How Many Meals for Best Results?
TossaBeanBag
Posts: 458 Member
When I used to exercise before, I had great success on 3 meals a day. Now, I am getting back into exercising and my primary goal is to burn fat without losing muscle. I am doing 6 small meals per day, and I am having results, I just think 3 worked better for me. What works best for you?
0
Replies
-
I always felt fuller/bloated on 3 meals. I usually do 6 small meals as well and my stomach thanks me.0
-
Jbach,
As many or few meals as fit your needs.
If you are eating 6 meals a day and it's working, why do you think 3 meals would work better for you? In my opinion- if it ain't broken, no reason to fix it.
On weekdays, I eat six smaller meals a day. On the weekends, I tend to eat three meals a day plus a desert. This just seems to work for me.
Meal timing and/or size has zilch to do with weight loss. It's calories in/calories out.
0 -
Some days, I have two or three. Many days, I have four to six.
I feel better and get less hungry eating more small-calorie meals. Smalll-calorie doesn't mean I don't eat a bunch of food and feel really full all day, though. 0 -
I like 2 huge meals with a few snacks here and there.When I used to exercise before, I had great success on 3 meals a day. Now, I am getting back into exercising and my primary goal is to burn fat without losing muscle. I am doing 6 small meals per day, and I am having results, I just think 3 worked better for me. What works best for you?
I don't know if meal frequency matters.0 -
To add: I know people who have one large meal a day with all their maintenance calories, and they love it. This would not work for me because I'd be thinking about that meal all day long. 0
-
2,3,4,5,6,7 however the day pans out0
-
Jbach,
As many or few meals as fit your needs.
If you are eating 6 meals a day and it's working, why do you think 3 meals would work better for you? In my opinion- if it ain't broken, no reason to fix it.
On weekdays, I eat six smaller meals a day. On the weekends, I tend to eat three meals a day plus a desert. This just seems to work for me.
Meal timing and/or size has zilch to do with weight loss. It's calories in/calories out.
An article spiked the topic for discussion. It had said that eating many small meals kept insulin up, which might not turn on fat burning enzymes. I have always thought that calories in calories out made sense, but I tend to overanalyze and second guess and constantly think the fat burning processes can be somehow enhanced through timing of meals, macros, ratios, and such.
I don't think calories in and out is the answer when trying to build or maintain muscle while burning fat. A diet of twinkies or just salads would not help me keep the muscle. Lots of sweets could spike insulin. I would need higher protein amounts, but, you are right, I would have to keep the calories consumption lower than calories burned to burn fat. Assuming calories are lower, this article said 3 hours later the gyclogen from meals would be metabolized, and the next two hours would be for fat burning. Then, you have a meal, again.
Is there any truth to the amount of time a body would metabolize the sugars in the blood stream, which then turns on the hunger response?0 -
It doesn't really matter other than for dietary adherence.
Look up Lean Gains...that guy eats once per day...I think he's doing just fine.0 -
I eat 3 meals, maybe 4 a day. Bigger meals keep me fuller longer than small meals. I've done this through weight loss, maintenance, bulk and have had great results keeping within my calorie goal for each. I do mind my macro/micros but other than that, eat in a way that keeps me satiated and happy.0
-
I binge less and make better decisions if I eat two good size meals and three small snacks. That works for me personally, if I keep something in my stomach regularly and don't let myself get so hungry that I eat the kitchen cabinet. YMMV of course. Do what feels right for you.0
-
Jbach,
As many or few meals as fit your needs.
If you are eating 6 meals a day and it's working, why do you think 3 meals would work better for you? In my opinion- if it ain't broken, no reason to fix it.
On weekdays, I eat six smaller meals a day. On the weekends, I tend to eat three meals a day plus a desert. This just seems to work for me.
Meal timing and/or size has zilch to do with weight loss. It's calories in/calories out.
An article spiked the topic for discussion. It had said that eating many small meals kept insulin up, which might not turn on fat burning enzymes. I have always thought that calories in calories out made sense, but I tend to overanalyze and second guess and constantly think the fat burning processes can be somehow enhanced through timing of meals, macros, ratios, and such.
I don't think calories in and out is the answer when trying to build or maintain muscle while burning fat. A diet of twinkies or just salads would not help me keep the muscle. Lots of sweets could spike insulin. I would need higher protein amounts, but, you are right, I would have to keep the calories consumption lower than calories burned to burn fat. Assuming calories are lower, this article said 3 hours later the gyclogen from meals would be metabolized, and the next two hours would be for fat burning. Then, you have a meal, again.
Is there any truth to the amount of time a body would metabolize the sugars in the blood stream, which then turns on the hunger response?
Calories in/out is the answer to weight loss. Maintaining muscle comes from lifting weights. However, I believe that it is normal to lose some muscle while losing weight/fat (someone, please correct me if I'm wrong).
The remarks I put in bold above are myths. Meal timing has nothing to do with anything when it comes to weight loss or maintaining muscle.
0 -
I eat two to three meals a day, but breakfast (if I do have it) and lunch are usually very light. I consume most of my calories at dinner since that's when I have more of an appetite0
-
I typically do 3 meals a day, and an occasional snack if I am getting hungry. It's what my family is used to, so it just works better for everyone if I stick with that.0
-
When I used to exercise before, I had great success on 3 meals a day. Now, I am getting back into exercising and my primary goal is to burn fat without losing muscle. I am doing 6 small meals per day, and I am having results, I just think 3 worked better for me. What works best for you?
However many needed to achieve caloric goals.0 -
Jbach,
As many or few meals as fit your needs.
If you are eating 6 meals a day and it's working, why do you think 3 meals would work better for you? In my opinion- if it ain't broken, no reason to fix it.
On weekdays, I eat six smaller meals a day. On the weekends, I tend to eat three meals a day plus a desert. This just seems to work for me.
Meal timing and/or size has zilch to do with weight loss. It's calories in/calories out.
An article spiked the topic for discussion. It had said that eating many small meals kept insulin up, which might not turn on fat burning enzymes. I have always thought that calories in calories out made sense, but I tend to overanalyze and second guess and constantly think the fat burning processes can be somehow enhanced through timing of meals, macros, ratios, and such.
I don't think calories in and out is the answer when trying to build or maintain muscle while burning fat. A diet of twinkies or just salads would not help me keep the muscle. Lots of sweets could spike insulin. I would need higher protein amounts, but, you are right, I would have to keep the calories consumption lower than calories burned to burn fat. Assuming calories are lower, this article said 3 hours later the gyclogen from meals would be metabolized, and the next two hours would be for fat burning. Then, you have a meal, again.
Is there any truth to the amount of time a body would metabolize the sugars in the blood stream, which then turns on the hunger response?
Calories in/out is the answer to weight loss. Maintaining muscle comes from lifting weights. However, I believe that it is normal to lose some muscle while losing weight/fat (someone, please correct me if I'm wrong).
The remarks I put in bold above are myths. Meal timing has nothing to do with anything when it comes to weight loss or maintaining muscle.
Yes, you are so right. If you want to lose weight, eat whatever you want as long as calories are at a deficit. Grab some donuts. If you want to lose only body fat, however it matters where your calories come from. No myth there.0 -
BombshellPhoenix wrote: »I eat 3 meals, maybe 4 a day. Bigger meals keep me fuller longer than small meals. I've done this through weight loss, maintenance, bulk and have had great results keeping within my calorie goal for each. I do mind my macro/micros but other than that, eat in a way that keeps me satiated and happy.
Looks like what you eat is important, too, keeping within calorie goals. Like another said, though, as long as it keeps you within the calorie goals, you should be good to go. Staying within calorie goals seems to be the consensus everyone agrees upon. What ratios of protein, carbs, and fats to eat is a topic for another discussion it appears.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
If you maintain a deficit you will loose. There are is no magic number 0
-
Test out different patterns. I tried for years to eat 5-6 small meals a day, because it was "better for the metabolism". I was always hungry, never felt satisfied and found it hard to stick to the amount of calories allotted to each meal, failed miserably every time.
So, now I do 1-2 large meals and maybe/sometimes 1-2 snacks, but always keeping it within my calories. For me it was just more satisfying to eat a good sized meal that filled me up, than a bunch of small meals that just tickled my taste buds. So, that's why I now do intermittent fasting but it is not everyone, so just do your research, test out some things.
0 -
I do two large with a couple of snacks in between. I guess you could call that four or five meals too. It fits my schedule better. Experiment and find what works for you and your body and schedule.0
-
It really doesn't matter how many or what, so long as you're in a deficit.0
-
Not surprising that you are using an all donut diet or all twinkie diet to try and make a point, which you don't have, because you don't understand how things work.Jbach,
As many or few meals as fit your needs.
If you are eating 6 meals a day and it's working, why do you think 3 meals would work better for you? In my opinion- if it ain't broken, no reason to fix it.
On weekdays, I eat six smaller meals a day. On the weekends, I tend to eat three meals a day plus a desert. This just seems to work for me.
Meal timing and/or size has zilch to do with weight loss. It's calories in/calories out.
An article spiked the topic for discussion. It had said that eating many small meals kept insulin up, which might not turn on fat burning enzymes. I have always thought that calories in calories out made sense, but I tend to overanalyze and second guess and constantly think the fat burning processes can be somehow enhanced through timing of meals, macros, ratios, and such.
I don't think calories in and out is the answer when trying to build or maintain muscle while burning fat. A diet of twinkies or just salads would not help me keep the muscle. Lots of sweets could spike insulin. I would need higher protein amounts, but, you are right, I would have to keep the calories consumption lower than calories burned to burn fat. Assuming calories are lower, this article said 3 hours later the gyclogen from meals would be metabolized, and the next two hours would be for fat burning. Then, you have a meal, again.
Is there any truth to the amount of time a body would metabolize the sugars in the blood stream, which then turns on the hunger response?
Calories in/out is the answer to weight loss. Maintaining muscle comes from lifting weights. However, I believe that it is normal to lose some muscle while losing weight/fat (someone, please correct me if I'm wrong).
The remarks I put in bold above are myths. Meal timing has nothing to do with anything when it comes to weight loss or maintaining muscle.
Yes, you are so right. If you want to lose weight, eat whatever you want as long as calories are at a deficit. Grab some donuts. If you want to lose only body fat, however it matters where your calories come from. No myth there.
I eat plenty of ice cream and other things along with plenty of whole foods. It's not 1 extreme or the other. Seems like many people like you can't grasp the meaning of middle ground.
Also, you don't understand the way insulin works based on your earlier post. I suggest you keep reading.
Sorry, you couldn't grasp the point.-1 -
We all know 3,500 calories = 1 lbs of bodyfat. If your desire is not to lose muscle, but rather only body fat, would it not stand to reason that you may want to have a decent amount of protein in your diet?0 -
Liftng4Lis wrote: »It really doesn't matter how many or what, so long as you're in a deficit.
There is a difference between losing "weight" and "losing just bodyfat". They are not necessarily the same. If you are in a deficit, are you saying you cannot lose any muscle?0 -
I usually eat 5-6 mini-meals a day. Works best for me. Do what works best for you. Experiment until you find the sweet spot.0
-
I usually eat 5-6 mini-meals a day. Works best for me. Do what works best for you. Experiment until you find the sweet spot.
Thanks. I am no expert at all, as many can obviously tell. I have tons of wrong assumptions. There are so many conflicting approaches. In the Army, I never did supplements, ran all the time and did tons of PT (infantry). Calories were low, body fat was low. I got injured jumping and over the years have put on weight. I am struggling to get the weight off. Everytime I go to the doctor, each week, I have gained 3-4 lbs of muscle and only lose a 1.5-2 lbs of fat. Everything I do has always been all or nothing in life. I am impatient with the rate of fat loss, right now, but at least it is coming off I keep telling myself.
Thanks for everyone's input. I'll just keep experimenting. What have I got to lose, right? Keep trying, and keep in deficit, and you'll lose fat, anyway.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I've noticed that I eat more frequently during the work week: generally three meals and three snacks. On the weekends when I'm more likely to eat out or participate in social occasions, I eliminate the snacks so that I can put the calories into bigger meals. It's personal preference.0
-
Liftng4Lis wrote: »It really doesn't matter how many or what, so long as you're in a deficit.
There is a difference between losing "weight" and "losing just bodyfat". They are not necessarily the same. If you are in a deficit, are you saying you cannot lose any muscle?
Where in this statement do you see me saying that you can NOT lose muscle? Aren't you the exact same person who has another thread right now asking how to lose more body fat?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions