Does meal frequency matter when cutting?

[Sarge.]

So does it?

[plated]

So does it?

For results? No.

For hunger? Maybe..depends on the person.

Some people intermittently fast with great results.

[Gendo3]

I'm skeptical, but so many people are saying that you should eat 6 times a day that it becomes truth.

[mrbaker3]

I'm skeptical, but so many people are saying that you should eat 6 times a day that it becomes truth.

That's pure bro science. It's a myth that's been busted. Do a google search on something like "Eating every 3 hours" or variations of "6 meal a day diet" and you'll find pretty much the exact same thing from every reputable source.

That said, and you'll get a chuckle out of this... but I eat about 6 meals every day.

I do it for hunger control, like plated said, and because doing it this way helps me to not overeat at my meals. I have 3 main meals that are slightly smaller than most people's meals, and 3 larger snacks.

There's no proof that it keeps your metabolism up or anything (at least I've never seen a study showing this), and nothing that says "6 meals will burn more fat".

However, keeping your body filled with protein throughout the day, is a good idea. So I make sure to have at least 20g of protein with each of my 6 meals, but that's just me, and I'm not saying that it's scientifically proven to be best for everybody.

[Shellack]

Just mess around with it and find what works for you.

I got tired of lugging around food and eating every two hours, these meals were like snacks and left me want more food.

I switched to 3 meals a day with 100g of protein in each, and a preworkout shake.This left me feeling fuller and more satisfied. Have had great results and doesnt mean i need to pack 3 meals to bring to work.

[Dominikm]

Just mess around with it and find what works for you.

I got tired of lugging around food and eating every two hours, these meals were like snacks and left me want more food.

I switched to 3 meals a day with 100g of protein in each, and a preworkout shake.This left me feeling fuller and more satisfied. Have had great results and doesnt mean i need to pack 3 meals to bring to work.

So your doing 300g protien a day + a shake, are you sure about that as thats 1200 cals protien and a shake for like ~1300 and what you cut at~2000 so that leaves enough room for some bread, rice and a bit of oil...

Meal wise, lugging food around sucks, takke lunch to work and breakfast and dinner are at home, makes life so easy.

[mrbaker3]

So your doing 300g protien a day + a shake, are you sure about that as thats 1200 cals protien and a shake for like ~1300 and what you cut at~2000 so that leaves enough room for some bread, rice and a bit of oil...

Meal wise, lugging food around sucks, takke lunch to work and breakfast and dinner are at home, makes life so easy.

Yeah, I can see how carrying food around would suck for certain professions. In that situation I'm lucky that I have a desk job and bring my morning snack, lunch, and afternoon snack all with me to work and keep them in the fridge. Breakfast and dinner and evening snack are at home.

Don't do something that you can't sustain, would be my suggestion. You want to be able to make a positive change for the long haul.

[Rubicon4door]

I do the under eating during the day thing, feast at night, much like the Warrior Diet plan. It takes a little getting use to when all I eat are some bananas (usually 2), an apple, some raisins and a shake during the day. I am losing fat and my lifts are staying the same and going up a little.

You just have to find what works for you. I did the 6 meals a day thing, it worked but I was tired of carrying my cooler around. Now I just toss some fruits into my backpack that I already carry and eat when I feel like. If I end up eating a small lunch or something during the day, I just make up for it during the feast at night and eat a little less.

[dukend]

I hate the whole "6 meals a day" magic! Every men's health type magazine raves about it. It just isnt very doable. I've seen results with 2-3 meals with some snacks thrown in. Like someone mentioned before, I can see it somewhat working to ease hunger, but otherwise, I wouldn't worry too much about meal frequency.

[dukend]

I do the under eating during the day thing, feast at night, much like the Warrior Diet plan. It takes a little getting use to when all I eat are some bananas (usually 2), an apple, some raisins and a shake during the day. I am losing fat and my lifts are staying the same and going up a little.

You just have to find what works for you. I did the 6 meals a day thing, it worked but I was tired of carrying my cooler around. Now I just toss some fruits into my backpack that I already carry and eat when I feel like. If I end up eating a small lunch or something during the day, I just make up for it during the feast at night and eat a little less.

True true. Find what works for you. However, I cannot stress keeping a spreadsheet counting calories and protein for at least the first couple weeks to make sure you actually are hitting your numbers. It takes like 5 mins a day.

[Revolutionize]

However, I cannot stress keeping a spreadsheet counting calories and protein for at least the first couple weeks to make sure you actually are hitting your numbers. It takes like 5 mins a day.

^^^^This. If you don't keep a log, you are likely underestimating how many calories you are getting.

[randywv]

Great responses. I've done Eat Stop Eat with success. As long as you're not cutting calories too much by fasting and you're getting enough protein it's all still about total calories eaten. If humans needed to eat every few hours to thrive we wouldn't have made it this long...

If eating 6 meals a day helps you control your hunger and calories more easily than fasting - then do it!

I prefer fasting, but I think it's important to find what take the least amount of effort and makes you the most comfortable. There are many different ways to implement fasting, here are a few to give you and idea:

Alternate Day Fasting/Calorie reduction (100-125% one day, 25-75% the next, depending on goals).

Daily Fasting (warrior diet, fast 5, leangains - daily eating window of 5-8 hours)

Fasting 1-3 times per week for 24 hours (Eat Stop Eat, basically 0 cals between one dinner and the next, in my case).

There are other diets floating around about cycling different types of food, but I think it ends up being alternate day calorie reduction in the end.

I'd encourage experimenting with the different methods. In my case, fasting has let me get leaner than I've been in 12 years or so.

Randy

[MCAR1936]

No. But one thing that is important with regards to timing is ensuring that you get some carbs in pre and post workout.

[biggestdog2007]

Makes no difference metabolism wise if you eat 1 meal of 100 meals in a day assuming total macros are the same.

[mikelog]

Meal frequency doesn't matter for losing fat. Most people eat more meals because it helps to curb hunger when you are eating less than normal. I can't eat 3 meals a day when cutting because I get too hungry. But it really just comes down to personal preference.

[Diiimn]

That's pure bro science. It's a myth that's been busted. Do a google search on something like "Eating every 3 hours" or variations of "6 meal a day diet" and you'll find pretty much the exact same thing from every reputable source.

That said, and you'll get a chuckle out of this... but I eat about 6 meals every day.

I do it for hunger control, like plated said, and because doing it this way helps me to not overeat at my meals. I have 3 main meals that are slightly smaller than most people's meals, and 3 larger snacks.

There's no proof that it keeps your metabolism up or anything (at least I've never seen a study showing this), and nothing that says "6 meals will burn more fat".

However, keeping your body filled with protein throughout the day, is a good idea. So I make sure to have at least 20g of protein with each of my 6 meals, but that's just me, and I'm not saying that it's scientifically proven to be best for everybody.

Do you even have 5% bf? And you eat 6 meals and basing on that you're saying it doesn't work, that's Bull **** man, put your $ where your mouth is then comment

Meal frequency doesn't matter for losing fat. Most people eat more meals because it helps to curb hunger when you are eating less than normal. I can't eat 3 meals a day when cutting because I get too hungry. But it really just comes down to personal preference.

If people're eating less than normal, eating more meals= even hungrier no? You're not one to say this as you haven't even tried doing so. Eating bigger meals, even in small frequency from my experience is fuller

[Seoulseeker]

So does it?

Quite simply, no. Was there another question here?

[Horizon92]

As others have stated, meal frequency is irrelevant. A lot of people are raving about IF, and other people raving about several small meals etc. Want the truth? Eat when you're hungry. As long as you are counting your calories and hitting your macro's, WHEN you eat and WHAT you eat doesn't matter. Like, at all. If you wanna do IF, you don't have to do IF strictly. Feeling hungry one morning? Eat. Not feeling hungry the next? Skip it. Just eat when you are hungry. This is such a simple matter that in recent years have been overcomplicated by the introduction of IF and all the attempts of making everything as efficient as possible. Personally, I can't think of anything more practical than to eat exactly when you feel like it. We know for a fact that what matters in the end is hitting your macro's and calories for the day.

[Diiimn]

As others have stated, meal frequency is irrelevant. A lot of people are raving about IF, and other people raving about several small meals etc. Want the truth? Eat when you're hungry. As long as you are counting your calories and hitting your macro's, WHEN you eat and WHAT you eat doesn't matter. Like, at all. If you wanna do IF, you don't have to do IF strictly. Feeling hungry one morning? Eat. Not feeling hungry the next? Skip it. Just eat when you are hungry. This is such a simple matter that in recent years have been overcomplicated by the introduction of IF and all the attempts of making everything as efficient as possible. Personally, I can't think of anything more practical than to eat exactly when you feel like it. We know for a fact that what matters in the end is hitting your macro's and calories for the day.

Prove it yourself by getting to 5% bf with 2 meals a day with junk food, hitting ur macros and calories then comment

[Horizon92]

Others already have, so I don't need to.

[Diiimn]

Others already have, so I don't need to.

No, I personally have tried counting my calories, maintenance kcals, TDEE, -20% from maintenance, 2 meals per day junk foods, 2 meals per day only ~about clean foods, 4 meals per day, calorie cycling, gym and w/o gym, 4:4:2 macro ratio and even higher protein ratio, and others, still, I couldn't get below 5% bf, not even below 10%. And having you, a reference dictionary simply point out a research reference from some dufus anon whose credibility is questioned and you yourself don't know for yourself whether it'll work or not certainly doesn't qualify you for giving advices.

[Horizon92]

Well, science disagrees with you. But if you'd like to say that your personal experience, which probably wasn't as controlled as a.. controlled study, counts for more than actual scientific evidence which hasn't changed in like what, 100 years? Calories in calories out is all that matters at the end of the day. You're not the first person telling me he did everything and failed, and so therefore thermogenesis is effectively debunked.

[slowjoeee]

i find meal timing irrelevant except in the case of workout day. i think its important to have majority of your calories post workout

[matman1813]

Prove it yourself by getting to 5% bf with 2 meals a day with junk food, hitting ur macros and calories then comment

http://www.********.com/ckbrah?fref=ts

Check his food logs, check his physique, 'mire, cry the bro science away.

[Diiimn]

Well, science disagrees with you. But if you'd like to say that your personal experience, which probably wasn't as controlled as a.. controlled study, counts for more than actual scientific evidence which hasn't changed in like what, 100 years? Calories in calories out is all that matters at the end of the day. You're not the first person telling me he did everything and failed, and so therefore thermogenesis is effectively debunked.

What do you mean wasn't controlled as a controlled study, all I need to do was to test out whether eating 2 times per day, 4 times per day/ w/ junk food, almost all clean food/ try get 5% bf w/ going gym; w/o going gym/ w/ calorie cycling or w/o and whatever experiment I want all while being the same calories, no need for some research from some dufus anon who may be someone who's experimenting meal frequency on fat loss while forgetting to keep the total calories constant and knowing that still posts the research results w/o mentioning his mistake, results is what matters, from my results, I've assumed the junk food part was wrong and thrown its research results reference out of the window while also right now suspecting other variables involved're also false.

Check his food logs, check his physique, 'mire, cry the bro science away.

Who's that, horizon? Doesn't prove anything if he didn't follow 2 meal per day with junk food, hit his macros and calories to get to 5% bf. I didn't search all his pics, but from the profile pic alone, I can't see if he's 5%. Oh, and I've seen on his food log he eats whey, that's like possibly cheating, as from some research by the FDA regarding whey they've found some steroids on some of those products sold in Bodybuilding.com, I don't know but a possibility, I'm only looking at ppl who got to 5% only eating 100% solid food.

[matman1813]

Who's that, horizon? Doesn't prove anything if he didn't follow 2 meal per day with junk food, hit his macros and calories to get to 5% bf. I didn't search all his pics, but from the profile pic alone, I can't see if he's 5%.

No, it's not horizon. It's a dude who lives off 'junk food' and is shredded, he's had shout outs from Matt Ogus and a few others. If he's not 5% he isn't far off.

[Horizon92]

First of all, that's not me

Secondly, you trying various approaches and failing with them doesn't really debunk scientific evidence which has been done in much larger scale. Now I'm not saying that fat loss is a linear process where you just calculate your macros, eat at a 500 deficit and wait for shreddedness to arrive. What I am saying is that there are some axioms which you need to accept when it comes to weight loss, one of them being that your body doesn't care whether you eat "clean" or "dirty" food, and the second being that meal frequency will never ever override total macro and micro-nutrients.

I'm going to assume that you are not perfect, and therefore I will assume that you have overlooked certain aspects of what you have been doing at the different times. If you have done a vast report on your journey, I think it would be interesting to read. But I doubt you have. Since you are saying that your macros stayed identical, and the only thing helping your fat loss was to eat clean, I can't come to any other conclusion than that you are misremembering, or that you have been miscalculating. Another reason for your beliefs could be that you are assuming that maintenance is a static figure, something it obviously is not. You could end up on the "clean eating part" at the same time that you had a higher maintenance, adjusted by activity levels and your bodies different regulation methods as you become leaner.

To sum it up, people oftentimes plateau, but that doesn't mean that because you got through the plateau at a time you were eating clean, the scientific evidence supporting my statements are false and debunked.

[Serpentarius]

You are now aware this thread was bumped from 2.5 years ago and are now fighting a battle you cannot win.

[matman1813]

You are now aware this thread was bumped from 2.5 years ago and are now fighting a battle you cannot win.

mind = blown

[Horizon92]

You are now aware this thread was bumped from 2.5 years ago and are now fighting a battle you cannot win.

holy chit