small meals often or a few big meals?
lma0423
Posts: 78 Member
What i eat depends on the day im having. I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts and healthier options, but some days im so busy that it isnt possible, for example yesterday. I had a bagel with creamcheese (500 cal) for breakfast, then 8 hours later i had a grilled chicken salad cobb salad at a restaurant that was about 900 calories. It was still within my calories but i felt guilty. Will this hinder my weekly weightloss, or is it really all about calories and making sure you dont go over.
0
Replies
-
Hey so you carry a purse around I suggest you go get some powerbars or protein bars they will give you that middle of the day snack you are worrying about
Good Luck! 0 -
When I was losing my weight, i am in maintence now, i would eat smaller meals. This helped me keep my calories in check. I understand that it may be hard but eating more often helped me a lot.
Good luck with your journey!!0 -
Well you didn't go over in calories but I am sure the carbs were high, fat and sodium too...that being said I eat 6x a day and I eat things like hard boiled eggs...string cheese...Almond nut thins (gluten free rice crackers) lean meats...fruits and veggies...and I have never felt better...0
-
When I was working full time and an Engineer I would have crazy hours. I always had a P90X bar and packet of Shakeology with me. They made it really easy to stick to my eating plan and calories.0
-
I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.0 -
I found eating three normal meals around 500 calories plus three snacks around 150-200 works for me. I have protein with every meal and snack and it keeps me from overeating at the main meals. So I guess I'm doing both. If I know I'm going to be out at a restuarant where my choices are limited I either forego one of the snacks or plan to have only half of what I order and save the rest for a second meal.0
-
I understand the theory behind the small meals frequently and on one level it make sense to me.
It just doesn't work for me. The small meals are never enough to make me unhungry and I always end up going OVER on my calories.
When I was doing 1200/day I had to eat 300-400 cal at a meal to feel satisfied. So I shot for 300 cal for 300 meals and then I could have 2 or 3 100 to 150 calorie snacks.
No I'm doing 1400 cal/day I shoot for three 400 calorie meals and the rest in snacks.0 -
I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.
what she said0 -
It's whatever works for you. I did the three meals, and I was always snacky. Now, I eat 5 small meals and my snackiness has died down a lot (and my weight loss has increased). But, it's not the same for other people, as evidenced by replies on this thread.0
-
Eating more often works for me. Otherwise I gorge myself, feel ill, and then do it again a few hours later because I don't stay full.I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.0 -
Eating smaller meals under 500 calories which includes plenty of raw and/or steamed vegetables along with friut and plenty of water has really helped me stay under my calories and Im not hungry during the day. You have to find your balance but water is your main component.0
-
Eating more often works for me. Otherwise I gorge myself, feel ill, and then do it again a few hours later because I don't stay full.I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.
Where I say "myth," I mean that eating several small meals over fewer large ones results in bigger losses. Beyond that, it is absolutely individual. If eating that way works better for you, then you should do it.0 -
Meal timing is irrelevant. If you feel better eating 5-6 small meals a day every 2-3 hours then go for it. However you will have the same results eating 2-3 meals a day as far as weight loss is concerned.
If it's about you are worried that you might snack more when eating 2-3 times a day then thats more of a self-control issue rather than "meal timing".
Calorie intake vs TDEE plus hitting your macros is what matters.0 -
I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.
I was going to say the same thing. There is no evidence it is more healthy or better for weight loss or fat loss to eat a bunch of small meal a day. It is a complete myth. What is important is staying within your calorie budget with high quality food. If you eat 3 or 6 or 9 meals, the weight loss will be the same. The only difference is for some people it helps control hunger, for others, they are always hungry doing it. Find what works for you and stick to it.0 -
I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.
Me too. When I eat small meals I never flip that "full" switch and I have the munchies all day. When I eat more than four times a day I am ALWAYS over my calories.
So long as your macros are ok and you're near your calorie goal (being too far under won't do you any favors) - you're fine.
If you're not a "grazer" by nature there is no use obsessing with food all day long by doing the 6 meal a day thing!
:bigsmile:0 -
Every body is different in some way - and while there are some pretty specific things that most people can do that EVERYONE will lose weight doing - everyone is also slightly different...What i eat depends on the day im having. I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts and healthier options, but some days im so busy that it isnt possible, for example yesterday. I had a bagel with creamcheese (500 cal) for breakfast, then 8 hours later i had a grilled chicken salad cobb salad at a restaurant that was about 900 calories. It was still within my calories but i felt guilty. Will this hinder my weekly weightloss, or is it really all about calories and making sure you dont go over.
That being said - MY experience is that smaller meals - no matter what - is an absolute must... eating the same overall calories in 3 larger meals halted a lot of my weight loss - so I'm moving back to smaller meals (regardless of what effort I had to make to get it done)...
I think long term it is the smartest way to do it - you DO eat healthier, you feel more full (you are eating more often so of course you would) and I won't want to snack as much at night..
I wish YOU the best in your goals and hope you can figure out an option that will work best for your fitness and weight loss desires!!!0 -
Everyone is so different, hey? I eat three meals at 300-400 cals per and eat the rest in snacks when or if I need them. I usually have a snack after I've worked out, as I can feel hungry then. Eating six small meals, makes me hungry, snacky and I tend to go over then. Just me though 0
-
....
Every body is different in some way - and while there are some pretty specific things that most people can do that EVERYONE will lose weight doing - everyone is also slightly different...What i eat depends on the day im having. I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts and healthier options, but some days im so busy that it isnt possible, for example yesterday. I had a bagel with creamcheese (500 cal) for breakfast, then 8 hours later i had a grilled chicken salad cobb salad at a restaurant that was about 900 calories. It was still within my calories but i felt guilty. Will this hinder my weekly weightloss, or is it really all about calories and making sure you dont go over.
That being said - MY experience is that smaller meals - no matter what - is an absolute must... eating the same overall calories in 3 larger meals halted a lot of my weight loss - so I'm moving back to smaller meals (regardless of what effort I had to make to get it done)...
I think long term it is the smartest way to do it - you DO eat healthier, you feel more full (you are eating more often so of course you would) and I won't want to snack as much at night..
I wish YOU the best in your goals and hope you can figure out an option that will work best for your fitness and weight loss desires!!!
Your quote, "I think long term it is the smartest way to do it - you DO eat healthier, you feel more full (you are eating more often so of course you would) and I won't want to snack as much at night.."....well I would have stayed with your above quote....that everyone is different, has their own opinion, and things just work differently for different people. I eat three meals 3-4 hundred cals and snack if I need it, like after a workout.....I am never hungry at night. My meals are super, duper healthy, so I really thinks it's false to state that you eat healthier when you eat smaller meals. Smaller meals can be just as much junk as a larger ones!!! I personally do not feel fuller when I am eating smaller meals, infact it's the other way around! I stuggled to stay under, now, I am consistantly under! Thanks =D
PS Do whatever works for you! Your food choices can be healthy either way. You will lose weight either way that works for you.0 -
Going to walk away from this thread before I get myself into trouble.0
-
Every body is different in some way - and while there are some pretty specific things that most people can do that EVERYONE will lose weight doing - everyone is also slightly different...What i eat depends on the day im having. I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts and healthier options, but some days im so busy that it isnt possible, for example yesterday. I had a bagel with creamcheese (500 cal) for breakfast, then 8 hours later i had a grilled chicken salad cobb salad at a restaurant that was about 900 calories. It was still within my calories but i felt guilty. Will this hinder my weekly weightloss, or is it really all about calories and making sure you dont go over.
That being said - MY experience is that smaller meals - no matter what - is an absolute must... eating the same overall calories in 3 larger meals halted a lot of my weight loss - so I'm moving back to smaller meals (regardless of what effort I had to make to get it done)...
I think long term it is the smartest way to do it - you DO eat healthier, you feel more full (you are eating more often so of course you would) and I won't want to snack as much at night..
I wish YOU the best in your goals and hope you can figure out an option that will work best for your fitness and weight loss desires!!!
While everyone is different, statistically speaking the vast majority of people fall within a general pattern usually along a nice bell curve. That is why scientists even study things like meal frequency since the vast majority of people will be near the middle of that curve. Some are not, but most are. Yes for some people who are outside of that middle portion eating a bunch of small meals or eating one meal makes a difference, but all the research I have seen baring one study which had a bunch of very big flaws show that for the vast majority of people meal frequency makes no difference in weight loss. In fact even in terms of insulin control, frequent small meals do not help the majority of people, but likely hurt them. I am glad it works for you, but it is by no means the "best" way to eat. It would have been far from how our hunter gatherer ancestors lived as they ate when they had food and when they ran out they needed to hunt down more meaning times of no food. The key is energy control, that is not eating more calories than you burn creating a small deficit whether you eat 1 meal a day or 9. I would add to that, eat the number of meals that keep you at your calorie goal while making you feel most satiated. For me that is 3 meals a day with perhaps an evening snack. For others it is more, and others less. The important thing to remember is that for the vast majority of people the evidence point to the fact it is not meal timing that makes a difference.0 -
Eat as often as what works for you. Eat often enough so that you're not so hungry you'll binge.
I don't believe in a bunch of small meals because it doesn't work with my schedule and I'd feel hungry all the time. I don't want to eat that often.
I eat 3 meals a day that are at least 450 calories. Dinner is usually my heaviest meal. I might snack once between lunch and dinner. It works for me. The key is I avoid feeling super hungry by eating a filling meal. I'm hungry for each meal, but not so hungry I'll binge like crazy.0 -
That being said - MY experience is that smaller meals - no matter what - is an absolute must... eating the same overall calories in 3 larger meals halted a lot of my weight loss - so I'm moving back to smaller meals (regardless of what effort I had to make to get it done)...
I think long term it is the smartest way to do it - you DO eat healthier, you feel more full (you are eating more often so of course you would) and I won't want to snack as much at night..
How did eating 3 larger meals halt your weight loss? That makes no sense whatsoever.0 -
Going to walk away from this thread before I get myself into trouble.
You are to this topic what i am to "must drink 48843584643 glasses of water a day" posts... 0 -
What i eat depends on the day im having. I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts and healthier options, but some days im so busy that it isnt possible, for example yesterday. I had a bagel with creamcheese (500 cal) for breakfast, then 8 hours later i had a grilled chicken salad cobb salad at a restaurant that was about 900 calories. It was still within my calories but i felt guilty. Will this hinder my weekly weightloss, or is it really all about calories and making sure you dont go over.
Listen to the fat guy... it's all about calories, but also exercise and finding a rhythm that suits your life.
So ok, you were busy yesterday and skipped lunch. Today you might have 4-5 smaller meals and go over 50-100 cals. Over a week, it all evens itself out. And if you can fit in some exercise (which I'm struggling with at the mo :grumble: ) so much the better.
Most of all... it's not about GUILT. That's a negative feeling that can hinder you more than skipping meals or having an off day :flowerforyou:0 -
I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.
Could you be so good as to provide citations for your statement?
Thanks.0 -
Could you be so good as to provide links to those sources?
Thanks.0 -
You want me to cite how much weight I've lost and that I've done it by eating three meals a day and that I'm starving if I eat several small meals?I know that it is much healthier to eat often small amounts.
This is a diet myth that refuses to die.
If I ate like that, I'd just always be hungry. Larger meals fill me up and stay with me longer than smaller meals. I haven't had any problems losing weight eating large meals a few times a day.
Could you be so good as to provide citations for your statement?
Thanks.
I haven't written an article about it, so I can't exactly do that. :-)
However, there was an article in this month's Self Magazine I believe (or perhaps it was on MSN.com, I can't remember) about a study showing that people who eat the several small meals tend to eat more calories and have more trouble losing weight.
I am a realist and believe in the "if it works for you, then it's what you should do" philosophy and I know you can find a study backing up anything you happen to say.0 -
You are to this topic what i am to "must drink 48843584643 glasses of water a day" posts...
:-)
When I post about drinking lots of water, I post this link:
http://ajpregu.physiology.org/content/283/5/R993.full
I haven't had anyone dispute the findings in that document.
If you have other well-sourced links about "8*8", I'd love to read them.0 -
-
Allow me ATT949.[Thermogenesis in humans after varying meal time frequency].
[Article in German]
Wolfram G, Kirchgessner M, Müller HL, Hollomey S.
Abstract
To a group of 8 healthy persons a slightly hypocaloric diet with protein (13% of energy), carbohydrates (46% of energy) and fat (41% of energy) was given as one meal or as five meals in a change-over trial. Each person was 2 weeks on each regimen. Under the conditions of slight undernutrition and neutral temperature the balances of nitrogen, carbon and energy were assessed in 7-day collection periods, and according to 48-hour measurements of gaseous exchange (carbon-nitrogen balance method) by the procedures of indirect calorimetry. Changes of body weight were statistically not significant. At isocaloric supply of metabolizable energy with exactly the same foods in different meal frequencies no differences were found in the retention of carbon and energy. Urinary nitrogen excretion was slightly greater with a single daily meal, indicating influences on protein metabolism. The protein-derived energy was compensated by a decrease in the fat oxidation. The heat production calculated by indirect calorimetry was not significantly different with either meal frequency. Water, sodium and potassium balances were not different. The plasma concentrations of cholesterol and uric acid were not influenced by meal frequency, glucose and triglycerides showed typical behaviour depending on the time interval to the last meal. The results demonstrate that the meal frequency did not influence the energy balance.
PMID:3592618[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3592618
More?Chronobiological aspects of weight loss in obesity: effects of different meal timing regimens.
Sensi S, Capani F.
SourceDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Chieti, Italy.
Abstract
A series of short- and long-lasting experimental protocols of different meal timing regimes were performed in obese subjects to assess the possible occurrence of (1) a different metabolic fate of nutrients; (2) a phase shift of circadian rhythms of metabolic and hormonal parameters strictly related to nutrition; (3) a different weight loss. (A) In a short-lasting protocol (3 days) 15 obese subjects were fed a hypocaloric diet (684 kcal/day) (a) at 10 hr only, (b) at 1800 hr only; (c) at 1000 hr, 1400 hr and 1800 hr, or (d) studied during a 36-hr fasting. Measures of calorimetry (R.Q., CHO and lipid oxidations, energy expenditure), hormones (plasma cortisol, insulin, HGH, urinary catecholamines), urinary electrolytes (Na, K) and vital parameters (body temperature, heart rate, blood pressure) were carried out at 4-hr intervals for three days. A significantly higher lipid oxidation and a lower CHO oxidation were documented with the meal at 1800 hr, in comparison with the meal at 1000 hr. CHO and lipid oxidation circadian rhythms appeared the most affected by meal timing. (B) In a long-lasting protocol (18 days) 10 obese subjects were fed the same hypocaloric diet (a) at 1000 hr only and (b) at 1800 hr only. Calorimetric measures were performed every other day for 2 hr preceding each meal. Before and after the 18-days single meal period, body temperature, plasma cortisol, PRL and TSH were recorded (delta t = 4 hr). A higher lipid oxidation and a lower CHO oxidation were again demonstrated with the meal at 18 hr. Minimal changes of hormonal circadian rhythms were documented suggesting that the hypothalamus-hypophysis network is scarcely affected by meal timing. Weight loss did not vary in both short- and long-term protocol.
PMID:3508745[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3508745
Not satisfied still right....okNutrition. 2007 May;23(5):385-91.
Influence of meal time on salivary circadian cortisol rhythms and weight loss in obese women.
Nonino-Borges CB, Martins Borges R, Bavaresco M, Suen VM, Moreira AC, Marchini JS.
SourceDivision of Nutrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital, Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil. carla@fmrp.usp.br <carla@fmrp.usp.br>
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the influence of meal time on salivary circadian cortisol rhythms and weight loss in obese women.
METHODS: Twelve obese subjects (body mass index >40 kg/m(2)) were hospitalized for 64 d and then randomly assigned to one of three 18-d stages with a 5-d interval between stages. In stage 1, the subjects received a hypocaloric diet (1000 kcal/d) portioned into five meals per day. In stage 2, the subjects received the same diet between 0900 and 1100 h. In stage 3, they received the same diet between 1800 and 2000 h. Between admissions, the subjects were discharged from the hospital and consumed their usual diet at home. Salivary cortisol rhythm (in six samples collected over a 24-h period) was determined during each stage, and anthropometric, bioimpedance, indirect calorimetric, and urinary nitrogen excretion variables were measured.
RESULTS: Salivary cortisol circadian rhythms were similar during all stages when measured on day 1 or 18 of treatment. Despite significant reductions in all anthropometric measurements except waist/hip ratio, no significant changes were observed in salivary cortisol rhythm after alteration of the eating hours. Starting on day 4 of treatment, nitrogen ingestion and excretion levels decreased significantly; on day 10, nitrogen balance was negative in all study stages.
CONCLUSION: Administration of a hypocaloric diet led to changes in weight, body composition, resting metabolic rate, and nitrogen balance but did not significantly alter salivary circadian cortisol rhythms.
PMID:17483007[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17483007
I can go on and on all day. I love this game. The amount of meals does not matter. Meal timing does not matter.
As long as you are getting your daily calorie intake and hitting your macros based on your goals, it will have the same result.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions