Do any of you eat 3 meals a day?

[mrRuckus]

Oh? A smarmy comment to read up on it? Ok, not sure why there's a message board if we're just supposed to read up on all things and discuss nothing, but in any event, I read up on it and other than blind claims that 6 is better for body composition, I find nothing much other than claims that 6 has no better effect. I didn't look super hard but if six is so obviously "common sense" why isn't there more info on it?


Alan Aragon

Meal Frequency - Hot Dogma & Cold Facts



Since the infancy of health-nut culture, it's been decreed that one must eat every 2-3 hours, thus minimizing muscle breakdown while keeping the metabolic engine revving. Tupperware and coolers in gyms and cars were (and still are) a common sight, perceived by the public as a sign of diligence and discipline. Alas, the long-held belief in a higher-is-better frequency has been examined with the lens of science, and some interesting data has surfaced.

Research indicates that a haphazard meal frequency, not necessarily a lower frequency, negatively impacts thermogenesis, blood lipids, and insulin sensitivity [1,2]. Contrary to popular belief, a high frequency has no thermodynamic advantage over a low frequency under calorie-controlled conditions (as opposed to ad libitium or free-living conditions) using 24-hr indirect calorimetry [3,4]. So much for the magic of stoking the metabolic furnace with an extreme grazing pattern. It bears mentioning that lower 24-hour insulin levels as well as lower fasting and total LDL-cholesterol levels have been observed with higher meal frequencies [5,6]. However, in discovering this, studies have used unrealistic protocols for the higher frequency treatments, comparing 3 meals to 9 or 17 meals per day.

Effects on Body Composition

With little exception [7,8], the majority of controlled intervention trials show no improvement in body composition with a higher meal frequency, with treatments ranging from 1 to 9 meals per day [9-11,15]. Unfortunately, a scarcity of research examining meal frequency's effect on body composition under conditions of exercise exists in the literature. To further confound the data, results from studies are mixed. The singular full-length published controlled trial showing a body composition benefit of higher meal frequency (6 versus 3) is limited by its poor study design. In the trial, boxers consumed a 1200 kcal liquid diet over a 2 week period [8]. The 6-a-day group retained more lean mass than the 3-a-day group.

Can any of you provide somewhere that counters this? That even attempts to show that 6 is better for body composition? I'm not finding them easily. I'm not even finding A difference lot alone a big difference. It doesn't have to be a formal study. Just something more than "cause I said so" and here's some reasonable explanation that wasn't even tested to see if it's that way in the real world rather than some academic idea.

AGAIN. I'm not arguing it's not true that six is better, but why do people claim it and repeat it over and over again if it's totally up in the air?

 

[I-tallionStallion]

Bottom line really is

-What is your goal - Weight gain or Weight Loss?

----If you are dieting *eating less food than bulking* - throw a couple protein shakes (use waterbottles) in a cooler pack, and bring it to work inbetween meals - It will help you from being hungry and will make it easier for you to have the energy to work hard

----If you are bulking you are going to need somewhere around 4000 or more calories for big change - so 4000 calories in three meals i think would be toooo much for you to handle in a proper and efficent way - here 4-6 meals would be easier. Again i suggest a cooler pack and tupperware.

A couple meal ideas at work:

-salad with .5 -.75 lbs of chicken (lots of olive oil and vinegar)
-Big meat/deli sandwiches on whole wheat bread
-lots of tuna
-nuts or beef jerky (as a snack)

*****If you have a microwave - USE IT and make fukkin stir fry or burgers precooked

Whether its better for your body or not, i haven't seen it proven as MrRuckus has pointed out...sure its in books and advocated everywhere but really you do whats optimum for the diet your on the best you can. I find there are many paths. Just don't cheat yourself!

 

[Throttle]

there you go again, mr. r., citing evidence & research! don't you understand that what people make up and post to message boards trumps that sort of stuff? i mean, statistics can be made to say anything!

According to G. Taubes latest book, which i suggested the curious here read a few months ago, there is little to no scientific evidence corroborating many of the most commonly cited dietary nuggets of 'wisdom'. it's pretty ugly how little we know.