PDA

View Full Version : Eating Every 3 Hours Is Highly Effective!!!!



saint sinner x
12-10-2008, 03:34 AM
Seriously man, I am seeing rapid results, your metabolism shoots like fire, whoever invented eating every 3 hours is a genius!!!!! lol...

tina1920
12-10-2008, 03:36 AM
That is my consistent struggle. I workout with no problem but eating every 2-3 hours is kicking my butt!! I am glad you are seeing results. Thanks for the motivation.

saint sinner x
12-10-2008, 03:43 AM
That is my consistent struggle. I workout with no problem but eating every 2-3 hours is kicking my butt!! I am glad you are seeing results. Thanks for the motivation.

Seriously sexy chocolate lol, eating every 3 hours is the ****!!! I drop 3 percent of bf within two weeks, while eating 6 small meals 3 hours apart and of course drinking two gallons of water. I like to sweat and I like the pain but I LOVE results even betta lol...

141455675
12-10-2008, 04:17 AM
http://djtaso.com/images/isolationized.gif

in10city
12-10-2008, 04:30 AM
Seriously man, I am seeing rapid results, your metabolism shoots like fire, whoever invented eating every 3 hours is a genius!!!!! lol...
If this isn't a joke [my guess is that it's not since I've seen a few other threads], placebo effects are strong here. Meal frequency "stoking the metabolism" is a myth.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=231231821&postcount=41
http://user210805.websitewizard.com/files/unprotected/AARR-Jan-2008.pdf

snorkelman
12-10-2008, 05:11 AM
In general, athletes and active folks tend to do well on a minimum of 4 meals per training day.

JustLost
12-10-2008, 05:13 AM
If this isn't a joke [my guess is that it's not since I've seen a few other threads], placebo effects are strong here. Meal frequency "stoking the metabolism" is a myth.




The "eating every 3 hours" thing is a good example of how broscience comes about.

HYPOTHESIS: Eating every three hours revs up the metabolism
DATA: X number of people have gotten big and lean eating every three hours.
CONCLUSION: Hypothesis is correct, and eating every three hours is the only possible way to get big and lean.

POSSIBLE OBJECTION: Y number of people have gotten big and lean eating some other way.
REFUTATION OF OBJECTION: Strong genetics, brah.

edited to add: On the other hand,the feeling that one is doing the most awesome thing can create a powerful placebo effect, and even a placebo effect is an effect.

blacksmith77
12-10-2008, 05:13 AM
bad joke ?
bad advice ?
poor post ?
yup, fail.

-rhino-
12-10-2008, 05:36 AM
The only things that eating that often really does is aid in digestion and spread out your caloric/nutritional intake throughout the day. So yes, there are purposes for eating that often. But boosting your metabolism isnt one of them. The human body is like a clock and runs off habit, the only thing you'll do by eating every three hours is ensure that you'll be hungry every three hours.


Now for bulking, this is a good thing =)

The Solution
12-10-2008, 05:39 AM
bad joke ?
bad advice ?
poor post ?
yup, fail.

My Thoughts exactly.

Flex500
12-10-2008, 05:42 AM
Seriously man, I am seeing rapid results, your metabolism shoots like fire, whoever invented eating every 3 hours is a genius!!!!! lol...
don't say that around here most believe here believe in starving themselves for 4 days then eating one 10,000 calorie meal for an ultimate bulk!

Own3r
12-10-2008, 05:46 AM
don't say that around here most believe here believe in starving themselves for 4 days then eating one 10,000 calorie meal for an ultimate bulk!

Lol so true!

saint sinner x
12-10-2008, 07:07 AM
If this isn't a joke [my guess is that it's not since I've seen a few other threads], placebo effects are strong here. Meal frequency "stoking the metabolism" is a myth.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=231231821&postcount=41
http://user210805.websitewizard.com/files/unprotected/AARR-Jan-2008.pdf


lol I actually am being serious, however I go by results not scientific data, there are many scientific data that states HIIT on an empty stomach is not a good idea, but my EXPERIENCE has lead me to believe otherwise, I was eating 4 times a day, and speed it up to six times a day, I am seeing more progress on eating six times a day as oppose to 4 times a day. This comment isn't directly aimed at you, generally speaking, the problem with bodybuilding nowadays is that there is a **** load of information that it becomes overwhelming, so as a psychological defense mechanism I said **** the self proclaim gurus and health freaks and I would just experience it. Perhaps not all bodytypes respond well to frequent eating, but mine does, hence I am a endo/meson bodytype so gaining muscles for me is easy and of course gaining fat lol....

Bioteknik
12-10-2008, 07:07 AM
if by effective meaning you dont' have to eat as much every meal so you don't get a food coma, yes.

chrisjd
12-10-2008, 07:09 AM
Since when did people stop believing 6 meals a day would enhance metabolic rates? I thought this idea was largely accepted here?

-rhino-
12-10-2008, 07:13 AM
lol I actually am being serious, however I go by results not scientific data, there are many scientific data that states HIIT on an empty stomach is not a good idea, but my EXPERIENCE has lead me to believe otherwise, I was eating 4 times a day, and speed it up to six times a day, I am seeing more progress on eating six times a day as oppose to 4 times a day. This comment isn't directly aimed at you, generally speaking, the problem with bodybuilding nowadays is that there is a **** load of information that it becomes overwhelming, so as a psychological defense mechanism I said **** the self proclaim gurus and health freaks and I would just experience it. Perhaps not all bodytypes respond well to frequent eating, but mine does, hence I am a endo/meson bodytype so gaining muscles for me is easy and of course gaining fat lol....

Its all a matter of what works for you and gets you results man. No broscience there, if youre happy with the results youre getting you must be doing something right.

Lemonzest
12-10-2008, 07:13 AM
Eating every 3 hours seems logical for bulking as you need to increase your cals, but for cutting i'm strongly agreeing with in10city.

berardi1111
12-10-2008, 07:16 AM
Since when did people stop believing 6 meals a day would enhance metabolic rates? I thought this idea was largely accepted here?

I see a lot of things on this board that I am like ??? maybe I'm behind the times... teenagers seem to be on "the cutting wave" lol

Regardless of any metabolic effects, it is ideal for your digestive tract. These monstrous meals are very hard on the stomach and bowels. Food combining is the **** :) I never feel bloated or crash

DarkDays
12-10-2008, 07:48 AM
Whether or not eating every three hours speeds up your metabolism, it's the only way I can take in enough calories in the day... I simply can't sit down and eat 1000+ calorie meals.

chrisjd
12-10-2008, 07:52 AM
Whether or not eating every three hours speeds up your metabolism, it's the only way I can take in enough calories in the day... I simply can't sit down and eat 1000+ calorie meals.

Why not?

I can easily, but then I overeat and get chubby.

Cronos1247
12-10-2008, 07:54 AM
More meals makes it easier to time pre/post workout nutrition.

Phosphate bond
12-10-2008, 08:00 AM
Seriously man, I am seeing rapid results, your metabolism shoots like fire, whoever invented eating every 3 hours is a genius!!!!! lol...

Sometimes I wonder if eating 6 meals per day really only applies to people eating really high calories for practical reasons more than anything else? (stomach size may be the stronger issue here).

I am not sure what eating 6 meals per day is going to do on caloric restriction? (Either the diet is good or deficient and that is what probably matters most with regard to weight loss). Can the empty calories from adipose be metabolized or not to so sufficient "calories out" can be made to achieve the deficit?

-rhino-
12-10-2008, 08:08 AM
Sometimes I wonder if eating 6 meals per day really only applies to people eating really high calories for practical reasons more than anything else? (stomach size may be the stronger issue here).

I am not sure what eating 6 meals per day is going to do on caloric restriction? (Either the diet is good or deficient and that is what probably matters most with regard to weight loss). Can the empty calories from adipose be metabolized or not to so sufficient "calories out" can be made to achieve the deficit?

Im sure the restriction that comes into play is that eating that often prevents snacking and binge eating if only consuming 3 large meals daily. Portion control is the deciding factor IMO.

lifeisdream
12-10-2008, 08:08 AM
but I'm putting on weight. I can't believe that I have been able to put on weight and I attribute it to eating every three hours every day.

-rhino-
12-10-2008, 08:12 AM
but I'm putting on weight. I can't believe that I have been able to put on weight and I attribute it to eating every three hours every day.

Yes, eating every 3 hours is effective for bulking diets, more food, more calories, more weight put on. No science there.

However this discussion is geared towards weight loss.

bobcat11
12-10-2008, 08:18 AM
Lollerz dude, I am ripped full of muscle with my new diet I found on the internet (so you know it works!). I starve myself for 6 days then on the seventh day I eat 1 saltine cracker to keep my muscle and energy. It's called the Ripped-Ethipian Diet. You know it works because look how skinny they are. LOL @ eating every 2-3-4 hours to get proper nutrients, maybe if you wanna get fat!

Phosphate bond
12-10-2008, 08:20 AM
Yes, eating every 3 hours is effective for bulking diets, more food, more calories, more weight put on. No science there.

However this discussion is geared towards weight loss.

What is going to frustrate people the most is thinking the guys in those muscle magazines got that way by eating low calories. So this idea of eating frequently anecdotally is actually founded on other principles (that go beyond caloric restriction)

But then we want to apply this anecdotal testimony to lower calories "weight watchers" type strategies and say it will work the same? Its not because it is apples to oranges.

-rhino-
12-10-2008, 08:34 AM
What is going to frustrate people the most is thinking the guys in those muscle magazines got that way by eating low calories. So this idea of eating frequently anecdotally is actually founded on other principles (that go beyond caloric restriction)

But then we want to apply this anecdotal testimony to lower calories "weight watchers" type strategies and say it will work the same? Its not because it is apples to oranges.

True true.

Whether you store or lose body fat at the end of the day is a consequence of intake minus expenditure, not meal frequency. IMO.

LarryByrd
12-10-2008, 08:52 AM
If this isn't a joke [my guess is that it's not since I've seen a few other threads], placebo effects are strong here. Meal frequency "stoking the metabolism" is a myth.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=231231821&postcount=41
http://user210805.websitewizard.com/files/unprotected/AARR-Jan-2008.pdf


Sure, and eating 1 meal with 200grams of protein is just as effective as spreading this 1 meal out 5x a day.

in10city
12-10-2008, 08:58 AM
Sure, and eating 1 meal with 200grams of protein is just as effective as spreading this 1 meal out 5x a day.
*Waits for Alan to drop the hammer on you again*. You've missed the point.

cmbc
12-10-2008, 09:03 AM
... Regardless of any metabolic effects, it is ideal for your digestive tract. These monstrous meals are very hard on the stomach and bowels. Food combining is the **** :) I never feel bloated or crash

Who says big meals are hard on the digestive system?
(hint: we evolved over millions of years eating infrequent, huge meals.)

Since when is it better to have food going through your system non-stop, so it never gets a break.

Paumen
12-10-2008, 09:07 AM
If this isn't a joke [my guess is that it's not since I've seen a few other threads], placebo effects are strong here. Meal frequency "stoking the metabolism" is a myth.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=231231821&postcount=41
http://user210805.websitewizard.com/files/unprotected/AARR-Jan-2008.pdf

While this may be true. But I have seen placebo studys with dbol and the effects are usually about 50 percent. That's what u get when you half ass it, 50 percent.

I'm not saying 3 hours is only way, 4 hours is fine but any longer and well...your half assing it.

LarryByrd
12-10-2008, 09:18 AM
*Waits for Alan to drop the hammer on you again*. You've missed the point.

Nah, I saw the point.

People have a belief that eating 6 meals every three hours is going to boost their metabolism.

In reality, the theory of eating every 3 hours is just a con to get people eating. I think many people really underestimate how much they eat (especially body builders).

Personally, I enjoy eating small meals every 3 hours. I'm never hungry at all.

-rhino-
12-10-2008, 09:22 AM
In reality, the theory of eating every 3 hours is just a con to get people eating. l.

Why do you think the suppliment companies love to keep this myth going? They are a multi-million dollar corperations for a reason.

saint sinner x
12-10-2008, 09:27 AM
Its all a matter of what works for you and gets you results man. No broscience there, if youre happy with the results youre getting you must be doing something right.

True that, and thats what I advocate the most, is to experiment and engage as your experience will be the foundation for your training structure. Too much information leads to confusion and so on, only person to trust is thyself.



but I'm putting on weight. I can't believe that I have been able to put on weight and I attribute it to eating every three hours every day.

In the end it's all about calories in vs calories out. Even on a cut I would eat every 3 hours, I feel more energetic, I feel more alive, and it definetly prevents binge eating which is a problem for many bodybuilders



Sometimes I wonder if eating 6 meals per day really only applies to people eating really high calories for practical reasons more than anything else? (stomach size may be the stronger issue here).

I am not sure what eating 6 meals per day is going to do on caloric restriction? (Either the diet is good or deficient and that is what probably matters most with regard to weight loss). Can the empty calories from adipose be metabolized or not to so sufficient "calories out" can be made to achieve the deficit?

I am actually rotating my carbs, but keeping it simple, on days I lift I consume at calorie maintaince, on days I do cardio, I consume at 500 calorie deficit, when I am on the deficit which is 4 days of the week, I still consume every 3 hours, on days I do and do not lift, I dont intake any carbs 3 hours prior to sleeping, it truly does speeds up your metabolism, that and drinking alot of water, and were talking about small meals here. My diet consists of high proteins, moderate carbs, low fats, hence I'm on a clean bulk now. I am able to lose fat and gain muscle by doing this method, and I feel full and content, I don't feel deprived at all, it feels very good. Energy levels are up, I feel stronger and of course more reactive, looking strong is good, but feeling strong is even better. Try it if you haven't for two weeks, I've dropped significant amount of bodyfat within the last two weeks and I am happy as hell!!!!! lol, hell yea man I love these tactics....

Flex500
12-10-2008, 09:56 AM
Since when did people stop believing 6 meals a day would enhance metabolic rates? I thought this idea was largely accepted here?
no, the new accepted plan is the starvation diet don't eat for hours then pound food...which sounds really smart...

or do whatever the people who make the ultimate musclebuilding supplement xtend tell you to do

black02ep3
12-10-2008, 10:15 AM
Lollerz dude, I am ripped full of muscle with my new diet I found on the internet (so you know it works!). I starve myself for 6 days then on the seventh day I eat 1 saltine cracker to keep my muscle and energy. It's called the Ripped-Ethipian Diet. You know it works because look how skinny they are. LOL @ eating every 2-3-4 hours to get proper nutrients, maybe if you wanna get fat!

Wow strong racist.

-Aaron-
12-10-2008, 10:18 AM
I don't eat anymore!

lth
12-10-2008, 10:21 AM
Sometimes I wonder if eating 6 meals per day really only applies to people eating really high calories for practical reasons more than anything else? (stomach size may be the stronger issue here).

This^^^

6 meals a day was introduced as bodybuilding advanced. Advanced bb'ers needed more cals and realized this would be an easier and more practical way to do it. Thats all, it has no phucking advantage!

Some others, such as layne norton say that eating every 2 hours is counter productive and I agree with him. This takes away your bodies ability to manufacture for itself which in turn i believe would have a negative effect on one's metabolism.

berardi1111
12-10-2008, 10:23 AM
Who says big meals are hard on the digestive system?
(hint: we evolved over millions of years eating infrequent, huge meals.)

Since when is it better to have food going through your system non-stop, so it never gets a break.

I don't know about you, but when I go to the buffet, my stomach definitely hurts lol... not rocket science... and look how it looks coming out the other end.. as for a break before after and including the 8 hours of sleep should be enough!

black02ep3
12-10-2008, 10:25 AM
This^^^

6 meals a day was introduced as bodybuilding advanced. Advanced bb'ers needed more cals and realized this would be an easier and more practical way to do it. Thats all, it has no phucking advantage!

Some others, such as layne norton say that eating every 2 hours is counter productive and I agree with him. This takes away your bodies ability to manufacture for itself which in turn i believe would have a negative effect on one's metabolism.

In truth, I used to eat 3 meals a day... and for about an hour and half before lunch and dinner, I used to get hunger pangs... and so by the time I'm eating, everything disappears without me realizing. Now, I was 300lbs, so I could eat a stupidly large meal in a sitting.

Eating more frequently allows me to eat smaller portions and therefore less overall calories... I don't know if it has metabolism benefits (according to past studies I read it does not), but it sure has other benefits for reducing calorie intake.

lth
12-10-2008, 10:33 AM
In truth, I used to eat 3 meals a day... and for about an hour and half before lunch and dinner, I used to get hunger pangs... and so by the time I'm eating, everything disappears without me realizing. Now, I was 300lbs, so I could eat a stupidly large meal in a sitting.

Eating more frequently allows me to eat smaller portions and therefore less overall calories... I don't know if it has metabolism benefits (according to past studies I read it does not), but it sure has other benefits for reducing calorie intake.

It may have some psychological benefits, but in no way is eating every 3 hours going to have any biological benefits.

stathis723
12-10-2008, 10:37 AM
If this isn't a joke [my guess is that it's not since I've seen a few other threads], placebo effects are strong here. Meal frequency "stoking the metabolism" is a myth.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpost.php?p=231231821&postcount=41
http://user210805.websitewizard.com/files/unprotected/AARR-Jan-2008.pdf

hes probably joking, it doesnt help with your metabolism but if i dont eat for 6 hours or more i dont have energy though

Smudgefit
12-10-2008, 11:17 AM
Wow strong racist.
Africans as a race arent genetically skinny, so it was not racist.
However, as a joke, it was inconsiderate and ****.

Oddball8945
12-10-2008, 11:25 AM
Seriously man, I am seeing rapid results, your metabolism shoots like fire, whoever invented eating every 3 hours is a genius!!!!! lol...

lol fk that **** ......... every 3 hours awesome gjdm

dn27
12-10-2008, 11:28 AM
Now eat every two hours. Less catabolism.


Actually, eat exactly 1 tbsp of 50% protein, 50% carbs, and 50% fat ever 20 seconds.

Tiffany_P
12-10-2008, 11:31 AM
I'm glad it's working for you. When I started doing that, I dropped several pounds in the first few days. After that though, weight loss stopped and became more difficult than ever. I also became hungry all the time and food obsessed.

I do agree that whoever invented it is a genius - an evil, marketing genius that is.

in10city
12-10-2008, 11:44 AM
Can I just do some extreme stretching every 3 hours instead to tear down some muscle tissue for my body to repair and create some EPOC-like effects???

Flex500
12-10-2008, 12:18 PM
Wow strong racist.
how is that racist?

US_Ranger
12-10-2008, 12:36 PM
Eating every few hours has great benefits depending on what kind of training you're doing. For the typical bodybuilder who spends 1-1.5 hours in the gym, it's not really a big deal. Start up double days, endurance training, endurance/strength split, anaerobic/aerobic combination sports (soccer, basketball, etc) and then the constant eating comes in handy as glyocogen replenishment, energy levels and the benefits of not training with a super full stomach come into play.

Paumen
12-10-2008, 12:40 PM
Eating every few hours has great benefits depending on what kind of training you're doing. For the typical bodybuilder who spends 1-1.5 hours in the gym, it's not really a big deal. Start up double days, endurance training, endurance/strength split, anaerobic/aerobic combination sports (soccer, basketball, etc) and then the constant eating comes in handy as glyocogen replenishment, energy levels and the benefits of not training with a super full stomach come into play.

Glycogen replenishment is just important for bbers as it is for endurance athletes.

KJR246
12-10-2008, 12:42 PM
I'm glad I read this. I just started only eating like 5 meals today, and I was all freaked out. It's all broscience huh? Good, every three hours is NOT convenient.


Can I just do some extreme stretching every 3 hours instead to tear down some muscle tissue for my body to repair and create some EPOC-like effects???

Huh?

KJR246
12-10-2008, 12:45 PM
Still waitin for that myth sticky...Is there one already?

US_Ranger
12-10-2008, 12:46 PM
Glycogen replenishment is just important for bbers as it is for endurance athletes.

I was referring to post-workout carb/protein intake for quicker glycogen replenishment. For bodybuilders who rest a full day between workouts, the need for insulin spiking post workout meals is not needed. For endurance athletes and those who train more than once a day, the glycogen replenishment becomes more of an issue due to performance.

Sage21
12-10-2008, 12:55 PM
I eat 5-6 small meals a day, not because it raises my metabolism, but it's because I love eating. I like to snack, bad habit but it is what it is. I tried to eat 3 meals a day. But it never worked cause I would get hungry another 3 and a half hours later and then I would have another big meal. So in the end I would have like 4 big portions of food, not including whatever I snacked on. And I was 230 pounds :(.

Now I eat 5-6 meals a day at small portions. 400-500 calories a meal, with a fat, protein and a carb. And it curbs my desires to snack, because I'm eating all the time, and at the end of the day I hit my total number for calories a day.

When I'm on a cut, just add in cardio in along with my workout. I will try to stick to 400 calories a meal, 5 meals a day.

It's just what works for me, and everyone is different. I've lost 40 pounds, so I'll stick to what works for me. But do I believe there is a added bonus? No. It's just psychological for me.

JustLost
12-10-2008, 01:14 PM
Still waitin for that myth sticky...Is there one already?

It seems like there used to be one, like a couple years ago. DOnno where it went. Maybe it didn't eat often enough.

Phosphate bond
12-10-2008, 01:19 PM
6 meals a day was introduced as bodybuilding advanced. Advanced bb'ers needed more cals and realized this would be an easier and more practical way to do it. Thats all, it has no phucking advantage!

Some others, such as layne norton say that eating every 2 hours is counter productive and I agree with him. This takes away your bodies ability to manufacture for itself which in turn i believe would have a negative effect on one's metabolism.

Yep and plus if eating something 1800 calories per day (6x) what is a 300 calorie meal going to look like?

I'll bet if meals are getting too small firing up the stove to cook something really nice just isn't going to occur.

Then all that happens is the person eats more convenience foods instead basically "short circuiting" the whole idea of nutrition in the process. (Although to be honest I'll bet a diet can be less than stellar in caloric restriction compared to all-out energy expenditure endeavors. That is just my hunch)

chrisjd
12-10-2008, 01:28 PM
Wow strong racist.

Wow strong idiot.

Bioteknik
12-10-2008, 01:34 PM
I was referring to post-workout carb/protein intake for quicker glycogen replenishment. For bodybuilders who rest a full day between workouts, the need for insulin spiking post workout meals is not needed. For endurance athletes and those who train more than once a day, the glycogen replenishment becomes more of an issue due to performance.


Some people suggest that muscle protein synthesis is impaired when glycogen stores are low.. haven't seen any data to suggest this, but I've seen a well-respected website owner suggest this is an issue with natural bodybuilders who do lots of high volume training (specifically legs).

-Aaron-
12-10-2008, 01:35 PM
Some people suggest that muscle protein synthesis is impaired when glycogen stores are low.. haven't seen any data to suggest this

Quite frankly, there isn't any...

Phosphate bond
12-10-2008, 01:36 PM
The "eating every 3 hours" thing is a good example of how broscience comes about.

HYPOTHESIS: Eating every three hours revs up the metabolism
DATA: X number of people have gotten big and lean eating every three hours.
CONCLUSION: Hypothesis is correct, and eating every three hours is the only possible way to get big and lean.



I didn't see this post earlier but I agree with you regarding big and lean.

Q: How does someone get big and lean in the first place?

A: By eating lots and training lots (which involves high calorie totals which are hard to accomplish in few meals)

So the anecdotal testimony really does have some legitimate basis in reality it is just that we are applying it to something else that is not analogous (low calorie weight loss programs that are not very rigorous)

in10city
12-10-2008, 01:42 PM
I'm glad I read this. I just started only eating like 5 meals today, and I was all freaked out. It's all broscience huh? Good, every three hours is NOT convenient.



Huh?
Which one - extreme stretching [i.e. Dogg Crapp / Parrillo theoretical muscle fascia stretching] or EPOC [Excess postexercise oxygen consumption - related in part to an elevated metabolic rate from the cellular repair processes in this case]

BenchRat
12-10-2008, 01:43 PM
i see people saying WHY your not supposed to eat every three hours, but no one is saying WHAT you should do... Q: if your not supposed to eat 6x a day every 2-3 hours what should you do?

in10city
12-10-2008, 01:51 PM
Some people suggest that muscle protein synthesis is impaired when glycogen stores are low.. haven't seen any data to suggest this, but I've seen a well-respected website owner suggest this is an issue with natural bodybuilders who do lots of high volume training (specifically legs).
AMPk. I remember reading about something related. I'd have to go back and look though. But the premise is AMPk activation cuts into protein synthesis.

-Aaron-
12-10-2008, 01:51 PM
i see people saying WHY your not supposed to eat every three hours, but no one is saying WHAT you should do... Q: if your not supposed to eat 6x a day every 2-3 hours what should you do?

You aren't reading clearly...

We aren't telling people what to do because frankly, people will do whatever they want anyway... All we are saying is that, there is really no benefit in terms of thermodynamics eating 6 times a day.

-Aaron-
12-10-2008, 01:52 PM
AMPk. I remember reading about something related. I'd have to go back and look though. But the premise is AMPk activation cuts into protein synthesis.

If I recall, that is loosely controlled study...

Bioteknik
12-10-2008, 01:56 PM
AMPk. I remember reading about something related. I'd have to go back and look though. But the premise is AMPk activation cuts into protein synthesis.


yeah, I think that was it. Makes the waxy maize bros sound like they might actually be on to something lol.

JustLost
12-10-2008, 01:57 PM
I didn't see this post earlier but I agree with you regarding big and lean.

Q: How does someone get big and lean in the first place?

A: By eating lots and training lots (which involves high calorie totals which are hard to accomplish in few meals)

So the anecdotal testimony really does have some legitimate basis in reality it is just that we are applying it to something else that is not analogous (low calorie weight loss programs that are not very rigorous)

Yeah, that. But actually, I screwed up the point I was trying to make. I think a lot of people confuse the fact that something works with the idea that it's the ONLY thing that will work.


Yep and plus if eating something 1800 calories per day (6x) what is a 300 calorie meal going to look like?


Like sadness.

thebasil
12-10-2008, 02:00 PM
Can I just do some extreme stretching every 3 hours instead to tear down some muscle tissue for my body to repair and create some EPOC-like effects???

only if you're on a bcaa iv drip

in10city
12-10-2008, 02:16 PM
yeah, I think that was it. Makes the waxy maize bros sound like they might actually be on to something lol.
There were a few others related to reduced Atk, Myogenin, and IGF-1 too - and IIRC at least one was with well trained athletes. The exercise protocols may not be completely applicable though.

EDIT:
http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/99/3/950
http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/01260.2006v1

BenchRat
12-10-2008, 03:53 PM
You aren't reading clearly...

We aren't telling people what to do because frankly, people will do whatever they want anyway... All we are saying is that, there is really no benefit in terms of thermodynamics eating 6 times a day.

ok... then what deit would you benefit from (meal frequency)

The Solution
12-10-2008, 03:57 PM
ok... then what deit would you benefit from (meal frequency)

To ask an individual what diet they benefit from is going to vary from person to person, find what works best for you and stick with it. For some its 4 meals, for some its 6-7 meals.

Either way given you protein, EFA's , Fiber, Macros , calories and all that stuff is met at the end of the day you are fine.

lth
12-10-2008, 03:58 PM
Either way given you protein, EFA's , Fiber, Macros , calories and all that stuff is met at the end of the day you are fine.

This^^^

-Aaron-
12-10-2008, 04:00 PM
This^^^

Who has been preaching this from day friggin one? :D

The Solution
12-10-2008, 04:06 PM
Who has been preaching this from day friggin one? :D

Who do you think i got it from :D,
its 100% true, people do not realise it until they implement it into their diet regardless of the # of meals they eat in a given day.

-Aaron-
12-10-2008, 04:13 PM
Who do you think i got it from :D,
its 100% true, people do not realise it until they implement it into their diet regardless of the # of meals they eat in a given day.

It's true and let's be honest as I mentioned this to lth; who here will actually compete or even that even bodybuild... Really, 95% of this section actually bodybuild in hopes of competing, me, you, lth, who else that posts in this section that is legit?

justfyi
12-10-2008, 04:22 PM
The thermic effect of food is insignificant when looking at energy expenditure. Eating six small meals a day every 2-3 hours is not gonna have any substantial effect on your body fat or weight loss. I only think it was suggested in order to prevent people from gorging themselves at a single meal.

lth
12-10-2008, 04:25 PM
It's true and let's be honest as I mentioned this to lth; who here will actually compete or even that even bodybuild... Really, 95% of this section actually bodybuild in hopes of competing, me, you, lth, who else that posts in this section that is legit?

yeah, i think you and I and maybe a select other few are the only ones on here that compete.

lth
12-10-2008, 04:26 PM
Who has been preaching this from day friggin one? :D

lol, you bro.

lth
12-10-2008, 04:26 PM
Who has been preaching this from day friggin one? :D

lol, you bro.

in10city
12-10-2008, 04:26 PM
"Hey man! No need for supplements at 16. Just go with a good protein/creatine mono/fish oil/mv you should be good to go!"
-Dracoy

Now THAT is spectacular.

swordsmanzenn
12-10-2008, 04:45 PM
its highly effective to making me fat

TheWaffleIron
12-10-2008, 06:03 PM
lol I actually am being serious, however I go by results not scientific data

You can't completely refute the studies posted on the basis of your anecdotal evidence.


I was eating 4 times a day, and speed it up to six times a day, I am seeing more progress on eating six times a day as oppose to 4 times a day

This does not demonstrate that meal frequency speeds metabolic rate.


Glycogen replenishment is just important for bbers as it is for endurance athletes.

No, not postWO. Endurance exercise is going to deplete glycogen to a far greater extent than a "typical" (approximately one hour) weight training workout.

black02ep3
12-10-2008, 06:19 PM
It may have some psychological benefits, but in no way is eating every 3 hours going to have any biological benefits.

You might be right. I happen to think it reduces the size of my stomach (or minimally, the amount of food needed for me to feel full), so I actually can't eat as much as I used to before in one sitting.


how is that racist?

Are you talking about that reference to Ethiopians being skinny because they don't eat? Yeah I suppose it's not necessarily racist, like this guy's explanation below.


Africans as a race arent genetically skinny, so it was not racist.
However, as a joke, it was inconsiderate and ****.

I suppose it's also true that Ethiopian is not a race, so it's not like saying "black" people. Ah well, my mistake.

Sarge Jones
12-10-2008, 07:43 PM
Eating every 3 hours is also highly anti-social and you'll forever be known as "that guy" that always carries a cooler full of chicken breasts, brown rice, and cottage cheese.

Try living this way if you work in business, too. They will can your ass for taking so many breaks.