Snacking

gabriellejayde
gabriellejayde Posts: 607 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.

Replies

  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,179 Member
    edited May 2017
    Real info? It's 4 pm and time for my snack. I'm having cheesecake.

    138 calories, 6 grams net carbs, 9 grams fat, 7 grams protein.

    The Low Calorie High Protein Cheesecake discussion inspired me to attempt it. I made this with full-fat versions of cream cheese and greek yogurt so I'm only calling it a high protein cheesecake. Due to the calculated calories in a 1/8 portion of the total and with respect to my daily calorie goals, I chose to have a 1/16 portion for today's snack.
  • carolineb81
    carolineb81 Posts: 459 Member
    I have 3 meals and 2 snacks per day.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.
  • gabriellejayde
    gabriellejayde Posts: 607 Member
    JeromeBarry1 wrote: »
    Real info? It's 4 pm and time for my snack. I'm having cheesecake.

    Sounds like a great diet plan.
  • missh1967
    missh1967 Posts: 661 Member
    Is that a Great Dane in your profile pic?
  • gabriellejayde
    gabriellejayde Posts: 607 Member
    missh1967 wrote: »
    Is that a Great Dane in your profile pic?

    It is! She's a giant lap dog.
  • gabriellejayde
    gabriellejayde Posts: 607 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.

    Ive just been reading a study that says the exact opposite. It says that intermittent fasting between meals allows your body to use stored fat as fuel.
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.

    Ive just been reading a study that says the exact opposite. It says that intermittent fasting between meals allows your body to use stored fat as fuel.

    As long as you are in an overall deficit, it won't matter. Your body constantly cycles between energy sources and that will happen whether your calories are taken in once a day or in ten increments.
  • vivelajackie
    vivelajackie Posts: 321 Member
    edited May 2017
    It sounds like the first doctor is expecting accountability on your end while the second is a little more prone to people mindlessly shoving things in their gob. It doesn't matter when you eat as long as you're averaging under your cals.

    I mean, why would people bank calories so they can eat out on the weekend if that one day off being over is nullified? Your body is always burning calories.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited May 2017
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.

    Ive just been reading a study that says the exact opposite. It says that intermittent fasting between meals allows your body to use stored fat as fuel.

    Your body uses stored fat as fuel anytime you're in a caloric deficit. That's how weight loss occurs. Technically speaking, you burn the highest percentage of fat while sleeping and the lowest percentage during high-intensity exercise (which is primarily fueled by glycogen).

    The calorie deficit is what matters. You could get fat doing IF just as you could on any other eating pattern if you were in a caloric surplus, and you could lose weight doing IF just as you could on any other eating pattern if you were in a caloric deficit.
  • gabriellejayde
    gabriellejayde Posts: 607 Member
    vivelajackie wrote: »
    It sounds like the first doctor is expecting accountability on your end while the second is a little more prone to people mindlessly shoving things in their gob. It doesn't matter when you eat as long as you're averaging under your cals.

    I mean, why would people bank calories so they can eat out on the weekend if that one day off being over is nullified? Your body is always burning calories.

    These weren't my doctors. One was a doc on daytime tv and the other was the director of an obesity clinic I saw being interviewed.
  • gabriellejayde
    gabriellejayde Posts: 607 Member
    heiliskrimsli wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.

    Ive just been reading a study that says the exact opposite. It says that intermittent fasting between meals allows your body to use stored fat as fuel.

    As long as you are in an overall deficit, it won't matter. Your body constantly cycles between energy sources and that will happen whether your calories are taken in once a day or in ten increments.

    So with that theory, could I eat all my calories for the week in one day, then fast for the rest of the week and lose the same as if I spread them out?

  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    heiliskrimsli wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.

    Ive just been reading a study that says the exact opposite. It says that intermittent fasting between meals allows your body to use stored fat as fuel.

    As long as you are in an overall deficit, it won't matter. Your body constantly cycles between energy sources and that will happen whether your calories are taken in once a day or in ten increments.

    So with that theory, could I eat all my calories for the week in one day, then fast for the rest of the week and lose the same as if I spread them out?

    Why not think big picture? Eat all your calories for the year in one day, then fast for 364 days. It works in theory.
  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,179 Member
    Theories and spreadsheets and Powerpoints aside, the point is that you can snack if you want to and you can eat any kind of food that you want to. Just honestly and accurately record your food intake and your exercise output. That, and the practice of patience and persistence will yield success to your endeavors.
  • hesn92
    hesn92 Posts: 5,965 Member
    In my opinion. The different advice would be suitable for different people. Someone not wanting to count their calories, it might be better advice to tell them to not snack so they aren't eating all these extra calories throughout the day and losing track. Whereas if you are counting your calories, it really doesn't matter when you eat or how much you eat at a given sitting, as long as you're eating the right amount overall you will lose weight.
  • spiffychick85
    spiffychick85 Posts: 311 Member
    Not sure I have "real" info because I haven't conducted any studies of my own...but I have personal info...I can eat and drink (yep...alcohol) any time I want (the clock is irrelevant for me) and as long as I'm under my calories....I lose for the week. Maybe I'm an anomaly to science maybe I'm not...maybe I can eat 300 calories worth of cheeto puffs at bed time and still lose as long as I track it :D
  • missh1967
    missh1967 Posts: 661 Member
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    missh1967 wrote: »
    Is that a Great Dane in your profile pic?

    It is! She's a giant lap dog.

    Awesome! They are my favorite! Had one growing up and she was amazing! Also black. Back then we had her ears done.
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    heiliskrimsli wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    gabriellejayde wrote: »
    Does anyone have any real info about snacking between meals?
    I eat until I'm full but have started to get a little hungry in between meals. I don't want to ruin my appetite for my next meal and I have the calorie allowance, but I'm not sure that snacking is the best idea.
    I've heard 2 conflicting doctors recently. One said that as long as you're in your calorie range, it doesn't matter when you eat. The other said to eat until you're satisfied at each meal and don't snack.
    The one who said the bolded part is correct. Meal timing is irrelevant for weight loss. Your eating patterns may have an effect upon satiety/adherence though, so eat at whatever intervals suit you best.

    Ive just been reading a study that says the exact opposite. It says that intermittent fasting between meals allows your body to use stored fat as fuel.

    As long as you are in an overall deficit, it won't matter. Your body constantly cycles between energy sources and that will happen whether your calories are taken in once a day or in ten increments.

    So with that theory, could I eat all my calories for the week in one day, then fast for the rest of the week and lose the same as if I spread them out?

    Why not think big picture? Eat all your calories for the year in one day, then fast for 364 days. It works in theory.

    It's been done. A man who was very heavily supervised by a team of doctors fasted for more than a year, taking in nothing but water, electrolytes and vitamins.

    It's not recommended and it's an easy way to end up dead, though, which is why the extreme medical supervision and the whole never repeating it.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories