Because of my work schedule (7:30-5 with a 30 minute lunch) it is not convenient for me to eat the recommended 6 meals a day. Is my metabolism really going to slow down that much and become obese if I only eat 3 meals a day with a snack mixed in?
Hello Friend,
If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.
It will be the most efficient use of your time.
And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.
Thank you for visiting and have a great day!
I completely agree and it's not as hard as you think if you focus on eating healthy, natural foods that need little to no preparation. Fruits, nuts, soups, sandwiches, nutrition bars and protein shakes are great filler meals. Plus like you said, eating more frequently lessens the need to spend more time eating larger meals.Espi said:There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING CONVENIENT about eating every 3-4 hours.
You're gonna have to learn to be non-reasonable when it comes to eating for fitness.
*Non-reasonable means that you have to purchase a cooler and a trusty can opener and carry them with you throughout the day.
*Non-reasonable means that you have to get up a few minutes early every day before work/school and pack your can opener and nutrient-rich foods into your newly purchased cooler-- foods which you can eat and digest easily and in minimal time (READ: tuna, rice, almonds).
*Non-reasonable means that you must STOP what you are doing every 3-4 hours and EAT QUICKLY. Yes, it's a pain in the azz, but if you've packed your cooler with canned tuna, rice, and almonds, you will be able to eat within 10 minutes.
Stop resisting the fact that you have to eat 5-6 times a day if you want to change your body. There's simply no way around it.
We all struggle to eat properly. Most of have jobs, school, etc. that make eating 5-6 times a day extremely challenging, but we do it because we're exceptionally committed.
Is this actually shown anywhere? Even anecdotally by a lot of people? I mean i eat 5-6-7 meals a day depending on things, but that's mainly because it's hard to eat that much food in 3.Quagmire911 said:It's more about what is optimal.
You can lose fat on 3 meals a day, just not as well as on 6 meals a day. You are more likley to lose muscle as you will slip into catabolism for some of the day.
It is? Also more likely to be stored as muscle, no? And so what if that's true? Wouldn't that fat just be taken back out later if the body needs energy the rest of the day? I mean, it's a constant process of fat in and then fat back out and if that's kept equal everything is good (assuming not trying to lose fat overall). You guys are just presuming things to be true and then drawing conclusions from them. You can't do that in this context if you're tryin to convince someone. I don't easily accept the assumption that extra calories in a meal will just go 'permanently' to fat.Quiksilver said:Building on top of that, it's pretty well known that when you feel "full", the food you eat right afterwards is more likely to be stored as fat.
Also, the process of digestion by the body takes a whole heap of energy. If you're eating constantly through the day, you're keeping the lights on, so to speak.
Well yeah they claim and claim and claim but it seems more like it's just taken on a life of its own and they'll all look at each other and be like hmm why do i believe this. Oh, someone else told me and it's what i did. WHY do they say eat 6 meals a day? I mean the explanation sounds good. "Faster metabolism and no catabolism" but sounding reasonable and it actually happening aren't the same thing.Espi said:Ruckus, I like your questioning conventional wisdom.
Is there proof? Well, maybe not, but my knowledge obtained via reading magazines, listening to personal trainers, and talking to just about every buffed guy or gal that I know invariably advocate eating 5-6 meals a day.
I personally have never read a magazine or talked to an exceptionally fit person who advocates eating 3 times a day for muscle gain/fat loss.
My personal experience also shows that eating 5-6 meals per day results in optimal muscle gain and fat loss.
So, yes, I say that a lot of people can, and do, prove that eating 5-6 times a day is best.
See here's from kontrollerx earlier in the thread. I've seen that kind of thing a number of times in different places, even by respected trainers who question this. I don't know how strict "proven" is there as there's proof beyond a doubt and "true as far as we know" and "looks that way, duddin it?"I read a forum where a certified personal trainer said there is no conclusively proven extra metabolic benefit from spreading the intake to six meals a day.
mrRuckus said:It is? And so what if that's true? Wouldn't that fat just be taken back out later if the body needs energy the rest of the day? I mean, it's a constant process of fat in and then fat back out and if that's kept equal everything is good (assuming not trying to lose fat overall). You guys are just presuming things to be true and then drawing conclusions to them. You can't do that in this context if you're tryin to convince someone. I don't easily accept the assumption that extra calories in a meal will just go 'permanently' to fat.
But if there's more food in the digestive system at once then it has to work more and longer than if there was less at the moment... ?? See this ignores the part of why is my body temp the same if there's extra mechanical things going on inside me from eating more often. There has to be extra heat as a by product.
Well yeah they claim and claim and claim but it seems more like it's just taken on a life of its own and they'll all look at each other and be like hmm why do i believe this. Oh, someone else told me and it's what i did. WHY do they say eat 6 meals a day? I mean the explanation sounds good. "Faster metabolism and no catabolism" but sounding reasonable and it actually happening aren't the same thing.
Advocating "3 meals a day" is completely different from advocating 6 meals a day. I'm questioning more does it really matter? There's a big difference between advocating 6 meals a day and just ignoring it completely and not telling people a number since it doesn't matter, if in reality it doesn't.
You've actually sat there with all other variables the same and ate 3 meals compared to 6 meals and you noticeably gain more muscle and gain less fat?
Not saying 3 is better at all but i question if 6 is sooo much better that people have to get stressed about it. If it's 1 or 2% difference it's not worth getting worked up over.
I'm not asking for proof, but rather a number of real anecdotes where it's plain as day of people who have done both ways with all other things equal. Sure I used to eat 3 meals a day 3 years ago but my training is a hell of a lot better now so i can't just magically attribute it to 6 meals a day when 3 could've given me the same results.
See here's from kontrollerx earlier in the thread. I've seen that kind of thing a number of times in different places, even by respected trainers who question this. I don't know how strict "proven" is there as there's proof beyond a doubt and "true as far as we know" and "looks that way, duddin it?"
Again I don't know. I don't claim anything. 6 probably is better. I just want to know where this idea comes from and why.. and a "why" that's real and not just something people thought up as a rational explanation that may or may not be the real reason.
Now if you don't mind i'm gonna go bang my head on the wall at the thought of "low carb fruit."
EFFORT said:well i guess this is a rational explanation but no way in hell i'm getting all the food i eat in a day down in 3 meals.
mrRuckus said:Not really the point since I already said the same thing. But it is possible. I tried those other diets before with like 2 meals of 4000 (total) calories and it's not really that hard especially if it's not a looooot of bulky carbs. I mean 2 lbs of meat wasn't too bad if you started with about nothing in you to begin with.
And 3000 some calories at 6 meals a day used to be WAYYYY too much too. Not I do it easily everyday without feeling too full.
Yes, why don't you read up instead of questioning it. It's common sense anyway. More meals speed up metabolism which minimises fat gains therefore calorie suprlus leads to muscle gains. Also the body can only absorb so much in one sitting which links to the point before.mrRuckus said:Is this actually shown anywhere? Even anecdotally by a lot of people? I mean i eat 5-6-7 meals a day depending on things, but that's mainly because it's hard to eat that much food in 3.
I wouldn't bother with any of this then, doesn't sound like you're willing.bud_2005 said:I work as a welder so its not like I'm sitting by a computer with a fridge sitting right by me all day. The reason I would prefer 3 is because I have enough trouble of thinking of meal ideas for 3 let alone 6.
bud_2005 said:The reason I would prefer 3 is because I have enough trouble of thinking of meal ideas for 3 let alone 6.
Yeah, the in-between meals could easily include good stuff that comes in a package and can be stowed in a locker or fridge with little or no need for preparation.EFFORT said:thats a lame excuse