4 ms·

The empirical data that I've read and used was to... - count calories, and ensure that I maintain a calorie deficit (which is the only way to burn body fat).

• kingkongreveng_ 17y ago
  > eat frequently The human body is made to run off a gas tank of fat reserves, not to be tethered to an extension cord of continuous eating. Eating every couple hours is historically impossible, and just on that basis one can reason it's likely maladaptive. You eat a proper meal, insulin levels spike to put the energy in fat and glycogen, insulin levels drop, then you switch over to running on the fat and glycogen. You are not built to always stay in the "post-meal" state of elevated insulin and fat storage. There is no basis to the idea that eating frequently boosts metabolism. I think the practice really has origins in the body building community where they want somewhat elevated insulin levels in order to pack on mass. Body builders pack on fat along with muscle and then shed the fat later for competition. Some recent studies indicate that the same life extending benefits of calorie restriction can be had by eating only every other day. The point is to spend much time with low insulin levels. > I've lost 25 pounds of body fat and gained 7 pounds of muscle mass in the last 14 weeks using this approach. Notice how you never hear from people who have stayed thin for years by counting calories. The research indicates it just doesn't work. Even in the short term we only get these anecdotes of success and the data indicates it's not very effective.
  • dboyd 17y ago
    I'm not sure I can add much to the argument of meal frequency. A lot of the information I rely on has come from the body building community, since that is where I get a lot of my information (although, I'm not a body builder). I accept the fact that there are many different schools of thought on the subject, each with their own sets of "empirical evidence." Not surprisingly, I tend to champion the one that worked for me. My change from 'three squares' to 4-5 smaller meals a day has had quite a positive impact on my health and my lifestyle. As such, I'm not about to give it up. I really like never being really hungry. (note that I define a meal as 'eating something', even if that something is simply a banana.) > Notice how you never hear from people who have stayed thin for years by counting calories. No, I didn't notice. In fact, a lot of the people I know that have stayed fit for years have used calorie counting as part of their tool-set. The author of the book linked in my above comment is one of those people. However, that's just my experience. Like the author of the original author stated, counting calories is used more as an educational tool than a micro-management tool. It helps people understand their own personal energy (im)balance. That may well be the crux of your point though. I find it interesting that the research indicates something doesn't work that I have seen work with much success. I've always thought that calorie counting makes sense, since "you can't manage what you don't measure."
  • lg 17y ago
    Eating every couple hours is not historically impossible. The gatherer end of the hunter-gatherer duo usually do not have to search far for food. You don't need to guess at this, we have records of how the !kung san lived and continue to live. Besides, people get really hungry if they don't eat for long stretches between meals, what to do about that? Turns out if you have a couple pieces of fresh fruit, every couple hours, it will suppress the hunger and you also won't gain fat. This is because the body handles the sugar differently than more complex sugars, and also because fresh fruit is more filling than a calorically-equivalent ball of white rice. Our primate cousins like the chimps are mostly-frugivores too, by the by.
    • kingkongreveng_ 17y ago
      > people get really hungry if they don't eat for long stretches between meals If you follow garbage diet advice and eat a bran muffin, banana, and skim milk, yeah, you'll be starving two hours after eating. For breakfast I had four eggs scrambled in butter and full fat yogurt with blueberries. I'm just getting hungry now, 12 hours later. > the hunter-gatherer duo usually do not have to search far for food Are you kidding? They walk miles and miles. > !kung san I don't think the san illustrate your point, but in any case they are a bad model. They are stunted and generally unhealthy, scraping by on marginal desert land. They were forced off the good land. There really aren't any representative modern day hunter gatherers. There are only historical accounts.