We all know by now that in order to gain muscle weight, we must eat small balanced meals 6-7 times a day. I bring to work my lunch bag, but I can not seem to be able to space myself out to eat every 2.5 - 3 hours apart. So, I continuously munch on my lunch stash: salad here, boiled egg there, hour later maybe a trail mix, etc. If I really must, I can limit myself to eat at specific times of the day. But, do I have to? If I continuously eat necessary amount of calories: carbs and proteins, and not just pack my stomach three times a day, does not it offer the same effect?
|
-
05-15-2013, 08:37 AM #1
- Join Date: Jul 2009
- Location: Pennsylvania, United States
- Age: 46
- Posts: 0
- Rep Power: 0
Are strict meal intervals important?
-
05-15-2013, 08:39 AM #2
-
05-15-2013, 08:41 AM #3No brain, no gain.
"The fitness and nutrition world is a breeding ground for obsessive-compulsive behavior. The irony is that many of the things people worry about have no impact on results either way, and therefore aren't worth an ounce of concern."--Alan Aragon
Where the mind goes, the body follows.
Ironwill Gym:
https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=629719403&postcount=3388
Ironwill2008 Journal:
https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=157459343&p=1145168733
-
05-15-2013, 08:42 AM #4
-
-
05-15-2013, 08:42 AM #5
- Join Date: Jun 2012
- Location: Lincolnshire, England, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 458
- Rep Power: 1808
No I don't believe it is necessary. Technically you could eat your entire days calories in one single meal. It wouldn't be easy, and probs not necessarily the most efficient way to do it. I think the main reason for spacing out the meals is 1) because of how much food we eat, much easier to split it up and 2) it helps prevent snacking. By ensuring you spread out your meals, you shouldn't go long periods of time without food and find your hungry mid morning and knipping to the vending machine for a chocolate bar!
The "scientific" reason is because it keeps your metabolism high...whether you choose to believe that is a different story."Milk is for babies. When you grow up you have to drink beer."
-
05-15-2013, 08:46 AM #6
-
05-15-2013, 08:50 AM #7
-
05-15-2013, 08:50 AM #8
-
-
05-15-2013, 08:54 AM #9Follow me on an enchanting adventure (My Log):
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=153543271
-
05-15-2013, 08:55 AM #10
-
05-15-2013, 08:57 AM #11
-
05-15-2013, 09:00 AM #12
-
-
05-15-2013, 09:03 AM #13
-
05-15-2013, 09:12 AM #14
-
05-15-2013, 09:17 AM #15No brain, no gain.
"The fitness and nutrition world is a breeding ground for obsessive-compulsive behavior. The irony is that many of the things people worry about have no impact on results either way, and therefore aren't worth an ounce of concern."--Alan Aragon
Where the mind goes, the body follows.
Ironwill Gym:
https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=629719403&postcount=3388
Ironwill2008 Journal:
https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=157459343&p=1145168733
-
05-15-2013, 09:23 AM #16
-
-
05-15-2013, 09:38 AM #17
Actually a great link which I have referenced many times...
In reference strictly to metabolism you may be correct as it states: Increased meal frequency does not appear to significantly enhance diet induced thermogenesis, total energy expenditure or resting metabolic rate. (Still not definitive though)
But some key points in the abstract (summary) in this position statement that you and others seem to leave out are:
1. Increasing meal frequency does not appear to favorably change body composition in "sedentary" populations. "sedentary" being the key word..
2. If protein levels are adequate, increasing meal frequency during periods of hypoenergetic dieting may preserve lean body mass in athletic populations.
3. Increased meal frequency appears to have a "positive" effect on various blood markers of health, particularly LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and insulin.
4. Increasing meal frequency appears to help decrease hunger and improve appetite control.
And particularly the 1st line of the conclusion: Like many areas of nutritional science, there is "NO" universal consensus regarding the effects of meal frequency on body composition, body weight, markers of health, markers of metabolism, nitrogen retention, or satiety.
So when statements are made like "of course this is not true" and "this is just bro-science" they are not based on any definitive "proof" or statement of "fact"...
-
05-15-2013, 09:48 AM #18
Pardon me? Why would I have posted the link if I was leaving things out?
Also, I am here trying to break the inculcation of certain "ideas" perpetuated by supplement companies & and those in this field trying to make a buck, exemplified of course by: "we all know by now that in order to gain muscle weight..." ~OPFollow me on an enchanting adventure (My Log):
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=153543271
-
05-15-2013, 09:57 AM #19
-
05-15-2013, 10:00 AM #20
-
-
05-15-2013, 10:00 AM #21
It's one thing when a newcomer asks a question. It's quite another thing when they come in stating "We all know that . . ." and then proceed to spout what is one of the most often corrected misconceptions on here as a great truth.
Oddly enough, people looking to lose weight instead of gain it often have a very similar misconception.
-
05-15-2013, 10:06 AM #22
-
05-15-2013, 10:55 AM #23
-
05-15-2013, 10:58 AM #24
-
-
05-15-2013, 11:02 AM #25
-
05-15-2013, 11:06 AM #26
-
05-15-2013, 11:11 AM #27
Similar Threads
-
How I gained weight in 3 months
By ncihcmj in forum Teen BodybuildingReplies: 13Last Post: 04-21-2012, 09:01 AM -
bulking is scary
By Dm1337 in forum Teen BodybuildingReplies: 3Last Post: 03-24-2009, 03:17 AM -
LongJack Thread
By Random907 in forum SupplementsReplies: 69Last Post: 03-11-2009, 11:59 AM -
Really like HIIT
By FSUFan4 in forum Losing FatReplies: 47Last Post: 03-26-2007, 11:09 PM
Bookmarks