Myth #1: You Should Eat Every 2-3 Hours To Lose Weight
Atthea
Posts: 53
Myth #1: You Should Eat Every 2-3 Hours To Lose Weight
«This is a biggie. According to JJ, If you are doing this, you are a sugar burner, not a fat burner !
This does not lead to stable blood sugar. When you eat a diet with "loads" of non-starchy vegetables (like high nutrient greens!), low amounts of slow carbs (like lentils), ideal amounts of healthy fats, a little "clean and lean" protein- you create an environment for stable blood sugar.
When you eat, your blood sugar and insulin rises- it has to. When insulin is up the "message" to your body is that you don't have to burn stored fat because food is coming in. So when you eat every couple of hours you are shutting off fat burning and teaching your body to fuel on sugar. You want to teach your body to access stored fat for food.
What are healthy fats? Olive oil, avocado, coconut milk are great examples.
You should go 4-6 hours (or be able to) between eating. If you need to eat before this, you are out of balance. This can be "healed" in a couple of weeks. Research shows that when you eat a 400-600 calories breakfast- you burn more calories and keep it off.»
It is very interesting and ... well... logical !!
It is quite a big one myth to bust!!! I forced myself into eating more often because I never was a nibbler before.
But eating more often does help to eat less at once and maybe over all at the end..
What do you think??
Here is the link :
http://www.peertrainer.com/myth_busters_jjvirgin.aspx
«This is a biggie. According to JJ, If you are doing this, you are a sugar burner, not a fat burner !
This does not lead to stable blood sugar. When you eat a diet with "loads" of non-starchy vegetables (like high nutrient greens!), low amounts of slow carbs (like lentils), ideal amounts of healthy fats, a little "clean and lean" protein- you create an environment for stable blood sugar.
When you eat, your blood sugar and insulin rises- it has to. When insulin is up the "message" to your body is that you don't have to burn stored fat because food is coming in. So when you eat every couple of hours you are shutting off fat burning and teaching your body to fuel on sugar. You want to teach your body to access stored fat for food.
What are healthy fats? Olive oil, avocado, coconut milk are great examples.
You should go 4-6 hours (or be able to) between eating. If you need to eat before this, you are out of balance. This can be "healed" in a couple of weeks. Research shows that when you eat a 400-600 calories breakfast- you burn more calories and keep it off.»
It is very interesting and ... well... logical !!
It is quite a big one myth to bust!!! I forced myself into eating more often because I never was a nibbler before.
But eating more often does help to eat less at once and maybe over all at the end..
What do you think??
Here is the link :
http://www.peertrainer.com/myth_busters_jjvirgin.aspx
0
Replies
-
Thank you for posting this. :flowerforyou:0
-
Interesting..0
-
Im kind of "weird" maybe but I found out that eating every 3-4 hours is simply the best for me and it works, so I wont change anything. But interesting idea for future...oooooor no haha:D0
-
That is interesting. I've been eating a snack between breakfast and lunch, but not between lunch and dinner.0
-
I agree with you that this does help with portion control. I have been doing very well with my weight loss and i eat every three hours, that is three meals and two snacks daily. So this information is very new to me.0
-
This helps me support the reasons I like to go so long between meals.
And the reasons I fast.
Thank you!0 -
Myth #1: You Should Eat Every 2-3 Hours To Lose Weight
«This is a biggie. According to JJ, If you are doing this, you are a sugar burner, not a fat burner !
This does not lead to stable blood sugar. When you eat a diet with "loads" of non-starchy vegetables (like high nutrient greens!), low amounts of slow carbs (like lentils), ideal amounts of healthy fats, a little "clean and lean" protein- you create an environment for stable blood sugar.
When you eat, your blood sugar and insulin rises- it has to. When insulin is up the "message" to your body is that you don't have to burn stored fat because food is coming in. So when you eat every couple of hours you are shutting off fat burning and teaching your body to fuel on sugar. You want to teach your body to access stored fat for food.
What are healthy fats? Olive oil, avocado, coconut milk are great examples.
You should go 4-6 hours (or be able to) between eating. If you need to eat before this, you are out of balance. This can be "healed" in a couple of weeks. Research shows that when you eat a 400-600 calories breakfast- you burn more calories and keep it off.»
It is very interesting and ... well... logical !!
It is quite a big one myth to bust!!! I forced myself into eating more often because I never was a nibbler before.
But eating more often does help to eat less at once and maybe over all at the end..
What do you think??
Here is the link :
http://www.peertrainer.com/myth_busters_jjvirgin.aspx
I think I love you! Do you know how many years of hard training at a gym and a "fkd up" 2 hour eating regimine I went through to achieve -0- results!!!!! I'd like to strangle all the fitness trainers who claimed this 2-hour small meal eating plan would stabalize my blood sugar level and make me lose weight. 0 -
I saw this too, it is interesting. I had read something where she said snacking is making you fat, but this explains it a little bit more, makes sense to me.0
-
saving to read when i have more time.0
-
Well if you look at the six-week body makeover, it is designed to keep your blood-sugar levels at a constant all day and you eat six times a day. But that particular diet is hardcore, and it would take some serious self-discipline to make that a long-term lifestyle change.0
-
Interesting. I've heard pros and cons about this before. I've pretty much come to the conclusion that it comes down to the individual and what their lifestyle is and body type and previous food intake is and so forth. Some people do best with multiple little meals a day, some do best with the traditional 3, some have best results with a big breakfast others doesn't seem to make a difference. There is no one "best fit" plan for everyone. It comes down to how your body reacts and what you can find works for you mentally as well.0
-
I eat 6 small meals a day and I have lost 94 pounds to date. It works for me to do it that way.0
-
I am going to have to disagree with the broader topic. I think there are a number of things I disagree with in the message. But I am bumping this to read the article later. There are a couple of statements that I have a contradicting opinion on. I would offer dissent, but I do not want to interrupt the consensus of opinion, nor start an argument.
I can see this is going to become a controversial thread quite fast...0 -
People always say not to do this, but I've never been clinically overweight in my entire life really so I figure it works pretty well. Especially when I stuck to this best I was my skinniest.
I pretty much skip breakfast, have a very small lunch (200-300 cal range) then have all my calories at dinner.
I find if you consume food it makes you hungry for more food and you eat more. For me anyway.
Whereas, if I don't hardly eat anything, I'll get hungry eventually, but not nearly as much or as often.0 -
Well, I can say that I lost 50lbs by eating around 200 calories every 2-3 hours, and drinking at least 64 oz of water (focusing on protein or fiber laden foods). I think it all depends on how active you are, and how you define a "meal". My "meals" were more like side dishes. My calorie input was stable every day at around 1200 calories (more if I was active).
It worked for me. Eating 6 meals a day left me never really feeling hungry. Now, I "could" go longer w/o feeling starving or lightheaded or anything, but I found it gave me stable, constant energy throughout the day. (I kept about 20 lbs off, but I didn't keep the rest off due to emo eating that got the better of me - and bad company for a few years.)
That said, I'm currently working the "big breakfast" thing. A typical breakfast includes 2 scrambled eggs, a piece of Double Fiber bread, and honey or all natural preserves of some kind, and a piece of fruit. That's around 6:30am. I snack at 10am, lunch around noonish, Snack around 3ish, and dinner around 6-7pm, with the occasional light snack around 8 or 9pm if I'm staying up past 10:30pm. Work outs are usually in the middle of the day or the evening.
Seems to work for me! Steady 1 a week when I stick to my calories!
I think we focus a bit too much on the "when" and not enough on the "what". But I still avoid huge dinners because I'll just end up sleeping on them.0 -
I can see that eating regularly keeps our metabolism going, but surely the best lesson is simply to eat less than your total daily energy expenditure? Unless you are risking starvation mode by not eating enough, and hence causing your body to store the fat that it will in starvation mode anyway, then whether you burn sugar or fat is immaterial, you will burn it all eventually.
Personally I stick to the usual three meals a day with the odd snack in between as most of humanity has done for millennia. Sure, I am obese at present, that's why I am here, but I know that is because I always used t eat more than I needed sitting at a desk all day. Now I am consiously eating less than my TDEE, I am loosing weight and have been for six weeks.
Eating sugar rich foods does lead me to being hungry sooner, but it isn't stopping me loosing weight.
Just my thoughts...0 -
I can see that eating regularly keeps our metabolism going, but surely the best lesson is simply to eat less than your total daily energy expenditure? Unless you are risking starvation mode by not eating enough, and hence causing your body to store the fat that it will in starvation mode anyway, then whether you burn sugar or fat is immaterial, you will burn it all eventually.
Personally I stick to the usual three meals a day with the odd snack in between as most of humanity has done for millennia. Sure, I am obese at present, that's why I am here, but I know that is because I always used t eat more than I needed sitting at a desk all day. Now I am consiously eating less than my TDEE, I am loosing weight and have been for six weeks.
Eating sugar rich foods does lead me to being hungry sooner, but it isn't stopping me loosing weight.
Just my thoughts...0 -
To each their own. Eating every few hours works for me and other very healthy thin people in my family. It works for us. Pre-planning out my meals and sticking to the food I take to work really helps.0
-
interesting... i find it hard to eat big calorie meals so i eat mini meals.. breakfast snack lunch snack dinner snack.... its working so far and i actually feel hungry after about 3 hrs of not eating if i dont have a carb heavy breakfast or lunch..0
-
Apologies for the double post - damn iPad!!0
-
Myth #1: You Should Eat Every 2-3 Hours To Lose Weight
«This is a biggie. According to JJ, If you are doing this, you are a sugar burner, not a fat burner !
This does not lead to stable blood sugar. When you eat a diet with "loads" of non-starchy vegetables (like high nutrient greens!), low amounts of slow carbs (like lentils), ideal amounts of healthy fats, a little "clean and lean" protein- you create an environment for stable blood sugar.
When you eat, your blood sugar and insulin rises- it has to. When insulin is up the "message" to your body is that you don't have to burn stored fat because food is coming in. So when you eat every couple of hours you are shutting off fat burning and teaching your body to fuel on sugar. You want to teach your body to access stored fat for food.
What are healthy fats? Olive oil, avocado, coconut milk are great examples.
You should go 4-6 hours (or be able to) between eating. If you need to eat before this, you are out of balance. This can be "healed" in a couple of weeks. Research shows that when you eat a 400-600 calories breakfast- you burn more calories and keep it off.»
It is very interesting and ... well... logical !!
It is quite a big one myth to bust!!! I forced myself into eating more often because I never was a nibbler before.
But eating more often does help to eat less at once and maybe over all at the end..
What do you think??
Here is the link :
http://www.peertrainer.com/myth_busters_jjvirgin.aspx I think I love you! Do you know how many years of hard training at a gym and a "fkd up" 2 hour eating regimine I went through to achieve -0- results!!!!! I'd like to strangle all the fitness trainers who claimed this 2-hour small meal eating plan would stabalize my blood sugar level and make me lose weight.
:blushing: Haha!!!
I know how crazy is that!! I was always told the same thing...«Skninny people eat all the time, eat more often, bla, bla...»
Of course you do what comes naturally but some of us just have to re-educate our ways about food.
If you saw no results then it's not the way to go for sure !0 -
It can't be a myth if it works for some people and I am one of them. Just like most things when it comes to weight loss there will be avenues taken by some that work and other avenues taken by others that work. It just depends on the individual and the results they get from the path they have chosen.
Eating every 2.5 to 3 hours keeps me full. I can not eat 400 to 600 calories per sitting unless it has bread or other stuff like mayo and such to add calories. The meals I cook at home are large enough for me and the calories are no more than 300 on most days.
And since my BF% is going in the right direction I don't know about that sugar burner stuff.0 -
Agreed. Eating every 2-3 hours is to prevent sugar crashes. Helps prevent binging when carbs is a big source of calories. Not going to hurt too much doing it at a calorie deficit.0
-
I can see that eating regularly keeps our metabolism going, but surely the best lesson is simply to eat less than your total daily energy expenditure? Unless you are risking starvation mode by not eating enough, and hence causing your body to store the fat that it will in starvation mode anyway, then whether you burn sugar or fat is immaterial, you will burn it all eventually.
Personally I stick to the usual three meals a day with the odd snack in between as most of humanity has done for millennia. Sure, I am obese at present, that's why I am here, but I know that is because I always used t eat more than I needed sitting at a desk all day. Now I am consiously eating less than my TDEE, I am loosing weight and have been for six weeks.
Eating sugar rich foods does lead me to being hungry sooner, but it isn't stopping me loosing weight.
Just my thoughts...
You kind of brought up a good point. If you are burning sugar while it is sugar, then it can't be converted to fat and stored. So if you are below calorie, and you are eating small meals, you will burn the sugar you consume and the body will turn to your current fat stores for the deficit. I think that might be a little closer to the point of the article. You don't eat every 2-3 hours to burn fat, but rather you eat that often to prevent the sugars you consume from converting to fat.0 -
I'd think this is wrong. If you go long periods of time between meals your body doesn't think it's getting food, it slows your metabolism down so it won't need as much to survive longer. So while I understand that in theory by constantly giving your body food you're having it burn that first, you should still be burning more overall by doing the small meals because you're keeping your metabolism running. Since the main part of dieting is giving your body less than it burns anyway, you're body should burn through the small meals fairly quickly and then burn some fat. I'm not a nutritionist or anything but everyone I've talked to has supported this theory, it makes sense to me, and it's worked for me (the first time I lost weight I lost 140lbs in 8 months and I'm down 18lbs since starting this time two weeks ago). I've always been a proponent of people reacting to diets in different ways so there may be plenty of people that don't respond well to many small meals but I wouldn't call it a myth.0
-
I can see that eating regularly keeps our metabolism going, but surely the best lesson is simply to eat less than your total daily energy expenditure? Unless you are risking starvation mode by not eating enough, and hence causing your body to store the fat that it will in starvation mode anyway, then whether you burn sugar or fat is immaterial, you will burn it all eventually.
Personally I stick to the usual three meals a day with the odd snack in between as most of humanity has done for millennia. Sure, I am obese at present, that's why I am here, but I know that is because I always used t eat more than I needed sitting at a desk all day. Now I am consiously eating less than my TDEE, I am loosing weight and have been for six weeks.
Eating sugar rich foods does lead me to being hungry sooner, but it isn't stopping me loosing weight.
Just my thoughts...
You kind of brought up a good point. If you are burning sugar while it is sugar, then it can't be converted to fat and stored. So if you are below calorie, and you are eating small meals, you will burn the sugar you consume and the body will turn to your current fat stores for the deficit. I think that might be a little closer to the point of the article. You don't eat every 2-3 hours to burn fat, but rather you eat that often to prevent the sugars you consume from converting to fat.
A little more complicated than that. If your glycogen stores are full and you have excess blood sugar then it will be stored as fat. Calorie deficit or not. Then you have to unlock that fat storage which for many, can be quite problematic.0 -
I don't know - it seems to work for me. I eat all the time and I dropped 100 pounds. It is probably one of those things that work for some and not others.0
-
I'd think this is wrong. If you go long periods of time between meals your body doesn't think it's getting food, it slows your metabolism down so it won't need as much to survive longer. So while I understand that in theory by constantly giving your body food you're having it burn that first, you should still be burning more overall by doing the small meals because you're keeping your metabolism running. Since the main part of dieting is giving your body less than it burns anyway, you're body should burn through the small meals fairly quickly and then burn some fat. I'm not a nutritionist or anything but everyone I've talked to has supported this theory, it makes sense to me, and it's worked for me (the first time I lost weight I lost 140lbs in 8 months and I'm down 18lbs since starting this time two weeks ago). I've always been a proponent of people reacting to diets in different ways so there may be plenty of people that don't respond well to many small meals but I wouldn't call it a myth.
This!
The article makes it sound like you don't tap into your fat stores because of the frequent meals.0 -
I think it just comes down to what works for an individual person. I eat every 2-3 hours and sometimes a little more often and I am losing 3-4lbs a week doing it that way.0
-
I can see that eating regularly keeps our metabolism going, but surely the best lesson is simply to eat less than your total daily energy expenditure? Unless you are risking starvation mode by not eating enough, and hence causing your body to store the fat that it will in starvation mode anyway, then whether you burn sugar or fat is immaterial, you will burn it all eventually.
Personally I stick to the usual three meals a day with the odd snack in between as most of humanity has done for millennia. Sure, I am obese at present, that's why I am here, but I know that is because I always used t eat more than I needed sitting at a desk all day. Now I am consiously eating less than my TDEE, I am loosing weight and have been for six weeks.
Eating sugar rich foods does lead me to being hungry sooner, but it isn't stopping me loosing weight.
Just my thoughts...
You kind of brought up a good point. If you are burning sugar while it is sugar, then it can't be converted to fat and stored. So if you are below calorie, and you are eating small meals, you will burn the sugar you consume and the body will turn to your current fat stores for the deficit. I think that might be a little closer to the point of the article. You don't eat every 2-3 hours to burn fat, but rather you eat that often to prevent the sugars you consume from converting to fat.
I think you both make very good points. The whole thing is one system; you're either burning it before it's fat, or after it's become fat. Either way, it's a good thing as long as you maintain your deficit.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions