Small, Frequent Meals aren't Necessary

Options
2»

Replies

  • pchann
    pchann Posts: 84
    Options
    Everyone seems to be focusing on just the weight loss. It's not about the weight loss it's about the 'fat" loss. If your diet is causing you to lose muscle mass then your diet is counter productive. I know an old guy that was 350 pounds. He went on a ....haha I'm not kidding....white bread, bologna and miracle whip diet. He's now 200 lbs. How healthy do you think he is? I'm no doctor but he looks very unhealthy. It is very much what you put in your face in my opinion. All the best.
  • hpsnickers1
    hpsnickers1 Posts: 2,783 Member
    Options
    It's kinda like those people who like to say "muscle weighs more than fat"... no it doesn't... a pound is a pound no matter what you're weighing. It's the same with the calorie count... 100 calories of a food that's high in sugar or carbs is the same is 100 calories from a steak. It's how your body metabolizes the food that matters. So, although you're trying to stay inside your calorie range, you're also trying to take care of your body at the same time.

    Actually carbs and protein/fat are not the same and the body handles handles them in a completely different way. Carbs and sugars cause the body to store fat, not burn it. Protein and fat DO NOT cause fat accumulation. It's all about the insulin response. Carbs control insulin and insulin controls fat storage - this is science of the body. Keep your insulin levels low (knock out the carbs that cause the insulin response) and your body will switch over to burning fat (what it was designed to do) rather than burning off sugar and storing fat (and also storing the sugar it doesn't immediately use).

    Why We Get Fat and What To About It by Gary Taubes. It's enlightening and I push this book whenever I can.

    I eat when I'm hungry, stop when I am satisfied. Meat and fat are much more filling and will keep you full longer than carbs. As soon as your blood sugar goes back down you end up hungry again. I no longer have the need to eat every few hours. And how much I eat depends on how active I was that day.
  • mpfand
    mpfand Posts: 98 Member
    Options
    For myself, I like to have my 3 regular meals, but also plan on some small snack inbetween. Things like fruit or granola bar. I certainly would not have time to have several small "meals" every day, but I found that making sure I have a planned snack, I don't "cheat", and I keep my metabolism going. I will say that my favorite snack is fruit. Low cal fruits (melon, berries) are great and fill me up because of their higher water content. Good stuff!
    Ditto! This works for me, as well.
  • Stacey765
    Stacey765 Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    I'm old school and I eat three times a day, sometimes twice if one meal is large (dine out). Believe it or not, there's nothing wrong with eating fewer, more calorie-dense meals. Let me list the benefits:

    1. Fewer meals to pack. I pack my breakfast and lunch. Easy. I throw two meals in Ziploc containers and walk out the door.

    2. Less focus on feeding times. Look - if I'm doing something productive, I don't want to constantly stop and have meal time. There's days where I'll only eat twice because I'm productive doing something else or I'm in a situation where I can't eat - meeting with a customer, etc. I'm not tethered to a constant snack schedule and I'm not hungry for snacks.

    3. Less stress about WHAT and WHEN to eat when traveling. I'm not stressed out by going out to eat because the majority of meals fall into my meal calorie allotment of 400-600 calories. And if they don't, I eat something lighter at the next meal. No stress.

    4. My meals leave me satisfied and not over-full. I am content until my next meal. No temptation to graze or binge on crap sitting around the office or my house.

    5. I eat foods that extend satiety. If you lead a diet that's more rich in protein or fat, a lower volume of food (higher caloric density) is filling and may leave you content much longer.

    Eat at whatever interval works for YOU. Me, the small snacks and 5-6 meal times was a royal pain in my butt. I also had a hard time choosing meals while dining out because I had eaten the majority of my calories during my "meal times" throughout the day and had few calories left over for dinner.

    I agree, for me personally I just don't have the time to eat that many times a day, I am constantly dealing with customers and on my feet all day, so stopping work to sit down to eat that many times a day just isn't practical for me and my lifestyle. I eat 400-500 calorie breakfast/lunch (I eat between 9 adn 10 am) Then I eat dinner, so far it's working for me

Categories