|
-
06-04-2012, 09:14 AM #61
-
06-04-2012, 09:34 AM #62
-
06-04-2012, 09:42 AM #63
- Join Date: Jul 2010
- Location: Severn, Maryland, United States
- Age: 35
- Posts: 2,431
- Rep Power: 525
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8...ubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9155494
http://www.slideshare.net/biolayne/o...nd-muscle-mass
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17413096
It's not that 6-8 meals does/doesn't work, it's that constantly stating that that's the way to go is rediculous and flawed. Better satiety has been shown in less meals while simultaneously showing same results when compared to more meals.
edit: hoping the issue was meal timing/frequency that you (p_gomez) were referring to.
-
06-04-2012, 09:45 AM #64
In response to p_gomez. See bold above in Rob's post. For a ton of people here (who are cutting and realize that they need 2100 cals a day to efficiently lose 1lb a week), eating 6 times a day would be similar to eating 6 different "meals" of 350 cals each. For a lot of us, after eating this amount, we are freaking starving, so it works WAY better for us to eat 3 times a day (of 700 cals each), 2 times a day (at 1050 cals each), or once... As we now know that eating more frequently doesnt give any "special benefits" in terms of body composition.
-
-
06-04-2012, 09:48 AM #65
-
06-04-2012, 09:49 AM #66
- Join Date: Aug 2010
- Location: Alaska, United States
- Age: 32
- Posts: 2,375
- Rep Power: 4691
The thermic effect of food only gets you 200-300 cals. It only can vary by about 10% so at max you can change about 30 cals. That being said TEF has to be about the same because chemical bonds have to be broken. You can't change that by changing resistance to insulin.
Also, look at the studies on leangains, it says that there is no increased insulin resistance with larger meals. In fact the idea that sarcopenia is mostly caused by problems with leucine tend to lean toward greater intakes at single time points especially for older people.
-
02-16-2013, 02:31 PM #67
The belief that your metabolism stops or slows down and can be sped up through increased meal frequency is utter crap.
Your metabolism only stops when you die, as long as your heart beats, your lungs breath in and out, your kidneys and liver function, you have peristalsis through the veins and intestines, you have body fat and muscle mass, your body is using energy.
At rest your body burns the following calories
The heart, 440 calories per kg per day
The brain, 220 calories per kg per day
Hepatic tissue, 200 calories per kg per day
Adipose tissue is 4 calories per kg per day
Muscle tissue is 11 calories per kg per day.
As you become active (move around, work, train etc) these numbers increase.
If you require 4000 calories a day it may indeed be more convenient to eat more smaller meals as you may not physically be able to consume large amounts in one sitting, but it doesn't change the thermic effect of food or make you more efficient at digesting nutrients. In the same way a builder isn't more efficient because he can build a 5 ft wall quicker than he can build a 10 ft wall.
Of course if you are one of the obsessive "clean" eaters that thinks the only foods to eat are 4 oz of boiled chicken (because you think your body can't use any more than 30 grams of protein in a sitting!) 1/2 a cup of brown rice and a cup of steamed broccoli, then of course you need to eat 8 times a day, it's impossible to get enough calories from a cup of steamed broccoli and 4oz of boiled chicken and 1/2 a cup of brown rice in one, two or three meals.
Bookmarks