibbling diet reduced mean blood glucose, serum insulin, and C peptide concentrations over the 9.5 h of observation and 24-h urinary C peptide output by 12.7 +/- 3.7% (mean +/- SE) (P = 0.0062), 20.1 +/- 5.8% (P = 0.0108), 9.2 +/- 2.6% (P = 0.0073), and 20.37 +/- 8.12% (P = 0.039), respectively, compared with the three-meal diet. Serum triglyceride concentrations were lower by 8.5 +/- 3.2% (P = 0.037). Despite lower insulin concentrations on the nibbling diet, the concentrations of free fatty acids, 3-hydroxybutyrate, and the insulin-sensitive branched-chain amino acids responded similarly on both treatments. Metabolic benefits seen with increased meal frequency may explain the success of similar agents that prolong absorption, including fiber and enzyme inhibitors.



Beneficial metabolic effects of regular meal frequency on dietary thermogenesis, insulin sensitivity, and fasting lipid profiles in healthy obese women1,2,3
Hamid R Farshchi, Moira A Taylor, and Ian A Macdonald
+ Author Affiliations

1From the Centre for Integrated Systems Biology and Medicine, Institute of Clinical Research, School of Biomedical Sciences, Queen's Medical Centre, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom
Abstract

Background: Although a regular meal pattern is recommended for obese people, its effects on energy metabolism have not been examined.

Objective: We investigated whether a regular meal frequency affects energy intake (EI), energy expenditure, or circulating insulin, glucose, and lipid concentrations in healthy obese women.

Design: Ten women [x̄ ± SD body mass index (in kg/m2): 37.1 ± 4.8] participated in a randomized crossover trial. In phase 1 (14 d), the subjects consumed their normal diet on 6 occasions/d (regular meal pattern) or followed a variable meal frequency (3–9 meals/d, irregular meal pattern). In phase 2 (14 d), the subjects followed the alternative pattern. At the start and end of each phase, a test meal was fed, and blood glucose, lipid, and insulin concentrations were determined before and for 3 h after (glucose and insulin only) the test meal. Subjects recorded their food intake on 3 d during each phase. The thermogenic response to the test meal was ascertained by indirect calorimetry.

Results: Regular eating was associated with lower EI (P < 0.01), greater postprandial thermogenesis (P < 0.01), and lower fasting total (4.16 compared with 4.30 mmol/L; P < 0.01) and LDL (2.46 compared with 2.60 mmol/L; P < 0.02) cholesterol. Fasting glucose and insulin values were not affected by meal pattern, but peak insulin concentrations and area under the curve of insulin responses to the test meal were lower after the regular than after the irregular meal pattern (P < 0.01 and 0.02, respectively).

Conclusion: Regular eating has beneficial effects on fasting lipid and postprandial insulin profiles and thermogenesis.