Calorie Break Down by meal for weight loss???

BLawyered
BLawyered Posts: 32 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
Hello, to help me stay on track and lose the most amount of weight possible, I've broken my diary into these sections:
Early morning
Mid morning
Afternoon
Late afternoon
Evening
Before bed

I would like to make my calorie goal 1200. I'd like to have my "before bed" goal at 100 so that i can have a drink or snack in the late evening. How should I break down the other 1100 calories over the 5 other sections? What division of calories is best for weight loss? Thank you!

Replies

  • malibu927
    malibu927 Posts: 17,562 Member
    It's personal preference
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Division of calories doesn't matter for weight loss. Split them however you like.
  • JaydedMiss
    JaydedMiss Posts: 4,286 Member
    edited April 2017
    1 meal of 1200 calories is same for weight loss as 12 meals of 100. you do you boo. Whatever you are happiest doing is whats right to do.

    All my meals are 200-400 roughly i eat 4-6 times a day mainly the 250 cal range + 1 400 for dinner
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    In whatever way best fits your lifestyle and satiety. Meal timing may have some relevance for very specific fitness goals, but is irrelevant for weight loss.

    I personally ate a really light breakfast and lunch when losing weight, skipped the snacks, and ate most of my calories after 7 PM. It worked well for me because it fit my preferences. Other people don't eat at all for a big portion of the day, others have multiple meals like in your plan.
  • inertiastrength
    inertiastrength Posts: 2,343 Member
    However you prefer. Makes absolutely no difference. Some people like a lot of little snacks, some people (like me) prefer to have one or 2 larger meals.
  • Libby283
    Libby283 Posts: 288 Member
    edited April 2017
    Early morning 200
    Mid morning 150
    Afternoon 300
    Late afternoon 150
    Evening 300
    Before bed 100

    You do not really need to eat them at a certain time, but this is kind of how I break it down. But I eat breakfast, lunch dinner, morning snack and afternoon snack.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    However you like...I typically have a pretty small breakfast...larger lunch...a couple snacks in the afternoon and dinner is typically my largest meal
  • KiwiAlexP
    KiwiAlexP Posts: 186 Member
    I have my diary set up for roughly the same time frames and it is open if you want to check. but for me I tend to eat the bulk of my meals before 1pm and don't usually snack in the afternoon
  • BLawyered
    BLawyered Posts: 32 Member
    But what about the whole "graze all day" aka several small meals leading to a better metabolism thing? I mean it's undeniable that some people can eat as many calories as they want and stay stick thin because they have a crazy awesome metabolism. How does that factor in? And the thing about not eating a lot too late at night before bed?
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    BLawyered wrote: »
    But what about the whole "graze all day" aka several small meals leading to a better metabolism thing? I mean it's undeniable that some people can eat as many calories as they want and stay stick thin because they have a crazy awesome metabolism. How does that factor in? And the thing about not eating a lot too late at night before bed?

    Those are myths.

    The person with the "crazy awesome metabolism" is staying within the calories they need to maintain their weight -- they may be moving more or not eat as much as they seem to (my husband will demolish a huge dish of ice cream, but then not eat again for 15 hours or so). We don't need to eat constantly to keep our metabolism running -- it's running all the time. And you can eat before bed if you like -- the only reason to avoid it is if it gives you heartburn.
  • Verity1111
    Verity1111 Posts: 3,309 Member
    edited April 2017
    BLawyered wrote: »
    But what about the whole "graze all day" aka several small meals leading to a better metabolism thing? I mean it's undeniable that some people can eat as many calories as they want and stay stick thin because they have a crazy awesome metabolism. How does that factor in? And the thing about not eating a lot too late at night before bed?

    Some people do have better metabolisms but sadly that's rare and it's genetics. You won't find out if you lose more or less than average unless you try to lose weight at a normal level of calories and for some reason it won't work or you're losing way more than you should etc. I think it can be a little better to eat smaller meals more frequently but in the long term it won't make much difference if any. You can eat before bed too. No biggie. The only issue is if you weigh in the morning obviously you'll weigh a tiny bit more since you ate right before bed but you'll still lose the same amount long term. Regular exercise will boost your metabolic rate so you burn more even at rest.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    BLawyered wrote: »
    But what about the whole "graze all day" aka several small meals leading to a better metabolism thing? I mean it's undeniable that some people can eat as many calories as they want and stay stick thin because they have a crazy awesome metabolism. How does that factor in? And the thing about not eating a lot too late at night before bed?

    Mythology...I don't graze all day and I eat dinner at around 8:30 most nights. If you need 3,000 calories to maintain weight then you need 3,000 calories to maintain weight...I would need to eat around 2,500 calories to lose about 1 Lb per week...when I take those calories in is largely irrelevant.
  • sarasmile0710
    sarasmile0710 Posts: 1 Member
    I'm not a nutritionist or anything but personally I have noticed a difference when I spread my meals out rather than when I was eating just 3 regular sized meals a day but that's just me. There's articles out there to support anything if you look hard enough but here's some tips from WebMD and one of them is to budget your day for some snacking in between meals but honestly talking to a doctor the next time you go would probably be the best thing to get a better answer!

    "Eating more often can help you lose weight. When you eat large meals with many hours in between, your metabolism slows down between meals. Having a small meal or snack every 3 to 4 hours keeps your metabolism cranking, so you burn more calories over the course of a day. Several studies have also shown that people who snack regularly eat less at mealtime."

    http://www.webmd.com/diet/ss/slideshow-boost-your-metabolism

  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    BLawyered wrote: »
    But what about the whole "graze all day" aka several small meals leading to a better metabolism thing? I mean it's undeniable that some people can eat as many calories as they want and stay stick thin because they have a crazy awesome metabolism. How does that factor in? And the thing about not eating a lot too late at night before bed?

    I wish I could change my metabolism with meal timing. Everyone would have a great metabolism if it were that simple. Myth.

    Losing weight at a moderate pace (strength training, adequate protein) and retaining a larger % of lean muscle mass will help, but it will only take you so far.

    Most people I know that seem to be able to eat what they want are very active.
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    I'm not a nutritionist or anything but personally I have noticed a difference when I spread my meals out rather than when I was eating just 3 regular sized meals a day but that's just me. There's articles out there to support anything if you look hard enough but here's some tips from WebMD and one of them is to budget your day for some snacking in between meals but honestly talking to a doctor the next time you go would probably be the best thing to get a better answer!

    "Eating more often can help you lose weight. When you eat large meals with many hours in between, your metabolism slows down between meals. Having a small meal or snack every 3 to 4 hours keeps your metabolism cranking, so you burn more calories over the course of a day. Several studies have also shown that people who snack regularly eat less at mealtime."

    http://www.webmd.com/diet/ss/slideshow-boost-your-metabolism

    The bolded part is the only operable part when it comes to weight loss. It's because they're eating less due to being less hungry at meals, and that results in a deficit.

    The rest of that, about the metabolism? It's snake oil. Spurious. Not genuine. Fake as a three dollar bill.
  • dfwesq
    dfwesq Posts: 592 Member
    BLawyered wrote: »
    But what about the whole "graze all day" aka several small meals leading to a better metabolism thing?
    Eating healthy snacks might help keep blood sugar stable, which could make it easier to eat less overall. If it helps with your energy level, it might also help you be more active through the day. Eating unhealthy snacks wouldn't help though.

  • This content has been removed.
  • dfwesq
    dfwesq Posts: 592 Member
    edited April 2017
    SideSteel wrote: »
    "Hey that light snack was almost fun. I'm not full. I'll sit here and think about the next meal I get in two hours".

    I'm not sure this is a good thing.
    The strategy of snacking, if that's what you do, should be to fill up temporarily. If you're still hungry, the snack probably wasn't enough. Of course, it depends what you're snacking on. It's hard to fill up on something calorie-dense like crackers and cheese, and still have calories left for meals. But if you're eating vegetables or a light soup, it may be a lot easier. Training yourself to enjoy snacking on different foods is helpful here.

    ETA I realize you were posting about 6 meals. Just adding this because planned regular snacking is halfway between "3 meals only" and multiple meal grazing.

  • dfwesq
    dfwesq Posts: 592 Member
    edited April 2017
    ...Several studies have also shown that people who snack regularly eat less at mealtime."
    ...

    The bolded part is the only operable part when it comes to weight loss. It's because they're eating less due to being less hungry at meals, and that results in a deficit.
    Feeling more energized throughout the day might also play a role. If people are lethargic, their energy output often falls off, i.e., they sit more and move less. That might play some role too.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    Others have already mentioned the metabolism thing being a myth but there's something else to consider.

    My personal experience and professional experience have lead me to believe that MOST people will do better with fewer, larger meals compared to several smaller meals, largely due to satiety.

    For sake of comparison lets take 1500 calories like this:

    Breakfast: 400 calories

    Lunch: 450 calories

    Dinner: 650 calories


    Compared to:

    Meal 1: 200 cals
    Meal 2: 250 cals
    Meal 3: 300 cals
    Meal 4: 250 cals
    Meal 5: 300 cals
    Meal 6: 200 cals


    In the latter scenario, many people end up not achieving satiety at all. Additionally, I think some people get MORE food focused because they are eating so often that they end up thinking about food all day.

    "Hey that light snack was almost fun. I'm not full. I'll sit here and think about the next meal I get in two hours".

    I'm not sure this is a good thing.

    Now I'll note, it IS personal preference and certainly there ARE people who do well on 6 meals per day.

    But I suspect the majority are probably going to do well with 3-4 total feedings mainly for the above reasons.

    I think it's going to be something on which people vary (like Side Steel says), but this was definitely true for me.

    A bunch of little meals and I feel annoyed and never satisfied (and mostly cannot eat the kinds of things I want or have to carry leftovers around all the time). 3 larger meals or, if I am doing lots of hard cardio, 3 meals and a snack, work best for me.

    When was I doing 1250 and not yet that active, I usually did:

    250-300 breakfast (6 am)

    400-450 lunch (12 pm)

    whatever was left (450-600) for dinner (9 pm)

    I'd vary it based on plans for the day.

    When doing 1500-1600, I usually do:

    400 breakfast

    450-600 lunch

    500-750 dinner

    If I'm planning to go out to dinner (which for me is usually before the theater or a concert, so earlier than my usual dinner), I may skip or have a very light lunch.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Also, for me snacking encourages a habit of me thinking about food and wanting to eat all the time. I do much better just not eating between meals unless there is a reason to. I believe (at least for me) that if you eat good filling meals there is no particular reason you will be hungry much before your planned meal time. But people differ so for them doing something else is better.
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,423 Member
    You need to do what works for you and your life. Are you hungry at specific times? Do you want to eat with other people for certain meals? Do have time to spend preparing/eating many small meals or would it be easier to eat a couple of bigger meals?

    I find it easier to eat a smaller breakfast and more of my calories later in the day. That is when I am hungrier and when I eat with other people. It is easier to eat the same as my family with 500 calories reserved for dinner.
    I eat 1200-1400 calories without exercise. I break it down like this:
    Breakfast 100-300 calories
    Lunch 300-400 calories
    Dinner around 500 calories
    Snacks 100-300 calories
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »
    Others have already mentioned the metabolism thing being a myth but there's something else to consider.

    My personal experience and professional experience have lead me to believe that MOST people will do better with fewer, larger meals compared to several smaller meals, largely due to satiety.

    For sake of comparison lets take 1500 calories like this:

    Breakfast: 400 calories

    Lunch: 450 calories

    Dinner: 650 calories


    Compared to:

    Meal 1: 200 cals
    Meal 2: 250 cals
    Meal 3: 300 cals
    Meal 4: 250 cals
    Meal 5: 300 cals
    Meal 6: 200 cals


    In the latter scenario, many people end up not achieving satiety at all. Additionally, I think some people get MORE food focused because they are eating so often that they end up thinking about food all day.

    "Hey that light snack was almost fun. I'm not full. I'll sit here and think about the next meal I get in two hours".

    I'm not sure this is a good thing.

    Now I'll note, it IS personal preference and certainly there ARE people who do well on 6 meals per day.

    But I suspect the majority are probably going to do well with 3-4 total feedings mainly for the above reasons.

    This is absolutely true for me. When I have frequent meals, I feel like my entire day is about food and I'm never full. When I eat three meals, I get the sensation of fullness I like and it is also easier to plan to eat things that have more calories (for example, my lunch today is 500 calories and that would be more challenging to do if I was trying to eat six times a day).
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    dfwesq wrote: »
    ...Several studies have also shown that people who snack regularly eat less at mealtime."
    ...

    The bolded part is the only operable part when it comes to weight loss. It's because they're eating less due to being less hungry at meals, and that results in a deficit.
    Feeling more energized throughout the day might also play a role. If people are lethargic, their energy output often falls off, i.e., they sit more and move less. That might play some role too.

    Unless you have a metabolic problem like diagnosed hypoglycemia or diabetes, do you really get lethargic from going five or six hours without food?

    Humans evolved going longer than that between meals, and I can't even imagine feeling the need to eat every two hours.
  • gen39
    gen39 Posts: 36 Member
    More meals does not equal faster weight loss.

    Some people are less hungry when they have multiple smaller meals. Others (looking at the intermittent fasting crowd) are less hungry when they have fewer but larger meals. Experiment.
  • crazyycatlady1
    crazyycatlady1 Posts: 292 Member
    edited April 2017
    Division of calories doesn't matter for weight loss. Split them however you like.

    This.

    eta: agree completely with Sidesteel-I prefer a 2 meal/1 snack protocol (16:8IF). Right now I'm veering away from that, due to experimenting with a more whole foods, plant based diet (with a big focus on quantity of veg/fruit), but it's annoying for me to have to eat in the morning and add in an extra snack :p

    Today's breakdown-

    breakfast (blech)-244c
    lunch-550c-ish (have to weight out veggies yet for exact count)
    snack #1- 68c
    supper-303c
    snack #2 90c

  • BLawyered
    BLawyered Posts: 32 Member
    Thank you all for the insight, conversation, and debate. I appreciate the personal experiences and posts with references a lot.
  • junodog1
    junodog1 Posts: 4,792 Member
    I set myself up for three meals a day, but I often eat the foods set up as breakfast or lunch over several hours.
    Especially lunch, if I am sitting in the office and I am satiated from a salad or sandwich, I will leave my other foods to sit until I feel a little hungry (or bored TBH.) A typical lunch: salad, fruit, cottage cheese or yogurt. **

    The salad is usually a 'traditional' salad with the plus of avocado and/or protein and/or savory like olives.

    Around 2 pm I may eat a yogurt, then later the fruit or I may not. But I bring the food and it is prelogged. If I don't eat it then I delete it and there is more for me at dinner or maybe dessert or adult beverage.


    ** I eat these foods because I like them, not because they are diet foods.
This discussion has been closed.