PDA

View Full Version : Truth to big meals???



Darcy Tucker
06-04-2006, 08:53 PM
Say my maintenance calorie level is 2500 but i eat 2000 calories with like 1. 5 big calorie dense meals will I still lose bodyfat?

Built
06-04-2006, 09:03 PM
Yes.

WORLD
06-04-2006, 10:15 PM
You know eating more often sort of turns your body into a furnace, so to say. Keeping your body's metabolism going will have it burning off fat, much better than if you were to eat only 2 or 3 meals.... So if I read your post correctly, because the number of your meals is unclear, your doing great.
You wrote 5 meals right?

Darcy Tucker
06-04-2006, 10:21 PM
Haha no I'm saying I ate 1.5 big meals today but stayed below my maintenance. I only got about a 100 g of protein which wasn't good etc..

I just wanted to know if there was a whole of truth to small meals throughout the day increasing your metabolism or if it is sheer garbage.

WORLD
06-04-2006, 10:32 PM
ohh ic.. wake up a little late did ya? haha. But to my knowledge it isnt a myth. I find this interesting:
Sumo wrestlers, apparently, starve themselves all day, and at night they eat one big meal and go right to bed. Since they starved their body all day, it thinks they're going to starve it again tomorrow, so it stores that meal as fat, to use it as energy the next day. Their goal of course is to gain fat, and be as heavy as possible.
Apply that to your eating one meal a day and I think it might help you understand why it is true.

Built
06-04-2006, 11:27 PM
There's no evidence that eating more frequently increases your metabolism.

Find me a peer-reviewed journal article that refutes my assertion and supports yours, and we'll talk.

Saint Patrick
06-04-2006, 11:30 PM
:lurk:

Slim Schaedle
06-04-2006, 11:49 PM
There's no evidence that eating more frequently increases your metabolism.

Find me a peer-reviewed journal article that refutes my assertion and supports yours, and we'll talk.
I saw this coming.

I'm too wrapped up studying for something I should have started on days ago to take part in the fun.

smalls
06-05-2006, 12:59 AM
ohh ic.. wake up a little late did ya? haha. But to my knowledge it isnt a myth. I find this interesting:
Sumo wrestlers, apparently, starve themselves all day, and at night they eat one big meal and go right to bed. Since they starved their body all day, it thinks they're going to starve it again tomorrow, so it stores that meal as fat, to use it as energy the next day. Their goal of course is to gain fat, and be as heavy as possible.
Apply that to your eating one meal a day and I think it might help you understand why it is true.


Sumo wrestlers often eat in excess of 20,000 cals. THAT is why they gain weight, not because it comes in one meal and not because it's before bed. Calories in VS Calories out. When it comes to WEIGHT loss or gain there is no way around it.

Diomedes
06-05-2006, 03:31 AM
While I'm personally leaning towards the conclusion that smaller meals dont speed up metabolism compared to less frequent larger meals, I think there are other benefits to spreading out your consumption across the day. Smaller amounts of protein every couple of hours is probably going to maintain muscle better than a huge amount eaten after a day of catabolism, in my opinion. I'd also think that consumption throughout the day would give you a more steady stream of energy, rather than fluctuating between starving and weak, and getting a massive energy boost all at once. Finally, I dont like eating til I feel uncomfortably bloated, spreading the food out avoids that.

Slim Schaedle
06-05-2006, 04:37 AM
I'd also think that consumption throughout the day would give you a more steady stream of energy, rather than fluctuating between starving and weak, and getting a massive energy boost all at once.

Relative to carbohydrates, that's why we have a process called glycogenesis.

An empty stomach is not an indicator of low glycogen stores, or even low amounts of plasma fatty acids that would undergo oxidation for energy.

WORLD
06-05-2006, 08:25 AM
Sumo wrestlers often eat in excess of 20,000 cals. THAT is why they gain weight, not because it comes in one meal and not because it's before bed. Calories in VS Calories out. When it comes to WEIGHT loss or gain there is no way around it.

So you completely disagree with what I said? I just read that they do this, I don't know if it's true. What do you think would happen to their bodies if they starved all day and ate a high calorie meal before bed, though? The Sumo's use "starvation alert" to their advantage.

And Built I dont have an article, it was in a book I was reading called "Extreme Muscle Enhancement" by Carlon M. Colker,MD FASN
I will look through it and try to find my argument, just hold tight :read:

WORLD
06-05-2006, 08:38 AM
"Our food selection and the way we eat affects our metabolism; some foods and methods raise your metabolism, while others slow it to a crawl......... Frequent protein based meals will actually help you burn fat by lifting your basal metabolic rate, irrespective to total caloric ingestion. The process of the body burning food for energy is known as the "thermic effect of food," or TEF. The TEF for protein, carbohydrates and fats are quite different from one another. Since most people eat mixed meals, the total TEF is usually an average of these components. When combined in roughly equal proportions, the TEF of protein, carbohydrates and fats together elevates the basal metabolism by roughly 10-15 percent"

So it is more frequent meals containing high amounts of protein that will speed up your metabolism.

Slim Schaedle
06-05-2006, 10:48 AM
"Our food selection and the way we eat affects our metabolism; some foods and methods raise your metabolism, while others slow it to a crawl......... Frequent protein based meals will actually help you burn fat by lifting your basal metabolic rate, irrespective to total caloric ingestion. The process of the body burning food for energy is known as the "thermic effect of food," or TEF. The TEF for protein, carbohydrates and fats are quite different from one another. Since most people eat mixed meals, the total TEF is usually an average of these components. When combined in roughly equal proportions, the TEF of protein, carbohydrates and fats together elevates the basal metabolism by roughly 10-15 percent"

So it is more frequent meals containing high amounts of protein that will speed up your metabolism.
While the body does require more ATP to digest proteins, I believe Belial (maybe Holto) worked out the math and the difference was so minute it would have equaled 1 additional pound fat (for example) lost over the course of something like 3 months.

TRITON
06-05-2006, 12:10 PM
Personally, I like smaller, more frequent meals because it tricks me into thinking I'm not so hungry if I'm putting something into my stomach every few hours. If I only ate 2-3 huge meals a day spaced several hours apart I think I'd always be craving something. That's just me.

MantiXX
06-05-2006, 12:26 PM
Noob here... So be gentle...LOL.... :hello:

So, are you all talking about caloric intake or protein 'uptake'?

Cause I would think that from a BB standpoint, getting 200 grams of protein in one meal before bed (while starving all day) would not help build muscle as good as spacing that out throughout the day and night?

I would think it would help with 'fat' gaining, since a large portion of the nutrients would be turned to fat once the bodies needs were met.

Also, there's the digestion issue and the waste of nutrients/food... I just dont think you can digest that much in one 'sitting'.. (from personal experience - 39 yrs old and still going)....

Anyways, interesting none the less...

Peace out...

smalls
06-05-2006, 12:36 PM
So you completely disagree with what I said? I just read that they do this, I don't know if it's true. What do you think would happen to their bodies if they starved all day and ate a high calorie meal before bed, though? The Sumo's use "starvation alert" to their advantage.

And Built I dont have an article, it was in a book I was reading called "Extreme Muscle Enhancement" by Carlon M. Colker,MD FASN
I will look through it and try to find my argument, just hold tight :read:


The body doesnt go into "starvation mode" in 24 hour periods, that would be a very bad thing if it did. I'm sure Sumo wrestlers DO do what you stated, it's just that they gain weight due to the total amount of calories taken in, NOT because they go to sleep right after.

There are lots of books and "sources" that have and will preach what you are saying. That doesnt make it true. As built stated, peer reviewed studies dont back up these claims (I'm almost sure there have been some studies cited here before)


As i've stated before, there are plenty of reasons to eat frequently. "Stoking your metabolic furnace" is certainly not one of them.

ArchAngel777
06-05-2006, 01:39 PM
As i've stated before, there are plenty of reasons to eat frequently. "Stoking your metabolic furnace" is certainly not one of them.

Yup... Smaller gut to name one... Rarely bloated...

Built
06-05-2006, 01:48 PM
"Our food selection and the way we eat affects our metabolism; some foods and methods raise your metabolism, while others slow it to a crawl......... Frequent protein based meals will actually help you burn fat by lifting your basal metabolic rate, irrespective to total caloric ingestion. The process of the body burning food for energy is known as the "thermic effect of food," or TEF. The TEF for protein, carbohydrates and fats are quite different from one another. Since most people eat mixed meals, the total TEF is usually an average of these components. When combined in roughly equal proportions, the TEF of protein, carbohydrates and fats together elevates the basal metabolism by roughly 10-15 percent"

So it is more frequent meals containing high amounts of protein that will speed up your metabolism.

Yep, that's the rumour.

Pity it's unsubstantiated.

Slim Schaedle
06-05-2006, 02:56 PM
Also, there's the digestion issue and the waste of nutrients/food... I just dont think you can digest that much in one 'sitting'


Simply put (very simply put), this is incorrect.



Digestion is a pretty broad term and involves many factors.

WORLD
06-05-2006, 02:59 PM
The body doesnt go into "starvation mode" in 24 hour periods, that would be a very bad thing if it did. I'm sure Sumo wrestlers DO do what you stated, it's just that they gain weight due to the total amount of calories taken in, NOT because they go to sleep right after.


Im sure there are different extremes to starvation alert, and this one is minor. I would imagine your body would react to you starving it all day, then feeding it a large meal at night, by storing it as fat to use as energy for the next.

------



Yep, that's the rumour.

Pity it's unsubstantiated.

Hmm, I guess someone with over 20 years of experience practicing the the wellness of the human body, and who is regarded as one of the world's foremost experts on human performance is obviously wrong. But hey ya learn something new every day right.

Built
06-05-2006, 03:04 PM
Im sure there are different extremes to starvation alert, and this one is minor. I would imagine your body would react to you starving it all day, then feeding it a large meal at night, by storing it as fat to use as energy for the next.
Indeed. Imagine. And it's a good place to start. But you do have to TEST the hypothesis. And when you fail to reject the null, well, trust your data. That's what the good folks at Pubmed do ...


Hmm, I guess someone with over 20 years of experience practicing the the wellness of the human body, and who is regarded as one of the world's foremost experts on human performance is obviously wrong. But hey ya learn something new every day right.

He is most obviously wrong.

There have been numerous studies refuting this claim.

The body DOES heat up every time we eat. The problem is that the degree to which the body heats up is comensurate with the size of the meal.

Small meal -> small heat
Large meal -> large heat

Net difference in caloric expenditure: null.

Sorry.

betastas
06-05-2006, 03:04 PM
I recall someone posted a pubmed study about two meals daily versus four or five. The conclusion was that the TEF was greater in the larger meals (IIRC) and that in the end the net difference was smaller than the margin of error in the test: Result: Eating two big meals a day versus five small meals of the same calories will have a minute difference on your metabolic rate.

This is all from memory, I don't have the study saved.

Built
06-05-2006, 03:05 PM
betastas, you and I are remembering the same study.

betastas
06-05-2006, 03:08 PM
:thumbup:

ArchAngel777
06-05-2006, 04:09 PM
This is why I think fitness people tout 6 meals per day. Generally when people go more than 3 hours without a meal the hunger urge increases with time. When it comes time for dinner, people shuv all sorts of food in their faces and then litterally stuff themselves before that even realize that ate too much.

So generally speaking I would say that eating smaller meals generally allows more successfull weight loss, but that is due to total calories ingested being fewer, not the fallacy that smaller meals increases your metabolism.

Sometimes people have good advice but the wrong reason for it. I would generally support more meals per day if you have enough to make a meal out of. But I don't think this 7 - 9 meals crap per day that some people to the extreme due is any good. I call that bondage and not the good kind... Wait, is there any good bondage? Not really.

smalls
06-05-2006, 08:17 PM
Agreed with above. Except I eat 8-9 meals a day and i'm still a bloated mess all day, it just makes it easier.

Saint Patrick
06-06-2006, 12:01 AM
Say my maintenance calorie level is 2500 but i eat 2000 calories with like 1. 5 big calorie dense meals will I still lose bodyfat?

To be accurate, you'll lose WEIGHT. Whether you lose muscle or fat depends on protein intake and training in addition to total calories.

Beef101
06-06-2006, 01:08 AM
this is article is vaguely helpfull.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12949360&itool=iconfft&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum

"We found no clear indication that it would be more favorable to ingest few larger daytime meals than smaller meals throughout the 24-h period. The body seems to be able to buffer small differences in meal size and timing provided energy balance is maintained."

however i havent really read it, perhaps someone might find it interesting...

ddegroff
06-06-2006, 07:55 AM
This is why I think fitness people tout 6 meals per day. Generally when people go more than 3 hours without a meal the hunger urge increases with time. When it comes time for dinner, people shuv all sorts of food in their faces and then litterally stuff themselves before that even realize that ate too much.

So generally speaking I would say that eating smaller meals generally allows more successfull weight loss, but that is due to total calories ingested being fewer, not the fallacy that smaller meals increases your metabolism.

Sometimes people have good advice but the wrong reason for it. I would generally support more meals per day if you have enough to make a meal out of. But I don't think this 7 - 9 meals crap per day that some people to the extreme due is any good. I call that bondage and not the good kind... Wait, is there any good bondage? Not really.

Agreed.

I tell my clients to eat smaller meals throughout the day. I do this so they don't over eat and go way over there goal cals, because they were SOOO hungry.

Built
06-06-2006, 08:56 AM
One thing to keep in mind wrt small meals and hunger control - for those of us on lower calories (for example, many women cut on sub-1500 calories), many find they do better with 4-5 meals than 6 "snacks". Seems to "stick" better. But 3 meals spaces them TOO far apart and the hungries may be too hard to control.

Holto
06-06-2006, 04:17 PM
Scroll down, 4 studies...

http://www.wannabebigforums.com/showthread.php?t=66713&highlight=meal+frequency

Slim:

I worked out the caloric implications of TEF and my results were as you posted.

Slim Schaedle
06-06-2006, 07:25 PM
Scroll down, 4 studies...

http://www.wannabebigforums.com/showthread.php?t=66713&highlight=meal+frequency

Slim:

I worked out the caloric implications of TEF and my results were as you posted.
cool...wanna make sure credit goes to where it is due

TechMetalMan
06-07-2006, 03:06 AM
This is why I think fitness people tout 6 meals per day. Generally when people go more than 3 hours without a meal the hunger urge increases with time. When it comes time for dinner, people shuv all sorts of food in their faces and then litterally stuff themselves before that even realize that ate too much.

So generally speaking I would say that eating smaller meals generally allows more successfull weight loss, but that is due to total calories ingested being fewer, not the fallacy that smaller meals increases your metabolism.

Sometimes people have good advice but the wrong reason for it. I would generally support more meals per day if you have enough to make a meal out of. But I don't think this 7 - 9 meals crap per day that some people to the extreme due is any good. I call that bondage and not the good kind... Wait, is there any good bondage? Not really.


That is how I have always looked at it.

Too bad there is no way to tell my friends this- or that you don't need cardio to lose weight :bash:

Vapour Trails
06-07-2006, 09:58 AM
Eating smaller meals more often is certainly a better scenario than big meals infrequently for hunger control, sanity and not being weighed down by your food. You guys get far too hung up on the minutia of the scientific evidence for one thing or another and ignore the everyday common sense aspects that clearly indicate which is better. Starving all day then pigging out with a 2500 calorie meal is stupid, regardless of whether it leads to more or less fat loss.

Holto
06-07-2006, 01:01 PM
You guys get far too hung up on the minutia of the scientific evidence for one thing or another and ignore the everyday common sense aspects that clearly indicate which is better.

You mean like when you get asked for evidence you can't produce???

Get a life.

:thumbup: