Eating every 2-3 hours a MYTH!??? WTH!

You do what YOUR body tells YOU to do, and stop listening to the BS claims that timing your eating to someone else's schedule will work for YOU.

Personally, I'm a snacker. When I can, I eat a very small something about every 1-2 hours. There are two reasons for this.

1. If I "starve" myself and wait for a full meal, I'm gonna eat. And eat. Because I'm HUNGRY. I'm not going to make good decisions. Because I'm HUNGRY. And when the table's empty I'm gonna hit the fridge. If I nibble all day long I'm never hungry. When I sit down for meals, I can look at the array of fuels laid out before me and make rational decisions about enjoying a little of what I want, and eating more of what I need.

2. Grazing gives me fewer opportunities to sit down in a setting where there ARE large amounts of food available.

Yes, I could plan out supper, but when I get home and I haven't eaten since lunchtime, my plans fall apart, and so does the fridge door in my desperate rush to get in there and start chewing at anything that doesn't move (and club anything that does and eat that anyway).

However, I have a lot of friends who can't stand grazing, and prefer 3, 2, or even in some cases 1 meal a day. I'd be stark-raving-bat$hit-crazy-hungry if I tried that, but it works for them.

EDIT: I also feel that eating smaller amounts more constantly gets me more used to being "satisfied" and less used to being "full", so when large amounts of food become available I don't feel like I have the stomach capacity to eat a LOT. I don't think my stomach is actually getting smaller, and it may well be psychosomatic for me to feel that way (and there are certainly times when I eat more than I should!), but I feel like converting to eating small amounts more frequently has allowed me to exercise better portion control when unhealthy foods are presented to me. I can be satisfied with half a donut instead of eating three of them. Again, I don't think there's a physiological explanation, but the psychology is working on me and that's enough for me!

From a purely metabolic weight loss pov, it doesnt matter if you have 1 meal or 10 meals a day. It's total calories consumed vs calories burnt that matters. People may find it easier to hit their goals with 3 meals, or with 6, but neither offers a calorie burn advantage over the other.

I eat every 2-3 hours starting at 7 in the morning. It just works for me. Myth or not it's all what works for you to help you achieve your goal.

I tried the 6-times-a-day thing and felt horrible. Moody, irritable, tired, and obsessed over when I had to eat (and I didn't lose weight, either). Now, I tend to wait until 12 or 1PM before I eat anything, eat little throughout the afternoon, and have most of my food around 8PM. I feel much better, have more energy, and am losing weight like crazy. Is it right for everyone? No! A lot of people would feel terrible trying to do that and would do better with that six times a day schedule. It's all just a matter of personal preference.

I eat three meals, plus a morning and afternoon snack. I do this purely to keep me on track. I find if I don't eat snacks, then I am so hungry by meal time that I go overboard. Find what works best for you. At the end of the day, it's just calories in and calories out that matter.

It is the illusion of a health benefit packaged for helpless morons.

As one of those "helpless morons", I agree. A more steady-state blood sugar level keeps me at an "I'm satisfied, I only need to eat a little bit" level all day long. And when my blood sugar is low and I'm feeling dizzy and cranky because I haven't eaten anything in 12 hours, I'm helpless to resist my cravings and I make moronic food decisions.

But as long as calories burned > calories eaten, you're good - whatever you as an individual find works for you. If you're the type of person who prefers to eat 1500 calories in a sitting and can manage not to eat anything else for 24 hours, then that's what you should do. If you can eat 100 calories an hour for 15 hours, that also works. And anything in between is fine.

There are certain foods that can increase insulin sensitivty or curb that urge to eat due to spiking (cinnamon for example). However it ultimately comes down to willpower.

Do you eat a lot of simple carbs to be having such weird blood sugar spikes? Or do you have any health issues related?

You do what YOUR body tells YOU to do, and stop listening to the BS claims that timing your eating to someone else's schedule will work for YOU.

Personally, I'm a snacker. When I can, I eat a very small something about every 1-2 hours. There are two reasons for this.

1. If I "starve" myself and wait for a full meal, I'm gonna eat. And eat. Because I'm HUNGRY. I'm not going to make good decisions. Because I'm HUNGRY. And when the table's empty I'm gonna hit the fridge. If I nibble all day long I'm never hungry. When I sit down for meals, I can look at the array of fuels laid out before me and make rational decisions about enjoying a little of what I want, and eating more of what I need.

2. Grazing gives me fewer opportunities to sit down in a setting where there ARE large amounts of food available.

Yes, I could plan out supper, but when I get home and I haven't eaten since lunchtime, my plans fall apart, and so does the fridge door in my desperate rush to get in there and start chewing at anything that doesn't move (and club anything that does and eat that anyway).

However, I have a lot of friends who can't stand grazing, and prefer 3, 2, or even in some cases 1 meal a day. I'd be stark-raving-bat$hit-crazy-hungry if I tried that, but it works for them.

EDIT: I also feel that eating smaller amounts more constantly gets me more used to being "satisfied" and less used to being "full", so when large amounts of food become available I don't feel like I have the stomach capacity to eat a LOT. I don't think my stomach is actually getting smaller, and it may well be psychosomatic for me to feel that way (and there are certainly times when I eat more than I should!), but I feel like converting to eating small amounts more frequently has allowed me to exercise better portion control when unhealthy foods are presented to me. I can be satisfied with half a donut instead of eating three of them. Again, I don't think there's a physiological explanation, but the psychology is working on me and that's enough for me!

Do what works for you! I eat 4 meals (breakfast is split between 8 am and 10 am) plus 2 snacks. Works for me!

It's all about what works for you. If eating small meals every 2-3 hours works for you then that's awesome. Keep doing that. It doesn't work for everyone. I tried it and it didn't work for me. I gained weight and was hungry all the time. It was a PITA to have to pack snacks when we would be going on a trip.

I pretty much eat 2-3 meals a day and they are not huge meals either. They are portion-controlled meals. I weigh and measure everything just to make sure I don't over eat at my meals and if I'm hungry in between then I will have a snack or two.

Eat every two to three hours. If you felt horrible or you were craving another meal, then you didn't do it right!! You have to calculate your BMR and your macronutrients. You have to work out. Losing weight is 80% nutrition 20% Weight Training/Exercise.

Don't take advice or ideas from people who don't have the results to prove it.

Chris1816: horrible advice man.

I change from one day to the next. Depending on what I have eaten, my body tells me eat more soon or eat less later.

I could go without food till lunch time or another day I could snack every hour.

Most commonly, I'll eat 3 meals and 2 snacks on fruit/nuts between those.

TinaLatina: do not read articles or take advice from noncredible sources. That article didn't even cite any research or analysis. It's just someone's personal opinion.

Ironic post is ironic.

BMR and macronutrients are tailored to the individua (Duh)l. So my BMR and macros are different from the next. It's the science that remains the same not the nutrition plan.

It's not ironic, because I can back up what I say.

Jim Stoppani, PhD-Jim Stoppani received his doctorate in exercise physiology with a minor in biochemistry from the University of Connecticut. Following graduation, he served as a postdoctoral research fellow in the prestigious John B. Pierce Laboratory and Department of Cellular and Molecular Physiology at Yale University School of Medicine, where he investigated the effects of exercise and diet on gene regulation in muscle tissue.

Science proves that


1. Eat 6 smaller meals per day, not 2-3 feasts

This will ensure that you supply your body with the nutrients necessary to build muscle and burn fat.

Bonus: Your resting metabolic rate increases. It will also prevent your body from kicking into “starvation” mode, which can happen when too much time elapses between meals.

If this happens, your body will start burning muscle for energy and increasing your body fat stores, as well as slowing down your metabolism. This is the exact opposite of what you want to happen.

Don’t be one of those people that complain about their situation but never does anything to improve it. Don’t become “happy” with the status quo of being miserable. Now take action on your knowledge!
(Dr Jim Soppani)"

I'm just not hungry every two or three hours. Thirsty, yes.

In my opinion, you might just have a slow metabolism. So eat every 2-3 hours and your body's metabolism will speed up, unless you have thyroid problems or other conditions with at would prevent this. Do your research.

If you are on my fitness pal the. It's safe to assume you are trying to eat better and lose weight? How long have you been doing it and what's your results?

Eat when you're hungry. Eat enough to be satisfied. Stay at a caloric deficit to lose weight. It's not hard.