4 ms·
Doesn't "5-6 small meals throughout the day" contradict the suggestions in this article, which other folks here have concurred worked for them? Would the people
by nonrecursive 18y ago
Doesn't "5-6 small meals throughout the day" contradict the suggestions in this article, which other folks here have concurred worked for them? Would the people who got good results from eating a large breakfast and then eating smaller lunches and dinners have done better using your suggestions? Is "conducive to weight loss among the obese" too narrow a criterion for a healthy diet? Are your suggestions appropriate for different lifestyles? Is a diet that worked in circumstances that I'm not in actually best for me?
I'm not actually asking you all these questions, they're just meant to illustrate my continued warines and weariness over varied and contradictory health advice. (But if you knew the answers that would be awesome)
- gaius 18y agoWell, "big" is relative... Let's say I am targetting 2400 calories a day (YMMV), that is 6 meals of 400 calories. If I had 600 calories at breakfast and 200 mid-morning (this corresponds to say, a pot of yoghurt and an apple) I'm still operating within "normal" bounds. The aim here is to keep your energy supply as level as possible. If you have a spike in energy, your body will react by storing it as fat. If you have a dip, unfortunately your body won't immediately turn to fat, it will react by slowing your overall metabolism and you'll feel tired and lethargic. Remember that for your body fat is a precious resource to be be hoarded as much as possible. Eating a small dinner is a relative thing because traditionally (in the West at least) the evening meal is large, 400-500 calories of good food is plenty. In the evenings, because you are not going to eat all night, slow-digesting foods are best. Diets fail because they are unnatural, similarly people get fat in the first place because they way they are eating is unnatural. Basically I am advocating using high-quality modern ingredients to replicate the nutrition preferred by our ancestors, not "as a diet" but as a lifestyle. If someone does this, in the right quantities for their metabolism (this can be determined as you say, experimentally), they can't help but be basically healthy. We're all the same species, after all.
- nonrecursive 18y agoThank you, this is very helpful.
- gaius 18y agoAlso - 3 meals a day is not natural. It is an artefact of needing to fit eating into a "working day". Some cultures go for 2 meals a day which is even worse. Our ancestors ate when they were hungry, and stopped when they were full.
- nonrecursive 18y agoBy the way, have you read or seen The Road to Wellville? Hilarious satire of obsession with health. T.C. Boyle in general makes for a good read. A lot of his stories are written from the perspective of humans being just another animal, with often ridiculous behaviors and compulsions.
- gaius 18y agoI'll check him out :-)
- eru 18y agoOh, humans can go without food for days and then eat a whole lot of stuff in a short time. Continuous food supply is a very recent comfort.
- gaius 18y agoYes, of course we can, but the result of doing that will be to optimize your body for doing that. Slow metabolism, lots of fat. Great for survival, not so great for the beach ;-)
- steveplace 18y agoYou want your biggest meal to be in the morning. It kickstarts your metabolism and your productivity should improve. The best information out there probably comes from "The Abs Diet" people at Men's Health. Note that they hate the word diet and this is more like a guideline. Also, consult with a nutritionist if you want specific needs (you can get free consultations through work, school, church, etc).