Meal Frequency

[lth]

^^this....

Alot of research has been done on that eating too frequently may inhibit growth a bit.....i try to shoot for 6 meals a day, no matter how frequently i eat. May be a 2 hr difference, may be a 5....all that matters is getting your food in for the day. People overthink this alot.

[jdjprimer19]

^^this....

Alot of research has been done on that eating too frequently may inhibit growth a bit.....i try to shoot for 6 meals a day, no matter how frequently i eat. May be a 2 hr difference, may be a 5....all that matters is getting your food in for the day. People overthink this alot.

Agreed. I definitely used to overthink the issue.

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

Emma, what about the notion that because protein annot get stored for later use, muscles begin to break down after 3-4 hours of no food?

[Emma-Leigh]

Emma, what about the notion that because protein annot get stored for later use, muscles begin to break down after 3-4 hours of no food?

^^
poppy.... Do you REALLY think the body is that black or white?
How do you explain the IF results if this were the case?

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

^^
poppy.... Do you REALLY think the body is that black or white?
How do you explain the IF results if this were the case?

Do I really think? Thats silly, I don't . I actually don't have an opinion on the issue. I'm wondering in terms of muscle growth, if that theory has any validity to it.

[thegymbum]

The total diet of subjects who had a morning fast tended to have a lower percentage of total energy from carbohydrate (40%) than when they had six meals per 24 h (49%) (P=0.05).

Just noticed that bit (in the article above, Links Compared with nibbling, neither gorging nor a morning fast..). Interesting... if less carbohydrate is being utilized for energy, I'm assuming more fat is being utilized for energy, thus resulting in greater fat loss? That would certainly give some credibility to IF. I wonder if further research on the specific topic has been conducted...

[Emma-Leigh]

^
Your assumption is muchly incorrect.
YES - It would only hold true if total cals were lower than intake.... but if fat intake was high enough to outway calorie expenditure then dietary fat would = fuel of choice, and fat loss would not occur (and will be stored to boot).

[Wapadaigo]

Although I agree, meal frequency is not as important as many make it out to be. I do not believe there is a one size fits all regiment. I feel metabolism function is similar to muscle tissue in regards to how different exercises/rep range work better for different individuals.

Example, my body might work optimally by following a 16/8 IF diet, while others might work optimally following the "old school" every 2-3 hours diet. Does this make my diet "wrong"? No. Does this make theirs wrong? No.

You have find what works for you

[chriscarter1988]

^^this....

Alot of research has been done on that eating too frequently may inhibit growth a bit.....i try to shoot for 6 meals a day, no matter how frequently i eat. May be a 2 hr difference, may be a 5....all that matters is getting your food in for the day. People overthink this alot.

definately, its all about getting your meals in whenever and however you can, just do your best, noone can eat bang on every 2 hours or whatever. I used to eat like 8-9 meals a day cos i thought i had to eat every 2 hours, so if i got up at 7 and went to bed at like 2 thatd total like 10 meals for that day, i actually think that slowed my progress cos as soon as i relaxed, ate when i could, still got enough macros but didnt overfeed, i began growing again.
Dexter Jackson said in flex once that he just eats whenever he feels he needs to and he won the olympia

[Wapadaigo]

definately, its all about getting your meals in whenever and however you can, just do your best, noone can eat bang on every 2 hours or whatever. I used to eat like 8-9 meals a day cos i thought i had to eat every 2 hours, so if i got up at 7 and went to bed at like 2 thatd total like 10 meals for that day, i actually think that slowed my progress cos as soon as i relaxed, ate when i could, still got enough macros but didnt overfeed, i began growing again.
Dexter Jackson said in flex once that he just eats whenever he feels he needs to and he won the olympia

Did Dex ever mention anything about steroids before or after that statement? It does have a slight effect u know....

[chriscarter1988]

Im sure he takes a ton of steroids, I know that just cos he won the olympia doesnt make it right for the rest of us.
The point im making is that i think it can be beneficial to be a bit relaxed about your diet in terms of meal frequency and actually better than eating to a rigid schedule, as long as you get all your nutrition in over the course of a day and do the best you can to eat at regular intervals, youl do fine.

[Wapadaigo]

Im sure he takes a ton of steroids, I know that just cos he won the olympia doesnt make it right for the rest of us.
The point im making is that i think it can be beneficial to be a bit relaxed about your diet in terms of meal frequency and actually better than eating to a rigid schedule, as long as you get all your nutrition in over the course of a day and do the best you can to eat at regular intervals, youl do fine.

That I agree with. It does not matter if you eat once a day or 6 times a day as long as your are getting in your goal macro/micro nutrients. But, my point was, if I ate whenever I was hungry I would be at a calorie surplus daily and would be gaining way more fat than muscle.

[boomclap]

Just because the topic always comes up - thought I would post up a whole heap of references so they were easy to find:

Everyone should be required to read this before they post anything about supplements

[Budjola]

i eat every 3 hours im used to that rhyth and if i dont eat at strict times i get nervous

[Wapadaigo]

On a "bulk" diet would their be adverse effects to counting total week cals vs day-by-day?

Meaning, if I ate at maintenance 5 days a week, then ate 1200 cals over maintenance 2 days a week having a total of 2400 cal surplus for the week. Less than one lb per week gain.

IE: Maintenance is 2800 cals

2800 x 5 days a week
2800+1200= 4000 x 2 days a week
1200+1200= 2400 cals surplus a week

Would it be more beneficial to have 250 cal surplus a day than to do this? If so why?

[beaul]

On a "bulk" diet would their be adverse effects to counting total week cals vs day-by-day?

Meaning, if I ate at maintenance 5 days a week, then ate 1200 cals over maintenance 2 days a week having a total of 2400 cal surplus for the week. Less than one lb per week gain.

IE: Maintenance is 2800 cals

2800 x 5 days a week
2800+1200= 4000 x 2 days a week
1200+1200= 2400 cals surplus a week

Would it be more beneficial to have 250 cal surplus a day than to do this? If so why?

Just throwing thoughts out there on this... kind of random thinking. while the body doesn't recognize days/weeks. We do signal the building of muscle by working out, and how long does that signal last? 36/48hrs? I can't remember. For example, if you do shoulders on Monday but only eat surplus on Wed/Saturday. Which muscles are actually getting the calories needed? Only the ones directly surrounding your surplus days? I dont have the answer. I just know i wouldn't spend my surplus on 2 days/week while bulking. I would rather have a slight surplus each day. Say you're 1200 cals over and 600 of those get stored as fat because your body couldn't use them for building. But on the other days your body could have used the extra 250 for building muscle, but you gave it maintenance level.

One thing i have looked at before. 24hrs post training gets a surplus. Then you taper off until your next session, really depends on your split though.

[Wapadaigo]

Just throwing thoughts out there on this... kind of random thinking. while the body doesn't recognize days/weeks. We do signal the building of muscle by working out, and how long does that signal last? 36/48hrs? I can't remember. For example, if you do shoulders on Monday but only eat surplus on Wed/Saturday. Which muscles are actually getting the calories needed? Only the ones directly surrounding your surplus days? I dont have the answer. I just know i wouldn't spend my surplus on 2 days/week while bulking. I would rather have a slight surplus each day. Say you're 1200 cals over and 600 of those get stored as fat because your body couldn't use them for building. But on the other days your body could have used the extra 250 for building muscle, but you gave it maintenance level.

One thing i have looked at before. 24hrs post training gets a surplus. Then you taper off until your next session, really depends on your split though.

Yea, I am in agreement with you. I guess I was just wondering how far you could actually push the limits of "meal frequency doesn't matter", as long as macros are hit.

But in case any one has more feed back on this, I lift Sun-Thurs and do cardio twice a week, one of which is Friday.

Surplus meals would have been Sunday and Tuesday.

[Wapadaigo]

Emma, what about the notion that because protein annot get stored for later use, muscles begin to break down after 3-4 hours of no food?

Ren, to add to what Emma said, this is "poppy" because the body take alot longer to digest food, especially protein, than 3-4 hours. It takes the body an hour to digest a measly 8-10 grams of whey, FAST digesting protein. Where as egg, the slowest digest protein, is only 1.3 grams/hr.

Therefore, chances are, by the end of 3-4 hours your body isn't even close to being finished with digesting your last meal.

[romeo196]

so just get all my calories in one meal a day? doesn't make sense to me, smaller meals are more easily absorbed by the body.

[Wapadaigo]

so just get all my calories in one meal a day? doesn't make sense to me, smaller meals are more easily absorbed by the body.

1 meal, 3 meals, 8 meals, it doesn't matter as long as you are hitting your daily macro's.

www.leangains.blogspot.com

[bocheltree]

so just get all my calories in one meal a day? doesn't make sense to me, smaller meals are more easily absorbed by the body.

this. i've been told before that your body can only handle an x amount of protein at a time. either the rest goes through you or is stored as fat.

[bocheltree]

this. i've been told before that your body can only handle an x amount of protein at a time. either the rest goes through you or is stored as fat.

1 meal, 3 meals, 8 meals, it doesn't matter as long as you are hitting your daily macro's.

www.leangains.blogspot.com

eh nevermind^ read above link and now im good. thanks for the info

[Biokinetic]

Not about what but when and how... how to combine our macronutrients so they work for us. And by eating those 2-3 hours we are getting our metabolisms to do what we want! The epidemic of "skinny fat" teens is scary and proof that we need to go back to the basics. And eat simple! Good read guys! Passionate about this stuff!

[Martin Berkhan]

Not about what but when and how... how to combine our macronutrients so they work for us. And by eating those 2-3 hours we are getting our metabolisms to do what we want! The epidemic of "skinny fat" teens is scary and proof that we need to go back to the basics. And eat simple! Good read guys! Passionate about this stuff!

Horse****.

People actually still believe in the 6-meals-a-day-will-boost-your-metabolism-nonsense on this board?

[Emma-Leigh]

just out:

J Nutr. 2010 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print]
The Effect of Eating Frequency on Appetite Control and Food Intake: Brief Synopsis of Controlled Feeding Studies.
Leidy HJ, Campbell WW.

Department of Nutrition and Exercise Physiology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211.
Abstract
Increased eating frequency is postulated to increase metabolism, reduce hunger, improve glucose and insulin control, and reduce body weight, making it an enticing dietary strategy for weight loss and/or the maintenance of a healthy body weight. Because past research has primarily focused on the effects of eating frequency on changes in energy expenditure and body weight, limited data exist surrounding the impact of eating frequency on appetite control and energy intake. We provide a brief review of the controlled-feeding studies that primarily targeted the appetitive, hormonal, and food intake responses potentially altered with eating frequency. The 3 meal/d pattern served as the reference for defining increased or reduced eating frequency. In general, increased eating frequency led to lower peaks (P < 0.05) in perceived appetite, satiety, glucose, insulin, ghrelin, and PYY responses compared with reduced eating frequency. However, when examining these responses over the course of the day (i.e. using area under the curve assessments), no differences in any of these outcomes were observed. The rate of gastric emptying also appears to be unaltered with increased eating frequency. Subsequent food intake was examined in several studies with conflicting results. Regarding the effect of reduced eating frequency, several studies indicate significant increases in perceived appetite and reductions in perceived satiety when 1 or 2 meals were eliminated from the daily diet. Taken together, these findings suggest that increased eating frequency (>3 eating occasions/d) has minimal, if any, impact on appetite control and food intake, whereas reduced eating frequency(<3 eating occasions/d) negatively effects appetite control.

PMID: 21123467 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

[SHARK13]

just out:

Emma,
First of all excellent posts/studies. I applaud your analytical viewpoints. My statement and question pertain to the meal frequency studies. Do any of the studies take into account optimal performance and subjects who want to increase lbw or are all the subjects pulled from a pool of "average people" Most of the posted studies address the thermogenic response to meal frequency. I am sure that you are aware of studies presented on nutrient timing (pre and post workout) for optimal performance/recovery. Thus that is 2 essential "feedings" right there. Breakfast would also be beneficial to break the 8-10 hr fast so this is 3 feedings at minimum for an athlete. Any comments would be appreciated. Respectfully

[Cruxxe]

just out:

Just wanted to thank you for posting this. I've had a long belief and preached 6 meals/day to many friends/family solely because of what I ready in Bill Phillips Body for Life program.

It's nice to see a neutral viewpoint (research papers) on the subject, and I for one, will be much less anxious when I accidentally skip a meal.

Although, I feel like a stray puppy who keeps following the next big thing. Hopefully this will help me in the long run, but I don't think I have it in me to try IF just yet.

[braggable]

Does time of day for certain meals matter if all macros are still met? Example: is it better to eat something high in fats and carbs like pizza at lunch versus at dinner, as long as all your macros are still met?

[PBateman2]

Does time of day for certain meals matter if all macros are still met?

Time of day for meals does not matter.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=123915821

[braggable]

Time of day for meals does not matter.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=123915821

Thanks bro. I appreciate the quick reply. BTW, what's your normal macros intake for the day, grams of Protein, Carbs and Fats? Thanks again.