A couple of stickied threads on the myths of dieting have suggested that eating 5-6 small meals a day does not help lose weight... so why then do personal trainers and other nutritionists stand by this lifestyle? I admit it isn't that difficult to consume 5-6 meals per day, I usually have a snack that consists of a piece of fruit. Should I just include that piece of fruit in with my meals?
Nutrition question
- Thread starter Gator1
- Start date
Doc Bunkum
New member
You might like to look up the Warrior Diet, Gator.
"Our ancestors consumed food much less frequently and often had to subsist on one large meal per day, and thus from an evolutionary perspective, human beings were adapted to intermittent feeding rather than to grazing." (Mattson, M.P., PhD, Lancet 2005; 365:1978-80)
The premise of the WD is to eat one main meal - at night.
You might like to ask your personal trainer for his take on that.
"Our ancestors consumed food much less frequently and often had to subsist on one large meal per day, and thus from an evolutionary perspective, human beings were adapted to intermittent feeding rather than to grazing." (Mattson, M.P., PhD, Lancet 2005; 365:1978-80)
The premise of the WD is to eat one main meal - at night.
You might like to ask your personal trainer for his take on that.
Here's something you might find shocking.
9/10 personal trainers I wouldn't feel comfortable sending someone I didn't know to for fitness (and especially nutritional) advice... let alone a family member or friend.
It only takes some minor knowledge of physiology, physics, and biochemistry to understand the why in why it doesn't really matter.
Most trainers can't spell those words, let alone apply the science behind them.
Their advice comes from the same myths we all hear on a continual basis or from very shitty resources like magazines or books you'd find on the shelves of your local store.
9/10 personal trainers I wouldn't feel comfortable sending someone I didn't know to for fitness (and especially nutritional) advice... let alone a family member or friend.
It only takes some minor knowledge of physiology, physics, and biochemistry to understand the why in why it doesn't really matter.
Most trainers can't spell those words, let alone apply the science behind them.
Their advice comes from the same myths we all hear on a continual basis or from very shitty resources like magazines or books you'd find on the shelves of your local store.
I have never heard of that as I am sure many others have not either. let's just stick to the 5-6 meal plan vs. 3 meal plan like was originally asked. Thanks.You might like to look up the Warrior Diet, Gator.
"Our ancestors consumed food much less frequently and often had to subsist on one large meal per day, and thus from an evolutionary perspective, human beings were adapted to intermittent feeding rather than to grazing." (Mattson, M.P., PhD, Lancet 2005; 365:1978-80)
The premise of the WD is to eat one main meal - at night.
You might like to ask your personal trainer for his take on that.
Alright, I get the PT part, but certain nutritionists I know (one being a friend, another being a nutritionist I saw at my university) have stood by the same concept. No one has ever mentioned that warrior diet, so i'm not even going into that. So, I digress back to my original question... does it matter much? If it does nothing to jumpstart our metabolism, why do so many people stand by it?
I have got into it with high level college professors who are doctors. I have gotten into it with dietetics (who I'd trust over a nutritionist). In all cases, none have been able to provide me substantial evidence to support their claim that high meal frequency jump starts metabolism.
I've posted a handful of studies here.
To boot, let's look at the real world. I've dieted a lot of people down, including myself, and there's simply not a noticeable difference in results when calories and macros are accounted for.
Just b/c someone has a particular title doesn't make them infallible. In fact, in many cases in my experience, said title stands to hinder their willingness to think critically and learn.
I've posted a handful of studies here.
To boot, let's look at the real world. I've dieted a lot of people down, including myself, and there's simply not a noticeable difference in results when calories and macros are accounted for.
Just b/c someone has a particular title doesn't make them infallible. In fact, in many cases in my experience, said title stands to hinder their willingness to think critically and learn.
Doc Bunkum
New member
You might like to look up the qualifications of a nutritionist, Gator.
Basically, in the States, anyone can call themselves a nutritionist.
Because there is no legal constraint, anyone without any training at all in the field can call themselves a nutritionist.
As you see people peddling MLM juices do - or use other terms such as Weight Loss Coach.
A Dietitian, on the other hand, is a legally defined term and I'd trust their advice far above any doctors.
Basically, in the States, anyone can call themselves a nutritionist.
Because there is no legal constraint, anyone without any training at all in the field can call themselves a nutritionist.
As you see people peddling MLM juices do - or use other terms such as Weight Loss Coach.
A Dietitian, on the other hand, is a legally defined term and I'd trust their advice far above any doctors.
schokobaerchen
New member
I think the biggest point is that you have to keep on eating that proportion of calories your body needs (so for example for me that would be around 1350 calories per day to loose weigth) and I seriously do not believe that eating 3 or 6 meals affects your weigth loss, as long as you stick to the calories. So for some it migth be easier to eat 3 "big" meals with more calories and for other 6 meals with less calories each migth be easier.
What are your stats to make 1350 your caloric goal?
schokobaerchen
New member
I use a German website which is initiated by professionals.
As they have my weigth, length, age and physical activity they calculated my basal metabolic rate and substracted 500 calories to make me loosing 500g a week (if i stik to the calories).
I have one more question, if I may. I want to know how many calories I should be eating.
I am currently 246, with 32.2% body fat (down from 33.6). I am 5'8 and a 27 year old male. I work out twice a day if possible. mwf mornings I lift weights and the the evenings I do cardio as well as Tu/Tr mornings. When I do cardio, I usually do about 30 minutes keeping my heart rate around 150.
I calculated my BMR with my activity level and it said I should be eating 3800 calories to maintain my current weight. After buying a scale and actually taking the time to count my calories... I found that i am eating/drinking between 1700-1900 calories a day. I am eating/drinking around 100-130g of protein a day.
I am filled and satisfied when I do eat. I eat a piece of fruit when I am hungry as a snack and that will last me until lunch/dinner. Going about this way, will I achieve my goals down the line?
I am currently 246, with 32.2% body fat (down from 33.6). I am 5'8 and a 27 year old male. I work out twice a day if possible. mwf mornings I lift weights and the the evenings I do cardio as well as Tu/Tr mornings. When I do cardio, I usually do about 30 minutes keeping my heart rate around 150.
I calculated my BMR with my activity level and it said I should be eating 3800 calories to maintain my current weight. After buying a scale and actually taking the time to count my calories... I found that i am eating/drinking between 1700-1900 calories a day. I am eating/drinking around 100-130g of protein a day.
I am filled and satisfied when I do eat. I eat a piece of fruit when I am hungry as a snack and that will last me until lunch/dinner. Going about this way, will I achieve my goals down the line?
My formula puts your maintenance at between 3400 and 3900.
In general, I prefer to cut calories from maintenance by 25-35%.
That said, with some of my bigger clients I've been able to cut much steeper, 50% off maintenance at most. There are various reasons for this, but the primary one (for those who can psychologically handle such strictness) is that people carrying a ton of extra fat don't have to worry so much about muscle loss.
People who don't have all much fat to lose have to be a bit more careful. If I had your stats, I'd most likely start worrying more about muscle maintenance while dieting. That would mean I wouldn't cut much more than 30% from maintenance and I would put a premium on things such as protein intake.
1 - 1.5 grams per pound of goal weight would suffice. Extra aminos floating around the bloodstream are a good thing relative to muscle maintenance.
None of this is set and stone, but that's my general thoughts on the subject.
In general, I prefer to cut calories from maintenance by 25-35%.
That said, with some of my bigger clients I've been able to cut much steeper, 50% off maintenance at most. There are various reasons for this, but the primary one (for those who can psychologically handle such strictness) is that people carrying a ton of extra fat don't have to worry so much about muscle loss.
People who don't have all much fat to lose have to be a bit more careful. If I had your stats, I'd most likely start worrying more about muscle maintenance while dieting. That would mean I wouldn't cut much more than 30% from maintenance and I would put a premium on things such as protein intake.
1 - 1.5 grams per pound of goal weight would suffice. Extra aminos floating around the bloodstream are a good thing relative to muscle maintenance.
None of this is set and stone, but that's my general thoughts on the subject.