3 square meals v 5 small meals a day?

ariela569
ariela569 Posts: 22 Member
edited December 4 in Health and Weight Loss
20 lb to lose and the struggle is real!!
What's gonna be more effective, eating small and often throughout the day, or 3 square meals? Please share

Replies

  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 18,342 Member
    Pure personal preference. Meal timing is irrelevant to weight loss and what truly works is doing what works for you. Me, I like big meals, so the three a day with a couple small snacks is great. Other people are grazers and like more meals through the day. Others practice intermittent fasting and only eat twice, or even once, a day.

    Having a plan that works for you and keeps you satisfied is the single most important thing you can do to be successful.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    6vkdwu8069lb.jpg
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Neither… Personal preference!
  • girlinahat
    girlinahat Posts: 2,956 Member
    personal preference. For me, I find snacks never satisfy my hunger, so I tend to overeat to try and kill the hunger. If I just wait and have a proper meal, life is better and I can stick to my calorie goal.

    Having said that, there's nothing wrong with ice-cream for lunch once in a while......
  • fr33sia12
    fr33sia12 Posts: 1,258 Member
    Eat when you're hungry, timing is irrelevant.
  • Wynterbourne
    Wynterbourne Posts: 2,235 Member
    ariela569 wrote: »
    20 lb to lose and the struggle is real!!
    What's gonna be more effective, eating small and often throughout the day, or 3 square meals? Please share

    Which ever one keeps you from feeling hungry and being tempted to snack on extra calories that you haven't allotted for. Personally, I usually only eat two meals, later in the day, but that's because it's effective for me personally. It wouldn't work at all for some people. Find what works for you.
  • pikaruka
    pikaruka Posts: 7 Member
    Again, as others reiterated - whatever works for you. I've been told by medical practitioners as well as friends into sports and fitness, that smaller meals during the day are better than three heavy meals. I find it too much of a chore so when trying to lose weight I stick to small healthy snacks and then one proper meal, the latter preferably towards late afternoon. Then again 1 or 2 light snacks during eve and dinner-time. Seems to work when I am gung-ho about losing weight.
  • crzycatlady1
    crzycatlady1 Posts: 1,930 Member
    Meal timing/meal frequency is a preference thing-what matters is that you're consuming the appropriate amount of calories for your weight goals.
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,473 Member
    When I first started losing weight, I just stuck to three meals a day (the No S diet - no sweets, no snacks, no seconds, except sometimes on Saturday, Sundays, sick days and special days). That worked for me to lose weight without having to count calories or do anything else. Before that I had been eating healthily, but having small snacks between meals, and obviously cutting those out instantly dropped my calorie intake.

    I've changed my methods over the years, but I've stuck to that format. Part of the reason is that as a smaller, older woman, I don't have a huge TDEE, and I like to have enough calories for at least one "big" meal a day (instead of trying to spread them over six tiny meals).

    Another reason is that I think it's good for me to learn to go without food. I'm currently also doing a bit of intermittent fasting too.

    That's just what suits me, and I wouldn't presume that it would suit other people too! But I will say, that I thought I was somebody who needed to eat often, because I had what I thought were "low blood sugar" symptoms, if I didn't. It has been a revelation to discover that once I got used to it, I felt just fine if I went hours without eating!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories