151 Comments

1. Methuselah - Pay Now Live Later
   

   Very nice Mike – always good to see a myth debunked with a detailed analysis.
2. BB
   

   EXCELLENT ARTICLE…..THIS IS AN INCREDIBLE BLOG…
3. DR
   

   I never really bought that “Eat 6x A Day” argument either.

   Sure, there is a thermic effect to the digestive process. Sure, your metabolism elevates every time you eat, but:

   Are we supposed to burn more calories (through digestion) by eating 6 small meals instead of 3 larger meals.

   This theory ignores how the macronutrient profile of each meal influences metabolism.

   This theory ignores the fact that at the same time your metabolism increases due to digestion, you are eating additional calories.

   This theory ignores the fact that portion size is already an issue with most people. What are the odds that 6 mini meals actually evolve to become 6 normal size meals

   Thanks for the references

   Keep up the good work
4. Mike OD
   

   Most theories in mainstream media ignore the total picture of how the human body operates…but they are usually manipulated and narrowed down to small window thinking only to promote an end product (like eating more or needing supplements). With enough specific research control you can prove any conclusion you want to get ahead of time after all. Personally I think telling people to eat more often, in a world that is already suffering from obesity is one of the dumbest things ever (once you take into consideration on how people in the real world eat all day long…as generally they will not be able to control their calories, make unwise choices on the go in the effort to fit another meal/snack in and never be in calorie deficit to see any weight loss….plus that doesn’t even take into account the damage towards increasing insulin resistance factors when you look at all the snacks and food people eat in general).
5. TonyK
   

   Great article. I can’t believe what a tremendous resource this website is!

   Quick follow-up question though. There seem to be quite a few articles that tout the cholesterol profile benefits of eating 6 meals/day vs. 3 meals/day. For example..

   http://www.doctoryourself.com/nibbling.html

   This was the main reason why I ate multiple meals per day for the past year or so. And this is just one of many articles available from doing a quick search online.

   For the past few weeks, I’ve been following an elementary form of IF whereby I fast for about 15 hours by skipping breakfast and eating a relatively late lunch. I do believe I am personally experiencing some of the benefits of this type of eating plan listed in this blog, but my mind is still bothered by all the stuff I’ve read about the cholesterol profile benefits of eating multiple meals throughout the day. Any thoughts? Thanks!
6. Mike OD
   

   Tony – Cholesterol is a whole another monster in itself to debate and talk about (you could probably Google “cholesterol myths” and get plenty of reading on that as well, or Dr Eades blog is a good place to research cholesterol as well)! Insulin levels/insulin resistance is more a factor there IMO than meal frequency. If you eat more whole real foods, control insulin, improve insulin sensitivity then really your cholesterol should be in a healthy range. Smaller bursts of insulin are present with smaller meals is the take home point they make, but it certainly neglects a bigger picture. Although like i said above, a randomized approach to eating large meals is not going to help insulin resistance, but more a planned approach such as IF with meals will.

   from that site I took interesting note to the following:
   “And, no question, from these nibbling studies, it appears that the reason why the organism improves is because of a return to homeostasis. This is borne out in many instances by the reduction in insulin and the changes in cortisol.”

   and if you want to talk about homeostasis, then IF and the feast-famine model is certainly a big part of it:
   Effect of intermittent fasting and refeeding on insulin action in healthy men
   “In conclusion, the findings that intermittent fasting increases insulin sensitivity on the whole body level as well as in adipose tissue support the view that cycles of feast and famine are important as an initiator of thrifty genes leading to improvements in metabolic function. We suggest that a fasting-induced increase in circulating adiponectin is at least partly responsible for this finding. The change in adiponectin, together with changes in plasma leptin with fasting, underlines the important role of the adipose tissue in recognizing the oscillation in energy stores. Finally, the data indicate that intermittent fasting and physical training may increase insulin action via different mechanisms because muscle energy stores did not change with the present fasting intervention.”
   http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/99/6/2128
7. Caleb - Double Your Gains
   

   Mike,

   You’re totally right brotha! I used to believe this lie as well, and I had the opposite feeling of “hungry” all day — I felt STUFFED all day long.

   It seemed like every time I was turning around I was either eating, or (worse) preparing food to eat… and my stomach always felt bloated … gas and all that crap.

   Now that I do IF, I haven’t felt better. I stay “on my game” all day for my business, a little hunger every now and then which I actually embrace and makes me look forward to my evening meal.

   Then I endulge in a great feast, break the fast, and when the lethargy comes, I embrace it too because I’m relaxing, winding down for the day and getting ready to rest.

   It’s really great

   Talk soon!
   Caleb

   P.S. I did a post on this too: http://doubleyourgains.com/the-6-meals-a-day-myth althought I didn’t use any of the studies you gave in your post — I think I’ll have to edit mine to link to yours as a “source”
8. Mike OD
   

   Caleb – Great article, you beat me to the punch! So true how many people have bought into this. Most of us probably started long long ago with bodybuilding magazine/articles (before there ever was an internet) and trying to get “huge”. How this all of the sudden transitioned into the secret and revolutionary way to burn fat I will never know….as it was probably all done in some supplement company marketing department and not a lab. I laugh (and cry) even more when companies sell that we need to eat more meals to keep the metabolism fired up, yet they sell shakes which are absorbed and digested with no effort. The whole TEF factor is more popular to use to sell diet books than actual results….although like you mentioned, TEF of 1800 calories is still the same…whether it is in 3 meals or 6.
9. fitness guru
   

   Good read!
10. Elizabeth
    

    As always, great information with the studies to back it up. Thanks for your dedication to the truth!
11. gMoney
    

    I second the really interesting read. I’ve heard many differing opinions on this topic, and I’ve got to say…you’ve backed yours up with some quite valid proof.

    I say we send this up to MythBusters and see what they make of it.
12. butsh
    

    What about the following scenario :

    lets assume you eat 1 meal a day and that is at 3:00 pm ,
    and the other guy eats 4 meals a day .
    “Both same calorie count”

    the first would put his body in a state of lack of food and thus the mind would think that its in a state of hunger , thus lowering the metabolism to preserve energy for later use . “Like in Famine cases”

    the second will tell his mind that food is available all the time thus not putting his body in that state.

    result is burning more calories for the same food intake.

    

    Ben Reply:
    

    You use the word “famine” too lightly in this context. Overweight people can not be famished, they are fat – the very reason people get fat is because the body likes to store energy for later – its kinda lazy like that. Why would the body then sabotage itself by slowing down metabolism when it has all that lovely blubber to use?!

    Think about it: The gene pool that has survived to present day came from humans that could survive eating berries, plants, water and the occasional meats and walk miles a day to watering holes and whilst hunting.

    If these humans simply went state of starvation because they couldn’t eat 4 or 6 times a day, the human race would probably be extinct! Imagine a race living through a brutal winter if they went into famine mode every four hours…..

    This is not even to mention the fact that after a big meal you have energy “dripping” into your system for several hours afterwards.

    There are but two states: fed and unfed. Not fed or famished. The unfed state raises HGH and adrenalin and enhances mental acuity.

    Through IF and heavy basic weight training I have gone from 205 lbs @ 20% bodyfat to 191 lbs @ 10% bodyfat. Years of eating 6 x a day simply left me fatter!

    

    "2 Meal" Mike Reply:
    

    Well done Ben!
13. Mandy
    

    Great article! Its so relieveing to know I dont have to eat if I dont want to, and I can actually enjoy my dinner now without feeling guilty if I eat too much.

    Regarding IF, I like to wake up in the morning and have some coffee or a piece of fruit as my blood sugar is really low, as I get jittery in the middle of the night due to my dips in blood sugar. I guess this would mean I am breaking the fast, even though I dont eat a real meal until 1pm?
14. The 6 Small Meals a Day Myth — Healthoid
    [...] to Mike over at TheIFLife, eating more meals does not lead to favorable results. “* There is no real truth to accelerated thermogenesis from increased meal frequency (with [...]
15. Mike OD
    

    gMoney – Ha. I don’t think it’s sexy enough to be on Mythbusters….personally I enjoy when they blow up things anyways.

    butsh – “thus lowering the metabolism”, that right there is another myth I could write (and will) about. People are so worried about starvation, but that is not going to kick in overnight or by missing a meal. That has to do with total calories and doesn’t even take into account low periods followed by reloads (feast/famine model). Figure pros do it all the time to lean out, as it works. The goal is not to have people starving themselves by any means, food is important….the question is whether meal frequency (when calories are the same) is important. If a person is going to go into starvation mode on X calories with one meal….they will go into it with X calories in 6 meals….it’s still about calories.

    Mandy – Guilt should never be a part of our eating lifestyle. Now moderation and making healthy choices is of course what we should focus on for our body to function properly. As IF is not a pass to dive through the bakery window and eat everything in sight once a day. As far as low blood sugar, it’s most likely related to insulin resistance factors and possible low morning cortisol output. I would work on lifestyle issues like relaxation (not stressing out), more exercise (to help improve muscle insulin sensitivity), take some fish oil, get to bed early (staying up late all the time will mess up hormonal responses). Don’t worry about breaking fasts, eat to keep your blood sugar stable first with healthy whole food choices like some fruit. Work on the insulin resistance factors first and then we can worry about IF and blood sugar levels, as the goal is not to make you go hypoglycemic.
16. Christoph Dollis
    

    the first would /i> put his body in a state of lack of food and thus the mind would think that its in a state of hunger , thus lowering the metabolism to preserve energy for later use . “Like in Famine cases”

    the second will tell his mind that food is available all the time thus not putting his body in that state.

    result is burning more calories for the same food intake.

    The third word in your comment, “would”, is the problem.

    Did by any chance you try reading this post and the summaries of the studies contained within before you wrote that? Insofar as they indicate the exact opposite of what you propose, rather than just say it… why not offer some proof, any proof, that your position is correct?

    Just asserting the contrary case without evidence is hardly convincing.

    As they say on the internet:

    Epic fail.
17. Christoph Dollis
    

    On the other hand if I may play devil’s advocate… you would use calories jumping in and out of the car to drive to 7-11 in the middle of the day, so that could result in more weight loss.

    Colour me sceptical.
18. Kellen
    

    Actual scientific studies instead of just “pull it out of your ear” claims? Nice. Thank you for the facts!
19. Mandy
    

    Thanks Mike, I always wondered if I was insulin resistance. Hopefully your new e-article will cover some of this…………if not, do you have and suggestions on good reads regarding this.
20. Roelant
    

    wow, this article is a sign. I’m test running a diet plan for a friend who’s meal delivery system is much like nutrisystem, but more based on the zone. Having practiced IF for the past six months and eating more of an EF/Paleo lifestyle, the difference is so apparent. eating 5 (or 6) meals a day just sucks. It really just sucks. I’m shovelling food into my mouth when I’m not hungry, my body is all %#$ed up from sugar crashing. and my gym performance tanked….I know you post on the x-fit forum Mike, so I know you understand when I’m a bit more then disappointed when my benchmark WOD time sucks….
21. Mike OD
    

    Christoph – don’t forget about sleeping…a great way to burn fat.

    Kellen – Imagine that, science….although I bet somewhere at some point they (supplement companies that is) did a scientific study to try and prove 6x burns more calories…but I will be if you look at the actual data it will show they ate less than 3x (as you also have the human factor about relying on people counting calories…yeah we know how that goes).

    Mandy – you might enjoy this post and the original longer interview/article it came from (link is on the post): http://www.theiflife.com/2008/07/11/insulin-and-sugar-the-one-hormone-you-need-to-control-and-the-one-enemy-you-need-to-avoid/

    Roelant – Funny how the body will tell you what works for you. Some respond well to the Zone, many don’t. Personally I want a life outside of eating, so Zone doesn’t (and never did) work for me. Good to know research is now showing that it doesn’t matter. Zone probably works best for very very active people (athletes), the rest of us average folk can eat other ways. That and if your performance suffers, then obviously it’s not right for you. There is no one set way to fit all….so it definitely takes individual tweaking to determine the optimal eating formula for performance, sanity and life long sustainability.
22. Liam Dougherty Springer
    

    Way to keep it real brother I am about to link a buddy of mine to this who is convinced I will seriousely harm myself through IF….. LOL
23. Andreas Wolf
    

    What really wonders me is the fact that EVERY <> crab contains this “scientific truth”.

    Maybe this is compareable to the recommendation that one should not eat spinach because it contains so much iron. This was a measurement error of a laboratory. For decades every EXPERT gave this recommondation.

    Then finally another lab stooped to correct this and published its figures.

    I am totally against censorship but wouldn’t it be wonderful if such crab would not live in the media for ages? One only has to image the severe damage these kind of information causes.
24. Fri, Nov 7th – CrossFit Ireland - Forging Elite Fitness
    [...] times to comments. Eating More meals does not speed up your metabolism – The IF [...]
25. Mike OD
    

    Liam – IF is always going to be looked at in some negative fashion because it goes against everything that is said in the media and by doctors in general. All you need to tell people is that it works for you and they can try it if they like. I find it funny though people who usually end up telling me how I am doing things all the wrong way, are in much worse shape than me…..if that’s the case I’ll stick with the wrong way then.

    Andreas – “One only has to image the severe damage these kind of information causes.”…..sadly looking around at the obesity and degenerative disease rates….plenty of damage has been done. Time to start moving in the other direction and questioning everything that is being told.
26. George
    

    What about a scenario where you eat a higher carbohydrate ration, say 40%. 3 bigger meals would contain an excess of carbs (and calories) which would be stored as fat. The 6 smaller meals would contain fewer carbs per meal, which would be more likely to be used for energy during the time between meals.

    I agree that the principle behind IF-life is less carb and more protein and fat. But the 6 smaller meals crowd are normally eating a higher carb ration, so I think the way it is structured is correct for that ratio, and the same amount of carbs over 3 meals would be more likely to lead to fat storage.
27. Lake
    

    http://health.msn.com/health-topics/diabetes/slideshow.aspx?cp-documentid=100202855&imageindex=7

    Yet another article insisting that eating every few hours is the healthiest option, this one actually directed at controlling blood sugar (1 of 8 suggestions).

    I’m starting to doubt the validity of these kinds of articles once I see advice like this, and I was wondering what your response would be to the claim made by the above link.
28. Dr Dan
    

    Ive always thought that that six meals a day was rubbish. I thought it was just that people would feel that they are eating all day and so the wait until the next meal is not as long and so psychologically comforting.
29. Christoph Dollis
    

    “I agree that the principle behind IF-life is less carb and more protein and fat.”

    Is it? I thought it was primarily “intermittent fasting”. Call me crazy.

    “Yet another article insisting that eating every few hours is the healthiest option”

    So… your response to 3 scientific studies is to link to some doctor in an article by Men’s Health, a glossy magazine offering supplement ads, which many theorize is where the craze of eating 6-8 “meals” per day originated… is to quote a 1-sentence recommendation by some doctor, linking to another Men’s health story with, again, another 1-sentence: “Eat regularly — approximately every 3 hours. This allows you to eat smaller meals without becoming hungry.”

    Hey, I think eating frequently can work as Mike has said, yet it also has the problems he’s said, including that it’s hard to eat 6-8 small meals and feel satisfied at any time, so you end up with several medium and maybe one large meal in there…

    Also, do you really think we evolved in such a way as to be unable to function properly unless we ate every 3 hours? How would that be beneficial?

    Here’s the thing. If you have a large meal, your insulin is going to spike naturally. It could spike high if the meal is high in carbohydrate. But if throughout the rest of the day, you’re not eating your insulin will drop a lot. And the body has mechanisms to keep blood sugar available for times without food.

    We and practically other large non-grazing animal would die otherwise, or be at a severe disadvantage.

    What’s the main reason for my belief we aren’t meant to graze constantly? We stand on 2-legs. How, pre-refrigerator, would people eat every 2-3 hours while getting work done?

    “I’m starting to doubt the validity of these kinds of articles once I see advice like this, and I was wondering what your response would be to the claim made by the above link.”

    Speaking for myself, that’s fine. By all means look at all the research and make up your own mind. But remember… where exactly did this every 2-3 hours eating thing come from?

    The bodybuilding industry. Of course they sell supplements, but they also support massive bodies with slabs of muscle the average person doesn’t have. So they can eat 6 well-sized meals.

    How is a 5’5″ woman, for example, supposed to lose weight and feel satisfied eating 6-tiny meals a day ad infinitum?

    Even with 3 meals, at least they can be half decent ones!

    All of that said, of course if you choose and prepare 6 healthy small balanced meals and eat them every 2-3 hours as recommended, if they are low calorie enough and ideally the person does some strength training or other exercise, sure they’ll lose weight.

    They’ll also be devoting a heck of a lot of time and attention to eating, which might be better placed on living.

    In my less than humble opinion!

    ###

    I sleep, Mike, and right now my cycle is in tune with my girlfriend in Australia. That’ll change in the near future.
30. Christoph Dollis
    

    * we and practically other = we and practically every other…
31. Christoph Dollis
    

    Lake, I realize now I totally misread your comment, and you’re starting to doubt the validity of articles such as the one that appeared in Men’s Health.

    Mea Culpa.
32. Mike OD
    

    George – A large amount of carbs per meal is not ideal if your goal is weight loss. If someone wanted to eat Zonish with cereal, 1/2 bagel, and so forth…smaller meals do produce less insulin response. Big carbs meals produce larger insulin responses. Long term fat loss is dependent also on having good insulin sensitivity. So all in all, number of meals isn’t the determining factor…..insulin responses and macronutrients play a role as well. Balanced 3 meals don’t have to be excessive carbs. Although it doesn’t have to be low carb (as I eat plenty of carbs), but people need to eat carbs based on activity level and goals too.

    Lake – that article you listed states “Eat every 2 to 3 hours. Eating this often helps prevent drops in blood sugar, which can lead to sugar binges, says Dr. Berkowitz.”….which is true if you eat crap/sugar/processed carbs (the guy in the pic is holding bread….yikes)…because the blood sugar will drop soon…so you need more. If you are eating healthy foods it shouldn’t be as much an issue. Blood sugar and insulin responses (keeping insulin low and reversing insulin resistance) is the key to weight loss and long term health. Hyperinsulinia (high insulin levels chronic) is just going to lead to bigger issues (cancers, diabetes, heart diseases, etc). Just comes down to our bodies are not meant for all the processed foods and grains…pure and simple. Also keep in mind a person who is lean, eats healthy foods and exercises will not have the same responses with food and fasting that an overweight person with insulin resistance issues does. Hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) is usually due to insulin resistance. Switching to real sources of carbs like fruits/veg is the first step even if it has to be in more frequent smaller meals. So blood sugar control is important (like the title of that MSN article)….but like the original title of this article says, frequency of meals will not magically speed up the metabolism. A healthy fat burning metabolism is only possible with stable blood sugar and insulin control….along with calorie deficit of course.

    Dr Dan – I am sure there is alot of psychological aspects….hence why I love IF in short bursts…just breaking the dependency on needing to put food in my mouth all day long. Eating to live….not living to eat.

    Most people like the 6x a day eating for dealing with hunger issues….eating high fiber foods and water to try and manage going through an 800 cal day….that’s how the figure pros do it. IF throws an interesting curve ball in the whole approach as it increases SNS activity and possible fat burning all day long…add that will controlled eating and insulin control and you can lose fat. If I did the zone starting when I woke up in the morning….I would be so hungry all day long I would want to eat my hand……but if I IF and eat the same amount in a smaller eating window like Noon-8pm….I feel much much better and keep my sanity in the process.
33. SC
    

    Great Info but I wonder how one can put in enough proteins in 3 meals if you need 0.8 to 1 gm per pound of body weight. Lets say you need 150 gms. Thus, each meal would average 50gms. That would mean at least 5 to 6 oz of chicken breast per meal which is quite a lot to eat. I find it difficult to eat that much in a meal but at the same time cannot find so much time to eat 6 meals a day. I am a gym rat.
34. Mike OD
    

    SC – You are right that protein intake is key and should determine how many meals to eat especially if you are wanting to put on muscle in the process. Me…I can easily eat a 6oz steak, chicken or otherwise in one serving. Others maybe not. Also you can add in things like cheese and other sources of protein. This is probably the only time I would say adding in a scoop of protein powder with meals is a good way to get your intake up….but that’s for those wanting more muscular gains than perhaps just fat loss. You can maintain muscle on less protein when losing fat. To gain muscle you need to up the protein intake.
35. Paul Anderson
    

    I have to say I have absolutely no trouble eating 6 ounces of protein in one go. the problem is stopping once I start – although its not addictive as wheat and sugar products seem to be.

    Mike – what’s your view on cheese. Is it, in your opinion a hleathy food? My understanding is that the mix of calcium and magnesium isn’t ideal and that the protein source, cassien can be problematic. On the other its low carb, is a good source of complete amino acids and fats and is very tasty. I find, though, that it is nowhere near as satiating as meat or fish, and for me is somewhat addictive.

    Paul.
36. Mike OD
    

    Paul – cheese in moderation is fine for me. If you can do without it, even better. I mix shredded cheese in with eggs for some flavor and have the occasional pizza. Other than that really don’t have much. If you are eating blocks of it a day, not ideal. I don’t eat it alone as a meal. There are better sources of calcium like veggies. Again…small and in moderation, you’ll probably be ok.
37. Paul Anderson
    

    Thanks Mike,

    I eat blocks a day – it can average more than 400gs a day. Sounds like I might be better off just using it simply to flavour eggs and veg, and not indulge in my habit of walking away from the fridge with a block, or two, of cheese. I guess its a wonder I have lost any weight following this regime.

    My understanding of protein is that the source really needs to come from eggs, cheese, meat or fish; combining vegetable protein means legumes, grains and too high a carb intake. Soya products seem to have problems assoicated with them. Nuts presumably aren’t a complete source of protein either.

    Is lamb a good source of meat. They seem to live a largely outdoor life and should I presume eat a largely grass based diet – they seem to ahve successfully escaped the factory farming industry.

    Paul.
38. xuanfam
    

    GREAT POST! Very informative, honest, and to the point! I like the way you used supporting documents to prove the point, validating each statement with solid proofs, very very strong arguments are brought up!

    Love the site, and please keep up the good work! The fitness industry needs more inspiring individuals like you!
39. Mike OD
    

    XU – Thanks…just trying to find the honest answers to what is being told to us out there in mainstream….personally I like to question anything that someone tells me is the right way to do it. I think we all need to do more of that.
40. Christoph Dollis
    

    “Is lamb a good source of meat. They seem to live a largely outdoor life and should I presume eat a largely grass based diet – they seem to ahve successfully escaped the factory farming industry.”

    If only we could all eat healthy as the Palin family.
41. Mike OD
    

    Lamb….Mmmmmmmm……since most is grass fed it’s probably much better than grain fed beef.
42. Nov 13 Health Links Roundup | Health Hackers
    [...] Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism – A few home truths about eating less, more often. It’s still a good idea, but maybe not for the reasons we think. [...]
43. Aaron
    

    Mike,
    I like the site and I have definitely noticed gains since following some of your posts, especially dealing testosterone, but I have to question your logic on meal frequency as it seems to be contradictory at times. For the most part you seem to recommend 3 square meals a day, in the “Sumo” post you say we should try to consume more than 2 big meals a day as that is their technique but in this post you argue size of the meals does not matter, only calories. I forget which post it was, but not too long ago you said to eat small meals through out the day with one large meal at night. As I recall from past posts you mention how a big meal bogs you down and clouds the thought process due to all calories being used to digest the food which argues against eating big meals? I am just curious what you use and truly recommend because from this post and what you have said before frequency and size plays no part, just overall calories but still make several different recommendations.

    In defense of 5-6 small meals a day, logically it does give much better insulin control. Correct me if I am wrong but bigger meals will initiate a higher insulin response due to glycemic load and excess energy at one time. You justify 3 large meals as saying it gives you more time to let your insulin get down to low levels but by that logic you could eat one meal with ice cream and what not and get away with it if you did not eat for the rest of the day. My next defense is protein utilization. Rule of thumb for most people seems to be 25 grams every couple of hours or so, anymore and you are pissing out the amino acids. I know body size and composition can allow some to eat more or less but by eating smaller meals at a higher frequency your body, theoretically, can use the smaller quantity more efficiently. Also, by constantly feeding your muscles in smaller amounts it seems that it would ensure constant nutrients are getting to the muscles, speeding up recovery.

    I am not an expert nor do I pretend to be, nothing I have stated is backed up by studies that I know of, just an argument for smaller meals through out the day.
44. Mike OD
    

    Aaron – Excellent question and because it is probably a bit confusing at times I will actually do a full post on meal frequency next week to cover it in more detail. Too many variables and topics to cover in just a comments section. Thanks for the question, look for something in the following week about it on the main blog. I can say that exercise is also very important to the equation, as it improves insulin sensitivity.
45. Weekend Link Love | Mark's Daily Apple
    [...] Two big meals per day, or eighteen tiny meals? The IF Life explains why eating more meals does NOT speed up your metabolism. [...]
46. Christoph Dollis
    

    Aaron, and I don’t have anything near the experience with intermittent fasting that Mike does, for what it’s worth, I rather like thinking behind the “Warrior Diet” that a large meal at night making you sleepy is an advantage!

    Just like light or no eating during the day leaving you energetic is an advantage.

    I don’t think everyone needs to eat only 1 meal a day, but I think 1 or 2 might be ideal, not even 3.

    I rather like the thinking of Hippocrates on p. 307 (start from at least: “This period will be during the daylight hours…”).

    Or the 2 meals a day (light in the morning, heavy in the evening) eaten by the early Jews.

    I’m doing mostly daily intermittent fasting and I find it difficult to both have a narrow eating window and eat several small meals! You may Fast-5 worth a read, if only for its description of limbic hunger vs. somatic hunger.

    The author of Fast-5 probably doesn’t give enough attention on what to eat.

    I disagree with you about 5-6 meals per day giving you better insulin control. Yes, any given insulin spike will be lower, but the total amount of elevated insulin throughout a day will be higher, bringing all the disadvantages of excess insulin along with it. Plus I think it’ll be far harder to control your hunger with several small carbohydrate containing insulin-provoking meals vs. letting the hormones designed to suppress hunger while you sleep simply continue on a more hours until enjoy (a) satisfying meal(s).
47. Ketan Patel
    

    Even though there is no metabolic advantage to 6 meals a day is there an advantage in terms of less insulin released for smaller and spread out meals?
    I’m not sure if there are any studies that show the effect of insulin release after big meals and after small meals.
48. The Baltimore Babe
    

    I am not a big supporter of eating 6x a day or eating breakfast. Thanks for this post.
49. Christoph Dollis
    

    “I’m not sure if there are any studies that show the effect of insulin release after big meals and after small meals.”

    Come to think of it, I don’t know of any either. So I was probably overly optimistic in my speculation above about less meals being better.

    If anything, at a guess, it probably matters more what the total carbohydrate you consume is rather than when or how it is eaten. However, that is a rank guess!
50. Mike OD
    

    There are studies, but most are based around high carb meals….not the most ideal choices. More needs to be studied about when the choices are healthier (more protein, healthy fats, lower processed carbs/sugars).

    But here’s a study on insulin response based on GI rated meals.
    http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/52/3/519.pdf

    Ori also has a good take on it here with an article called “the skinny on meal frequency studies”. I like his line here:

    “Finally, what you eat, when you eat and how much you eat are all important factors that are inseparably bound together to form your diet. Isolating one element over the others is a futile experiment that will always fail to indicate how things really work in real life.”

    http://www.warriordiet.com/blog/archives/44-The-Skinny-on-the-Meal-Frequency-Studies.html

    As I’ve said many times over when it comes to IF and meals….IF can work….IFOC (IF on Crap) does not.
51. Andrew R
    

    Hey Mike,

    This is a well thought out, thought provoking post and I really enjoyed it. Thank you. I have a question for you. I don’t recommend to my readers to eat between 5-7 meals a day in an effort to manipulate the inner workings of their metabolism. Rather, I recommend it as a dual approach at curbing the dreaded binge. The other side of the coin is taking a cheat day. Taking a cheat day, in my opinion allows for greater consistency over a long period of time, which is a great way for people to get away from the “diet” mentality, which I’m sure you will agree with me that dieting (instead of eating healthy) is one of the biggest problems with regards to how people view nutrition in the US.

    By allowing for one day out of the week to indulge (responsibly) in the foods that people love, while still adhering to multiple, well portioned meals in a day that contain good sources of higher protein and fat content (not counting the “cheat day add ons”), I find that people become much more aware of how to gauge portion control as well as understanding what it means to indulge responsibly.

    I’m interested to see how you view this approach. By the way, love the site!

    All the Best,

    Andrew R
52. Aaron
    

    Chris,
    I never said anything about all of those meals consisting of carbs, but carbs in small quantities don’t have a high glycemic load. I’m one who thinks you are wrong to go simply by the GI, for if you did it would be better to eat potato chips than watermelon, for potato chips have a lower GI. If all of those meals are coupled with protein and fat it helps provide a satiated feeling while lowering the insulin response. You can fault any theory if you assume “bad carbs” are included in the meals.
    Also, you respond to everyone’s posts as if you are an expert on the topics. I guess i’m asking if you have some kind of background in nutrition or fitness by the way you respond with critique to a lot of posts, it seems that you would.
53. Weekly Roundup | boomerhealthandfitness.com
    [...] Somewhere on the list of the top ten weight loss tips is the standard “eat 5-6 meals a day to increase your metabolism”. Mike at The IF Life explains why Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism. [...]
54. Christoph Dollis
    

    Aar,

    Is your argument or problem “appeal to authority”?

    I believe Hippocrates knew a thing or two about nutrition and fitness. Potato chips vs. watermelon? I’m not sure I get your point.

    Humans evolved as hunter’s and/or gatherers and certain populations may be slightly — slightly — adapted to selected agrarian foods: Certainly it doesn’t take a “background” in nutrition and fitness to know this. Indeed such a background may get in the way.

    I’d say the most nutritious food is the one with the most vitamins, minerals, even amino acids, etc., per unit of simple energy components like carbohydrates. Also fat quality: high omega-3 vs. omega-6.
55. Christoph Dollis
    

    “Also, you respond to everyone’s posts as if you are an expert on the topics.”

    Incidentally, Aar, I’m curious what gave it away. Was it where I said:

    “Aaron, and I don’t have anything near the experience with intermittent fasting that Mike does, for what it’s worth…”

    or:

    “Come to think of it, I don’t know of any either. So I was probably overly optimistic in my speculation…”

    or:

    “If anything, at a guess… However, that is a rank guess!”

    ?

    I don’t think you can honestly say I’ve claimed expertise. This is a discussion. I’m not telling you what to do. Ignore everything I write if you prefer. It matters not to me.
56. Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism - Part II | TheIFLife - Simple Fat Loss, Muscle, Health and Longevity
    [...] Part I of learning about how eating more meals does not speed up your metabolism, we covered many research [...]
57. GO HEALTHY GO FIT » Blog Archive » Intermittent Fasting
    [...] blogger, Mike O’Donnell of The IF Life, has just recently posted an eye opening two part (Part 1 and Part 2) series discussing why eating 6 meals a day does NOT in fact boost your metabolism: [...]
58. Mary
    

    First off, my dietary lifestyle is low carb…the lower the better. I also work at keeping it ketogenic, whereas I keep my fat intake high. Ketosis has helped me to appreciate intermittent fasting. When I first began my Atkins journey, I had no true understanding of ketosis.Since adapting to IF and continued research, I have come to the conclusion that it is healthy and it strengthens the body as opposed to weakening it. Basically, I eat everyday. I usually fast fro 20 hours then I eat within a four hour window. When I eat , I eat all the food I want without worrying about overeating. I always eat healthy foods that contribute to insulin stability and ketone production. Usually my cravings are low carb related and I do crave some weird things since I have been IF. This past summer,for example, I craved baked chicken thighs stuffed with brie and blueberries. I had never even had those but I craved them so I made them…Craving was satisfied and I created a gourmet meal. Overeat? It is okay to overeat with IF because your body may need extra food…so feed it. The next day you may discoverr that you require less food to satisfy your hunger. I have learned to really let my body speak to me and I follow its orders. I have stabilized my blood sugars, reduced inflammation while increasing ketones. I can function throughout the day without concentrating on food. The plus side, I lost 26 lbs since April of 2007. The poundage drifted off my body.

    I have theorized that fasting allows the digestive system complete its job. THis is why you can eat as much as you want without overeating. By allowing the process to complete itself, without loading up on food before the body is ready, actually increases metabolism. Adding food before digestion is complete is like a car spinning its tires in the mud. The more mud the more stuck the tires become…likewise this happens metabolically. The more meal frequencies, the more stuck or metabolizm becomes. The idea is not to eat less food…the idea is to eat less often. I also learned last year that a growling stomach isn’t a sign of hunger, it is alerting you that peristalsis is taking place. Likewise, hunger alerts you to the fact that digestion is coming to completion BUT, that doesn’t mean that you have to eat to stop the hunger. A jolt of MCT,coconut oil, and/or omega 3 gel caps are all that is needed. At least that is what is use sometimes to get around the desire to eat.

    When I began IF, I didn’t jump into it whole hog. I began eating breakfast progessively later in the day. This progressed until I was able to go until 2:00 or 3:00 in the afternoon without eating solid food. Sometimes, my schedulae may take me up to 6:00 in the PM before my first meal of the day. Going that long without eating does no longer causes dispair, jitters, or crankiness. Its that ketone factor,I tell yah!!! So now, I will be low carbing while IF for life.

    Thanks,
    Mary
59. GO HEALTHY GO FIT » Blog Archive » Delicious Mondays!!
    [...] OD of The IF Life wrote a two part post, titled eating more meals does NOT speed up your metabolism, that takes on the 6 meals a day myth head [...]
60. Andrew S.
    

    I am extremely skeptical of this “eat 6 times a day” dogma. I just don’t believe it from a human evolution perspective. I have a hard time believing that our bodies start breaking down muscle if we have not has some sort of a snack within the last 3 hours. Hunters needed to be at max efficiency when going out to make a kill even if they were hungry, actually especially when they were hungry. Burning the meat off their bones seems like a good recipe for failure. The purpose of body fat is to act as a reserve of energy to get you through lean times. I can see catabolic muscle loss happening to prisoners of war and other types pf people who are subjected to extreme protracted starvation and or malnutrition. However I believe that the human body, like all other animals is designed to stay strong and feisty as long as possible.
61. Mike OD
    

    Mary – Great comment, thanks for sharing.

    Andrew – You are right about the body being a pretty good design, although with modern science we try to break it down to responses by meal…when in fact it is a much more complicated machine that can adapt to stressors over longer periods of time (and was designed for that evolutionary survival). The sign of our weak and sick bodies of today shows we have lost touch with that natural design and “primal blueprint” (as my buddy Mark at MarksDailyApple calls it).
62. Mindtrapper
    

    Very nice post. Coming from a doctor to be (in a year or so).

    I never really understood the 6 meals per day ultimatum. I searched in Biochemistry books and the argument “less insulin spikes” while convincing and correct did not warrant the creation of a dogma.

    Bottom line is: the human body has amazing adaptive capabilities. Treat it right and you will be rewarded. No need to get stuck up in rules like this, just follow what makes sense. It’s not hard in the end.
63. Christoph Dollis
    

    “less insulin spikes”

    Wouldn’t it also be fair to say “more insulin spikes”?
64. Christoph Dollis
    

    I mean, in other words, larger insulin spikes, but less of them.
65. Mindtrapper
    

    Bigger meal = large insulin spike
    Smaller meals = smaller spikes hence more even blood sugar levels through the day.

    “Smaller meals in right portions of carb/protein/fat can keep blood sugar/insulin stable and encourage more fat burning while in the “fed” state all day long”

    That’s what i meant.
66. Mindtrapper
    

    I am not saying that is a reason to accept the “6 meals per day” dogma.

    But keeping your blood sugar even throughout the day helps. Keeps you from having cravings/feeling week at some point.
67. Christoph Dollis
    

    It could be.

    I think that if the frequent fasting periods improves your sensitivity to insulin enough then even a large meal won’t crash a person too much.

    However, it’s more of an observation. I’m eating 1-2x/day and eating larger meals. I wasn’t surprised that I’m more energetic when I’m fasting because I’ve noticed that in myself when too busy to eat.

    What surprised me, however, was that when I eat larger meals I’m not nearly as tired after as I thought I’d be. I have no idea what that means, just an observation.

    It seemed that frequent eating left me the most fatigued. My best guess is that because there were no fasting periods, I wasn’t as sensitive to insulin and overproduced it to a greater degree.

    A large amount of insulin when there’s a large amount of food to convert to fat may NOT be a problem. The same large amount of insulin with only a small amount of food would lead to a crash.

    That’s my hypothesis.
68. Mindtrapper
    

    If what you’re saying is: “Keep it consistent” then i agree
69. Christoph Dollis
    

    Actually, Mindtrapper, I know you’re going to be a doctor.

    Hypocrates wrote something about this you may find interesting. He was talking about how people in the habit of eating lunch felt weak when they missed it, but if they were habitually taking their main meal in the evening they could work the day without feeling weak and headachy.

    You might find reading the text on thes pages (87 & 89) thought-provoking, whatever the underlying physiological and psychological reasons for it are.
70. Christoph Dollis
    

    “If what you’re saying is: “Keep it consistent” then i agree”

    LOL

    No. I believe the opposite. I believe the body tries to maintain homeostasis, but for health people should provide stimuli to the body. In other words, fasting and eating, intense exercise and rest, activity and sleep, cold and warmth, etc. (There’s evidence cold itself can provoke a healthy response in the body.)

    I think there’s a lot of advantages to NOT trying to keep things consistent. Physical in part and psychological in huge part also.
71. Christoph Dollis
    

    I’m pretty sure what I actually said is that a large release of insulin when there’s a large amount of food to convert into fat isn’t a problem, particularly if it only happens 1-2x/day.

    However, a largish release of insulin when there’s only a small amount of food to convert to fat is a big problem if it happens 6-10x/day.
72. Mike OD
    

    “Bottom line is: the human body has amazing adaptive capabilities. Treat it right and you will be rewarded. No need to get stuck up in rules like this, just follow what makes sense. It’s not hard in the end.” Bingo…..too bad people stopped listening to their bodies and started listening to “experts” who make up all sorts of rules or are pitching ideas for profit…there’s no money in IF…can’t sell a supplement for not eating.
73. Christoph Dollis
    

    “No need to get stuck up in rules like this, just follow what makes sense. It’s not hard in the end.”

    I don’t know.

    Art De Vany and Brad Pilon have me thinking… in terms of what our lives were like pre-clock, pre-industrial age, pre-3 squares a day. There is something to be said for a “rule” if one wants to call it that to have a significant amount of intermittency, inconsistency, and variety in life including exercise and diet.

    In other words, like you advocate instead of like I wanted to do. Example: even exercising 2 times a week is inconsistent as some times its 3 days between workouts and sometimes 4. Intermittent fasting sometimes on, sometimes not, sometimes longer, etc.

    I’m being persistent here and it’s important.

    Mindtrapper is an awesome (most people who go into medicine are!) fellow and open minded. But I suspect he is dead wrong in terms of health when he writes:

    “Keep it consistent.”

    He could mean simply eat and live healthy in whatever varied ways make sense from day to day. And that I’d sign on for. Or he could be thinking in standard medical terms where treatment — e.g., drug therapy — is linear — i.e., standard dosage spread so far apart. Which I think is a bad model to apply to diet because a tiny amount of overeating becomes obesity.

    Even a week ago I realize I was looking for a “magic bullet” formula that could be repeated on a daily or at least weekly basis. Yet there would have been few such periodic things in Paleolithic times aside from perhaps arising and going to sleep with the Sun… as it slowly changed throughout the seasons!

    I realize this is old hat to you, but it constitutes a breakthrough in thinking for me. Non-linear systems as De Vany, a libertarian economist intellectual cum Paleolithic fitness practitioner, refers to it.

    Out of curiosity, when does your eBook come out? I just read De Vany promised a book over a year ago and it hasn’t been seen! I hope you beat him to the punch.
74. Meal Frequency: How Many Meals Per Day Should You Eat? | JCD Fitness
    [...] Mike O’Donnell is also known for advocating the intermittent fasting approach. Here is Part One and Part Two of his take on meal [...]
75. Dan K
    

    I think this post leaves out some very good points. Increasing metabolism is not the goal of eating 6 meals a day and isn’t possible. The goal is preventing muscle loss. Less muscle mass does reduce metabolism.
    Fasting is not a good idea.
    Does everyone forget that when the body does not get enough food, it will devour “fat stores AND muscle”.What in the body uses energy? Muscle. the loss of muscle reduces metabolism the same as an increase in muscle mass increases metabolism.

    The diets must be studied over a long period of time to determine muscle atrophy/loss, and its result. not for an increase or decrease in metabolism from the order of food intake.
76. Mike OD
    

    Christoph – “Even a week ago I realize I was looking for a “magic bullet” formula that could be repeated on a daily or at least weekly basis. Yet there would have been few such periodic things in Paleolithic times aside from perhaps arising and going to sleep with the Sun… as it slowly changed throughout the seasons!”….Yes even IF is supposed to be “intermittent”…hence the I next to the F. While some may use it daily, it still can be randomized with hours, calories, macronutrient ratios, etc. Things that are a set plan can work to help us along the way, like the Zone….I think it is too OCD but can be a learning stepping stone towards a healthier life. I don’t believe the body was programmed to eat the same all the time, hence why you see impressive gains with people knowing how to cycle and time carbohydrates, pulse protein levels and even train/detrain with exercise. Randomization has to have some sort of ideal plan behind it for optimal results, like I wouldn’t go to the gym and randomly do exercises…that won’t product the best results. In the end we just need to find what works for us….as there could be 10 ways to do, and 20 ways that don’t…there doesn’t have to be one perfect way and we can adjust as we go. Ebook is in the final stages…and Yes i will beat DeVany since he has been talking about an ebook for I think 3+ years now. (on a side note, shoot me an email…I have a question for you)

    Dan – I just wanted to shed some light on the fact that the eating 6x a day is SOLD on the myth of a sped up metabolism….I read it everywhere, and they are wrong. Now eating 6x a day can work, control cravings, keep blood sugar stable, and keep someone in calorie deficit (which is how weight loss is really happening). As for the fasting “you are going to starve yourself and waste away” myth (which I need to do another post on), IF is not about fasting for 10 days….it’s simple short and intermittent fasts while still getting enough calories in. With that you will still retain your muscle and not be overtaken by the evil cortisol monster that bodybuilding magazines and supplement companies would have you believing in (so you keep buying their stuff). Plenty of people do IF with NO loss of muscle, and some gain (with eating enough). The body is a much more complex machine to assume that one missed meal will result in the eventual shut down and destruction. You are confusing IF (done with enough calories) with actually starving oneself….not the same thing.
77. Len Campbell-Rossen
    

    Thanks for putting yourself out front like this. It is almost impossible to write something meaningful without contradicting oneself at least once.

    Also, it is difficult to write something about health without the central theme
    changing/shifting to ‘loosing weight’, given the fact/fiction that 1 in 3 adults in the
    US is obese.

    What has worked for me is really not about food or any eating regime, it is
    about responding to changes as I age.

    Nothing is static, everything is always in a state of change. I’ve
    personally found that if I am unwilling to change the foods I eat
    and how often I eat as I age, I become less healthy.

    Len
    ===
78. Mike OD
    

    “What has worked for me is really not about food or any eating regime, it is
    about responding to changes as I age. ”

    Well said Len…..as we all should be in tune with our bodies and the metabolic changes that occur over life.
79. JLL
    

    Nice post.

    I’m very sceptical even of these claims:

    * Eating more often can help curb cravings and binge eating
    * Smaller meals in right portions of carb/protein/fat can keep blood sugar/insulin stable and encourage more fat burning while in the “fed” state all day long

    I just don’t see how eating often equals curbing cravings and bing eating. Eating often might just as well increase cravings, because there’s no time for your body to get used to not eating.

    On the other hand, what is the point of keeping blood sugar stable if it means it’s constantly high? If eating a large meal and then fasting for a long time does not keep insulin levels stable in the short term, it sure seems to balance insulin levels in the long term.

    It’s the people who fast (and eat large meals when they don’t) who have the best insulin levels, while the people who snack constantly who have the worst levels.

    I also don’t see how having high insulin promotes fat burning. I thought insulin promotes fat deposits.

    I also practice Intermittent Fasting, by the way:

    http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/search/label/intermittent%20fasting

    Nice blog anyway. Cheers.
80. Mike OD
    

    JLL – “It’s the people who fast (and eat large meals when they don’t) who have the best insulin levels, while the people who snack constantly who have the worst levels.” What you eat matters, as there is the infamous meal frequency Mattson study that is constantly used to debunk IF. But what is does show that under those conditions when the carb load is extremely high with just one meal a day, that you can build up higher fasting insulin levels. I’ll be first to admit that most of these set point data studies are flawed in some aspect and don’t account for many factors including activity level and macronutrient ratios. Things like exercise can help increase insulin sensitivity and reduce fasting insulin. On the other hand if you eat small meals of good foods and exercise, you will not have higher fasting insulin levels as well.

    In the end, IF should not be used as a free “pass” to eat crappy foods all the time….as you will end up with muscle loss, increased insulin resistance and fat gain. I don’t see where it is said that high insulin promotes fat burning…but it does not you are correct. Smaller meals have smaller insulin responses, bigger meals have bigger ones. None of this really leads to weight loss if you are not in calorie deficit as well. While eating 6x a day can work for people…..to me it’s a bogus diet myth and usually leaves people feeling hungry, deprived and soon to gain all the weight back….it’s not a realistic lifestyle for most (or enjoyable).
81. frank
    

    There is a benefit to eating 6x/day you did not mention and is probably the biggest one. It keeps you from being extremely ravenous at lunch and dinner time. If you eat breakfast at 8am and then lunch at 12pm, chances are by 12 pm you are pretty hungry and are more than likely to over eat. Fitting a snack in between breakfast and lunch and lunch and dinner keeps you from binge eating.
82. Mike OD
    

    Frank – actually….yes I did mention it in the bullet point above “Eating more often can help curb cravings and binge eating”.
83. Is Miley Cyrus Developing Good Eating Habits? | GO HEALTHY GO FIT
    [...] While eating 5 meals a day can help you lose or maintain weight, we know that the reason for that is due to reducing your total daily caloric intake, not because it boosts your metabolism! For more on this, check out this article on why the 5-7 meal a day recommendation is actually a myth! [...]
84. Another Perspective On Eating Before Early Morning Workout |
    [...] wanted to mention that your statement about slowing metabolism may be false. Read specifically http://www.theiflife.com/2008/11/05/eating-more-meals-does-not-speed-up-your-metabolism/ for more information. I felt the same way you do, that you need to eat breakfast (and 6 times a [...]
85. Eating and your metabolism «
    [...] 5-6 meals work for ME and is recommended by fitness experts, but as you can see in the following article, this view is might be wrong. Will I change my approach? No! It works for me to have more smaller [...]
86. What diet do you follow?
    [...] links to clarify the concept: Leangains – Intermittent Fasting for Strength Training and Fat Loss Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism | TheIFLife – Simple Fat Loss, Muscle, Health an… Intermittent Fasting*|*GO HEALTHY GO FIT __________________ Personal Deconstruction Personal [...]
87. Damien
    

    The 6 meals a day plan started out originally as eat a healthy snack (fruit,veggies) between breakfast and lunch, lunch and dinner and if necessary pre bed. The only point of this was in order to curb the appetite so overeating did not occur with the three large meals.

    The extra meals, or snacks as we call them, were meant to have little dietary value in terms of macro nutrients but they were usually consisting of fiber which helped curb appetite.

    This idea was than taken by the bodybuilding community and turned into eat 6 meals a day of equal proportions with lots of protein to build bigger muscles. This in turn spread to the fitness community as eat 6 meals a day to be fit.

    So if the original idea is used, then it is being used correctly to curb appetite which has been proven correct in several studies.

    “In two separate studies led by Speechly, both lean and obese subjects had greater appetite control when pre-test meals were consumed at frequent intervals, in contrast to the same amount of food consumed at a single meal [15,16]. In the ad libitium test meal that followed the pre-test meals, subjects given the single meal consumed on average 26.5% more calories.”

    “Stote’s team compared 1 versus 3 meals per day [17]. Among other results, the 1-a-day group reported significantly higher levels of hunger and an increased desire to eat, with the severity of both phenomena increasing throughout the length of the trial. In a recent alternate-day fasting study [18], Heilbronn’s team concluded, “Overall, these results suggest that a prolonged schedule of fasting and feasting would be marred by aversive subjective states (eg, hunger and irritability), which would likely limit the ability of most individuals to sustain this eating pattern.”

    15 Speechly DP, Buffenstein R. Greater appetite control associated with an increased frequency of eating in lean males. Appetite. 1999 Dec;33(3):285-97.

    16Speechly DP, et al. Acute appetite reduction associated with an increased frequency of eating in obese males. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1999 Nov;23(11):1151-9.

    17Stote, et al. A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Apr;85(4):981-8.
88. skustes
    

    Frank, eating more often is good in some respects, namely you’re less likely to be ravenous at mealtime. However, it also provides more opportunity for overeating because at each meal, you’re probably not eating until full. I also find that with my high-fat, moderate-carb/protien diet, I’m usually too full to eat more than 2-3 times a day. I think as long as people are sticking to high-quality unprocessed foods, they’ll have no problem with eating only 2-3 times per day. If someone is eating garbage, you’re right that eating more often is probably beneficial.

    Cheers
    Scott
89. Mike OD
    

    Damien – Yes the idea behind multiple feedings was to curb appetite while keeping people in calorie deficit….then it got taken off by many to help promote supplement bars and shakes. Ask many who do a Zone diet with meals based on bars and shakes…they will tell you that they are starving all the time….hungry all day. Now if you ate real foods it may not be the same response. In the end….doesn’t matter if you eat 2x or 22x a day….if you are not in calorie deficit you will not lose weight. That and multiple insulin spikes all day long is not going to be optimal for longer health factors such as insulin resistance/fasting insulin. Me….I eat 2-3 bigger meals of real food….I have no hunger issues. I think once most people kick their sugar habbit….the cravings and hunger is not such a big issue anymore.
90. Why Skipping Meals and Workouts is Healthy
    [...] health and longevity, maintain weight, and build lean muscle. We’ve got the studies that seem to back it up, plus my own success with it, but you can also look at it from Grok’s perspective. Our ancestors [...]
91. You’re a mutant–Part 1 « Soldier-Citizen
    [...] a day. Seems I’m always battling against urban mythology and this 6 meal crap has to die. It doesn’t speed your metabolism! We need a break. Stopping our routine is like hitting the reset button. In neuroscience it’s [...]
92. Canitha S.
    

    I’m gonna disagree with this article. The 6 meals a day works….for me. I’ve tried Atkins, Slimfats and calorie counting. Atkins works for some people but it didn’t work for me. I didnt see 10lbs shed in 2 weeks. Slimfast worked for me because I was only taking in 1200 calories but I was very cranky and hungry. Calorie counting was ok but I couldnt see myself doing that for the rest of my life. I’ve also tried Weight Watchers. It worked but I also got bored. My weight has been between 140lbs to 213lbs (my heaviest). 140lbs was when I was 18 and 213 is now at the age of 30. Im a black woman so i’m always gonna be heavier than the other female races. My doctor told me to do the 6 small meals a day last year. I tried it for 3 days and I lost 2lbs it was tooo good to be true. I also LOVE working out, even at my heaviest. I didnt like the 6 small meals a day because I was NEVER hungry (I guess that was the side effect LOL!!!) and I was always used to being hungry at lunch time and at the end of the day (I work 10hrs as an educator) so it was weird for me. I would sometimes forget to eat because I wasn’t hungry and the key is to not let your insulin level drop.But i’m gonna try it for a month to see how much weight I can lose. I do believe that your metabolism does speed up because when I do the 6 meals my energy is very high, as if i’ve been drinking coffee. When I try the 3 meals at the end of the day i’m tired and exhausted. I guess “To Each It’s Own”? Do what works best for you but it’s always a good idea to see your doctor for health and weight loss advice. I’m gonna do what my doc suggests.
93. Mike OD
    

    Canitha – I always say, do what works for you! Mix it up, see what happens. But you technically are not “disagreeing” with the information above….as the article states “6x does not SPEED UP your metabolism”….it says nothing about 6x a day not being a valid way to lose weight IF you control calorie intake. It’s still about the calories, not meal frequency.
94. GJC
    

    I dunno… I disagree and agree. For the past two years I played with the eating several times a day, I exercised 4-5 times a wk… but was at a stand still. Where I was going wrong was not eating enough! I was a 134 lb, 5’6” girl only consuming 1300 – 1500 calories a day, and exercising on top of that. I am now consuming 2000 calories, and have lost 4% BF and 9 lbs in 2 months…. plus I should add that I have increased my strength drastically! I went from eating little meals 6 times a day to eating 6-7 FULL meals (‘clean’ meals). Eating often helps… I am hungry every two hours, but I always have energy and my metabolism is sky high b/c of when, what and how I eat AND exercise. Switching my cardio to post weight training and doing cardio first thing in the AM when I dont have weight training days….

    It is a complete science… very complex… and people just need to understand that there are several components to losing fat or shredding your body…. not just one magic trick…
95. Mike OD
    

    GJC – calorie intake is important especially when you consider other metabolism driven hormones like Leptin that are determined mainly by higher intake of carbs. Having days to just eat up is always recommended to keep the metabolism strong.
96. lubdub
    

    to above posters
    the argument is not that 6 meals a day can’t become an effective tool
    but that is has some magic metabollic kickstart
    your metabolism is high exclusivley because (a) you work out and (b) you don’t starve yourself

    I do 4-5 day fasts occassionally and my metabolism gets real slow. but I when I go back to eating, i come off the fast appropriately and then I feel in more control of my caloric intake and continue to lose weight.
    i don’t work out so thats what works for me, not saying it’s the best way.
97. Nick
    

    At the LA Fitness Expo, there was someone proposing a caveman diet that was in favor of eating light all day and having your big meal before bed; however, this did not include a lot of heavy carbs.

    The part that this does not address is those trying to gain muscle while keeping fat down. If you do not have protein in the system, doesn’t the body steal some from the muscle. Plus, it is not clear that the body can digest and utilize 60 grams of protein in one sitting as opposed to 30 grams in 6 sittings as there is evidence that higher protein relative to carbs benefits fat – muscle ratio.
98. Mike OD
    

    Nick – I think that sounds like the “Warrior Diet” from Ori. That’s been around for a long time. Personally when I do eat, I like it lighter and smaller during the day and then larger meals at night. The other way around makes me groggy though the day and then starving at night.

    Gaining muscle is all about protein intake over days, not hours. The “nitrogren” myth is from bodybuilding supplement companies. I gain as much muscle nowadays eating the same amount of protein in 2-3 meals, than drinking shakes all day long (from my 20s). The key is now I eat real foods, not shakes. Real foods take much much longer to digest. Plus that whole “how much protein can you utilize” doesn’t take into effect the total amount and speed of digestion. If you eat 100g of steak….and it takes 3-4+ hours to digest……then it’s not the same as 100g of Whey shakes. You won’t lose muscle if you strength train and still eat enough protein. The only advantage to smaller more frequent meals is when you want to up your carb intake (carb load) and do it in smaller doses so you don’t have a big spillover effect (where it’s taken into fat instead of the muscles). Hence why the bodybuilders who do 6-10x a day eating are also taking in 300-400+g of carbs in smaller doses.
99. Juan Batista
    

    I always felt that your body will burn calories each day, according to the work that it has to do. Simple logic dictates that if you put in more than you use, you will gain weight. I know it’s a bit more complicated, but you get the gist.
100. Juan Batista
     

     A good way to loose weight is to avoid foods that cause you to gain weight. Avoiding sugar and processed foods is a good start. Soda is a major problem in some cases. Even, so called all natural juices are high in sugar content. I might suggest using sugar free powder drink mixes. I use the strawberry mix from Walmart. It’s delicious and you wont even be able to tell there’s no sugar in your drink.
101. Juan Batista
     

     When you miss breakfast, your metabolism will slow down. So don’t forget to eat breakfast.

     

     Mike OD Reply:
     

     Juan – Are you an employee of General Mills by any chance? Ummm, no it won’t…but feel free to post any scientific/real life proof not found in a “top ways to boost your metabolism” article in most fitness magazines, as I am always open for debate.
102. skustes
     

     Juan, no it won’t. The body is far smarter than to slow down based on such a small window of time.

     Cheers
     Scott
103. Terri
     

     I found your site looking for any kind of scientific proof that eating breakfast or frequent small meals does anything for the metabolism. I didn’t think that I’d find any. I figured that it was the kind of advice that everyone takes for truth, like the idea that you must drink 8 glasses of water a day. It was just someone’s theory, without any actual proof.
     I know that for me, if I start the day with a large breakfast I am hungrier throughout the day. Likewise with the small meal thing. What works best for me is to eat a light breakfast and lunch, then I am able to look forward to a larger meal in the evening.
104. Terri
     

     I wanted to add, that at age 51 I went from 29% body fat to 19% in less than 3 months eating as I described above.

     

     Mike OD Reply:
     

     @ Terri – Great job! Yes you will see that we don’t promote the “mainstream” myths out there, but that doesn’t mean anyone can’t eat breakfast or 6x a day. The biggest factor will always be calorie intake, so whatever style works for you and keeps you from overeating is the best approach. Most important thing is just finding a way that you enjoy and can maintain for lasting results. Keep up the great work!
105. Day 10: The Benefits of Intermittent Fasting – Fitness Spotlight : Fitness Spotlight
     [...] we are sold on the idea that we need to eat more often in order to have a faster metabolism, but as disputed in the past articles we know that is not true.  Sadly most mainstream diets sell best when they are complicated, because you have to buy a book [...]
106. Kloé
     

     I have just discovered this website. It is so great to see people going after the truth instead of urban-money-making-myth! I really enjoyed this article. Thanks!
107. Eating and Metabolism Revisited | Diet & Metabolism
     [...] be the case and I may be wrong when it comes to the impact mini meals have on your metabolism.  This post from Fitness Spotlight sums it up quite well but the general logic is that the amount you eat [...]
108. Fragen,die keinen eigenen Thread verdient haben (2nd edition) - Seite 159
     [...] halten, aber dann kommt so etwas im Netz, wo ich mich frage, ob die alle Tassen im Schrank haben: Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism Was sagt ihr eigentlich dazu? __________________ [...]
109. Jaime L
     

     Hi,

     I’m a personal trainer and I foudn this article interesting. But I will absolutely NOT be recommending this to my clients at all. While the author made some very good points, the general theme was that all of the trial subjects needed to decrease their caloric intake, which is not always the case. I have many clients who only eat once or twice a day and don’t get ENOUGH calories, and that is why they have problems losing weight. They obviously aren’t eating the right things as well, and their nutrition ratios are off as well as their hormonal balance, but the key is that everyone is different. If I had a client who was eating the right six meals a day and had the correct caloric intake then yes, maybe I would see if this method worked for them, but for many the six meals a day is the safer way to lose weight. Especially because most people can’t fit that much in their stomachs at one sitting and I find that a lot of people get sluggish afterwards and are slow to respond. Anyways, it’s always nice to hear about different theories, and I think that the key thing to remember is that everyone is different and not one method or way is going to work for everyone. So just because it worked for you, doesn’t mean it will always work for someone else…..

     

     Mike OD Reply:
     

     It is all about what works (long term as a lifestyle) for each person in the end. This article was just to bring to light that more meals is not a “metabolic” advantage vs less meals if calories/macronutrients are the same. There are still many other factors to healthy weight loss including getting the right food intake, enough protein and the right kind of exercise. Many people may do just fine if they focus on eating 3 good meals everyday, without a risk of burnout on obsessing about food all day long (that can happen with an approach that focuses on that). How one enjoys what they do and are able to sustain it because of it, is of vital importance to long term success too. There is always more than just “one way” and we must find our own that works.
110. If a Trainer, Diet Book or Magazine Tells You to Eat More Often for a “Faster Metabolism”…Please Read This First! – Fitness Spotlight : Fitness Spotlight
     [...] for one last time….driving home the nail in this mainstream myth….eating more meals does NOT speed up your metabolism (when calories and macronutrients are the same in lesser # of [...]
111. David
     

     Thanks for clearing up the OBVIOUS AND distorting a large amount of minds at the same time…any person who TRULY follows nutrition knows that smaller meals throughout the day doesn’t cause an increase in metabolism..Within a day, a higher frequency has no thermodynamic advantage over a lower frequency under controlled conditions. And the majority of controlled intervention trials show no improvement in body composition with a higher meal frequency alone. However, in discovering this, studies have used unrealistic protocols for the higher frequency treatments, comparing 3 meals to 9 or 17 meals per day. PLUS, a scarcity of research examining meal frequency’s effect on body composition under conditions of exercise exists in the literature.

     But there known positives to higher meal frequency. If done right, 6-8 meals a day can stabilize blood sugar AND reduce hunger cravings. IF DONE RIGHT. For controlling appetite, the majority of research indicates the superiority of a higher meal frequency. (will state research if anyone doesn’t believe me) To quote one study’s conclusion, “There is, however, the problem of elevated hunger during food restriction and this may provide too great a challenge to a ‘faster’ in not breaking compliance to the dieting regime and reaching for the biscuit barrel.” Now most postings in favor of this style of IF consumption have listed their reason as an EASIER method to follow than boxing meals up every day. This shows me that their dedication and willpower levels are not up to par, so to speak. Hence the need for a REVOLUTIONARY new diet lol. If you are searching for new ways to reach goals because it is INCONVENIENT to your current lifestyle, you’re not gonna make it ANY WAY. It requires sacrifice, simple as that. Jeez people, stop looking for an easy way out.

     Next up, explain to me how a true bodybuilder, needing to consume a minimum of 5000kcal a day to continue to build lean muscle mass, would have an easy time consuming all of that in 8 hours, CLEANLY! LOL
     Maybe for little people trying to be lean and build a little muscle mass, this IF diet might work. (Now that I think about it, I haven’t seen a success story of an actually MUSCULAR person on this website lol, unless you consider a 7% BF 180 pound person muscular hahaha).

     Next argument. The body appears to be “metabolically primed” to receive calories and nutrients after an overnight fast. Breakfast is a particularly beneficial time to have dietary protein, since muscle protein synthethis rates are typically lowest at this time. And also carbodydrates to to restock liver glycogen levels and revamp the thyroid. Overall, both experimental and observational research points to breakfast improving, nutrient status, weight control, and muscle protein synthesis.

     Next Argument. Improvements in insulin sensitivity, glucose tolerance (except in women undergoing ADF), bodyweight/bodyfat, blood pressure, blood lipids, and heart rate are commonly cited benefits of IF & CR. However, All of the above benefits can be achieved by exercise, minus the downsides of fasting.

     I haven’t even gone into the proven affects of nutrient timing throughout the day. That is another huge essay lol.

     Point of this response: Every New Nutritional “Miracle Plan” can be countered and refuted. Bodybuilders (natural too lol) have been gaining lean muscle mass and/or losing bodyfat for over 50 years. There are tried and true nutritional techniques that have been used by these bodybuilders for a long time. Countless champions have been crowned at 3-5% bodyfat, with huge amounts of muscle mass, MOST by following a pre-contest diet of 5-8 meals a day!

     Why is there always a tendency (such as with this IF “diet”) to try and by-pass this “tried and true” method???? Because it’s INCONVENIENT???? Because it’s HARD???? Of course it’s freakin hard! lol Everyone would be 5% BF weighing 220+ if it was easy! hahahahahaha

     Let’s get REAL people…stop falling victim to unproven methods and money making schemes…suck it up and do what it takes to reach your goals.

     I’m OUT.

     David R

     

     Mike OD Reply:
     

     No one ever said eating 6-8x/day doesn’t work, just proving it has nothing to do with metabolism upregulation. As far as fat burning goes the 2 biggest key factors will be the increased protein synthesis response from exercise and calorie deficit intake. If you look at ALL the studies out there and not just the ones shown by supplement companies you will see 2 things: #1) That there is benefit to eating in and around workouts (we can agree to this) and #2) that outside of that window, as long as you are getting in enough of the right macronutrients (esp protein) daily the frequency of meals will not matter. Sure there are body composition benefits to smaller higher carb meals for muscle glycogen replenishment and working out 5x/week isolating muscles one at a time….but guess what, not every one wants to be a bodybuilder especially those looking to lose weight (as we are talking about meal frequency and metabolism in this article after all, not winning Mr Universe). If you think that is the only way to eat/train to lose weight and look good, then I feel sorry for the dogma you are blindly accepting. But to each his own and everyone can pick their own path, as long as the truth is known. In fact using IF may not be right for everyone especially those with higher activity levels and calorie needs. IF is just a tool, not a diet plan.

     “This shows me that their dedication and willpower levels are not up to par, so to speak. Hence the need for a REVOLUTIONARY new diet lol. If you are searching for new ways to reach goals because it is INCONVENIENT to your current lifestyle, you’re not gonna make it ANY WAY. It requires sacrifice, simple as that. Jeez people, stop looking for an easy way out.”
     If something that goes back 10,000s of years ago as a natural evolutionary response mechanism (feast-famine) is revolutionary….then not sure what isn’t. While many “diets” out there do promote a quick fix (or supplements for that matter), we can both agree that a sustainable lifestyle approach is the best solution. IF is simple tool to use and it works, if that is an easy way out….well I guess I will take it. There is still much that has to happen for it to work as well, such as eating right when not using IF and being active/exercise. The line of thinking that “it must be complex, take up all day long and require total daily sacrifice” inorder for it to work is a pretty depressing outlook, as there is more to the joys of life than eating/exercise.

     I completely agree with the benefits of exercise (glucose tolerance, insulin sensitivity, etc) and do promote people to be active especially some sort of resistance training which can get them the most “bang for their buck”. However having also trained many people in the mainstream, I know that motivation and consistency is lacking. IF can fill the holes for people who may not be willing (or have the time) to hit the gym all week. Also as with eating (because you still do eat with IF of course) smarter, you can workout smarter. So a combination of IF and less (but smarter/intense) working out can easily provide the same results that a complicated and time consuming eating/workout plan can do. Less is more especially when done correctly. I’m not going to say it will make a huge bodybuilder, but for the average person out there wanting to look good at the beach it is a better approach IMO for the reason of a realistic and enjoyable lifestyle plan (that will breed consistency…which is where results really come from).

     PS. I find it comical to toss in IF as a money making scheme, yet eating 6-8x/day fuels a billion dollar supplement industry and isn’t? Really? Give yourself another “Lol” for that one. Well done.

     PPS. You may want to brush up on how bodybuilders have really been building muscle over the last 50-80 years, and it didn’t always involve protein powders and 6-8 meals a day shockingly enough:
     http://www.westonaprice.org/Splendid-Specimens-The-History-of-Nutrition-in-Bodybuilding.html

     PPPS. You may also want to sit back and really take a good look at why you workout and what makes you happy….if it involves just to be better than everyone else (as hinted by all your “LOLs” towards all the “weak minded” people and “180lb weaklings”), well then my friend I have seen many a bodybuilder go down that road of unhappiness (as the mental trap of not being “big enough” will make many depressed). Find happiness in life outside of eating and what you look like, as that is only temporary and doesn’t define who you really are inside. Or you can be trapped inside your own body as your solution to being happy and then be a slave to all the things you need to do to maintain that illusion. This is not a personal attack on you, just an attempt to create some awareness for you to analyze your own life and find your best path to being happy.
112. Trainer Tells…More…About What I Have Learned in Health and Fitness : Fitness Spotlight
     [...] I can’t say it enough without people saying how wrong I am…eating more meals during a day does NOT speed up your metabolism. Sorry, just relaying the facts as I see [...]
113. Ditch Grains for Weight Loss, 5 Best Chocolate Bars, & Eating More Meals To Boost Your Metabolism | Get Fit & Burn Fat at Home
     [...] the guys over at Fitness Spotlight report that eating more meals does NOT speed up your metabolism. But, it may still work if fat loss is your goal. Check that out for a mega does of [...]
114. bob
     

     Ya this lady’s not nuts. The same number of calories is the same number of calories. So anyway I have a pretty busy week next week so I’m gonna go ahead and take in ohhh about 10,500 calories right now and then I can eat 300 calories real quick like each day and I’m sure it will affect my body all the same as if I ate 1800 calories each day????? Right that’s how it works?????

     

     Mike OD Reply:
     

     Yup you nailed it. Studies on daily meal frequency with no change in metabolic rate means you can eat 10 days worth of food in one day. Nice job on cutting through all the nutty science and clearing it all up for us.

     PS. That was sarcasm….but thanks for the silly comment, I enjoyed the good laugh today.

     

     bob Reply:
     

     I’m just sayin that there has to be some difference in the way your body processes food You can’t really believe that it just doesn’t matter when or how much you eat. I have been eating one meal a day for the last 10 years, and both my current Dr. and my last Dr. have both told me that I probably don’t need to change the amount of food I’m eating, but to split it up. I don’t know much about metabolic rates, but I do know common sense. Common sense says a body should be able to process a couple hundred calories at one time more efficiently than trying to process a couple thousand at a time. Anyway like I said my Dr.s have been telling me this for years, but this is the first time I’m actually trying it. so if it doesn’t work I’ll let ya’ll know, and admit you might be right.

     Ohh and I’m definitely full of silly comments.

     

     Mike OD Reply:
     

     Finding what does work for you is important, no doubt about that. I usually intake 2-3 meals a day, a far cry from the old days of 6-7 meals a day and I see no negative change in energy or body composition (in fact, I feel and eat better because of it). So it will also depend on what you eat and how it is digested, as intaking a large amount of carbs in one sitting is not ideal for stable glucose/insulin, but a large protein meal will take 5-6 hours to digest anyways. Your goals, daily energy requirements, etc….all come into play. If you have a medical condition that doctors are worried about then perhaps more meals is better…but if they are just saying that because they “think” that is healthier, keep in mind they have no courses in nutrition and are just feeding off whatever is popular in the mainstream. In the end, we all have the choice…..but as far as a metabolic “advantage”, there really is none.

     Eating several, more than 2-3, times a day (or nibbling) is a more modern concept on how to eat…not something humans have been doing for all that long in the bigger picture historically.

     I’ve been reading many old texts for some wisdom and perhaps you may enjoy a couple of these quotes:

     “Barely two centuries ago, the first meal of the day in England was taken about noon. Breakfast was an unrecognized meal and it originated in the practice of ladies taking an early dish of chocolate before rising. The ancient Greeks–the finest of people, physically and mentally, that ever lived–ate but two meals a day.” ~ The Hygienic System: Orthotrophy by Dr Shelton, 1935

     “For more than a thousand years the one meal plan was the established rule among the civilized nations inhabiting the coast-lands of the Mediterranean. The evening repast—call it supper or dinner—was a kind of domestic festival, the reward of the day’s toil, an enjoyment which rich and poor refrained from marring by premature gratifications of their appetite.” ~ Fasting, Hydropathy and Exercise, MacFadden 1900

     “To rise at six, dine at ten, sup at six and go to bed at ten, makes a man live ten times ten” ~ 16th century proverb
115. Nebesuprantu savo kuno. - Puslapis 3 - BodyBuilding.lt forumas: kultūrizmas, fitnesas, treniruotės, sveika mityba, steroidai
     [...] Myndioha Duok OZ'ai linka i tyrima. Tyngiu ieskot konkreciai, jei nedurnas esi pats rasi… Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism | The IF Life cia 3 iskarpos yra is tyrimu ir cia kazkur forume buvau imetes linka i kita foruma, kur labai [...]
116. Day 10: The Benefits of Intermittent Fasting | The IF Life
     [...] we are sold on the idea that we need to eat more often in order to have a faster metabolism, but as disputed in the past articles we know that is not true.  Sadly most mainstream diets sell best when they are complicated, because you have to buy a book [...]
117. Trainer Tells All – What I Have Learned About Health and Fitness | The IF Life
     [...] Eating 6x a day provides no metabolic advantage for losing weight than 2-3x a day…it’s still about calories and blood sugar/insulin control [...]
118. Trainer Tells…More…About What I Have Learned in Health and Fitness | The IF Life
     [...] I can’t say it enough without people saying how wrong I am…eating more meals during a day does NOT speed up your metabolism. Sorry, just relaying the facts as I see [...]
119. Love my hubby...but would love to turn a head or two again.... - Weight Loss Forum
     [...] I've found out that eating larger meals less frequently doesn't actually make you gain weight…. Eating More Meals Does NOT Speed Up Your Metabolism | The IF Life Keep doing what your doing if its working for you, I don't mean to put you off as you have already [...]
120. The Advantages of Using Intermittent Fasting / Feeding (IF) | The IF Life
     [...] idea that we need to eat more often in order to have a faster metabolism, but as disputed in the past articles we know that is not true. So that means that there can be other ways, and this is where “IF” comes into play. [...]
121. Jerry Flemming
     

     Actually what I’ve been told by several doctors that because I don’t eat right. I’ll skip brakfast and sometimes don’t eat until dinner. You would think by not eatting I should be a tooth pick right? WRONG!! I’m at 343 pounds now, why you ask? Because I don’t eat and when I do finally eat I over eat and what’s happening is because I don’t eat my body goes into starvation mode where it stores everything I eat into fat because it doesn’t know when it’s next meal is going to be. I’m told to eat every 3 hours with each meal about the size of your fist because it’s making your body know it’s getting nourishment now and doesn’t need to store everything as fat.

     

     MikeOD Reply:
     

     Hi Jerry,

     What you are talking about is calorie overload response because of hunger you get from not eating frequently.

     Calories are always going to be the big factor. If your food choices are high in calories, fat, sugar, etc…then yes, you will gain weight whether you are eating 2x a day or 10x a day…if calories are the same and in excess. I’ve never seen anyone who does rebound/binge eats on vegetables…as it is usually breads, pasta, desserts, and other dishes that will easily be stored as fat in excess.

     Eating 6x a day works because it keeps you eating less calories overall (and not binge eating on the things you shouldn’t).

     The point of this article was to highlight your metabolism is not regulated by meal frequency (when calorie load is the same…and that is a key part to remember). The term “starvation response” is highly misused, and your metabolism works over longer periods of time than the hours between meals.

     I and many others here eat only 2-3 meals a day (and hardly any snacks…which can add in excess calories quick especially with high sugar/fat ones) and I’m still very lean with ease because of it….but it still comes down to overall calories and my food choices, not how often I eat. I personally think that 1 meal a day would also cause me to overeat and not control my calories because of hunger, unless it was all leaner meats and vegetables. Food choices matter.

     However, it still is important to find a sustainable way to eat less overall for you…and if every 3 hours works for you, then you should stick with it. Not here to discourage that, just here to help you understand the factors behind it…so you can take control and get results. I only want you to be healthy no matter how you decide to eat.

     Mike
122. Improve Your Metabolic process – Accelerate Your Metabolic process – Secrets | Do You Really Get Help
     [...] metabolic process, but aren't sure exactly what it's or what it really does. Essentially it' s…Important! Very shortly you'll get a confirmation email suggesting that you verify it really was you…re–> The teeth grinding frustration of attempting to slim down or attempting to remain in shape [...]
123. Carl@ sciatica exercises
     

     Yeah, I agree with you, it really depends on the what kind of food you eat. That’s why it’s important to consult a dietitian regarding this so you won’t waste your time.
124. Frank
     

     for almost a year, I ate 5 or 6 times a day and didn’t even realize how crappy I was feeling until I just recently started eating 3 to 4 meals and actually feel a lot better. My brain actually functions to some degree now
125. Man
     

     man i appreciate the effort you put in this article, eating 6 meals a day its really annoying and looks its not that good of a thing, i’ll start eating 3-4 meals a day
126. jason
     

     So what you’re saying is that as long as your body goes in to starvation mode the 6meals a day will work?….

     That^ is an exaggeration as is your article, sorry but there you have it.
     The idea behind the 6 meals a day isn’t due to the “body building industry trying to get you to buy protein and power bars” as you said it is. Just about any doctor will tell you that eating more frequently is best.

     Quite simply the more often you eat the more stable your blood sugar will be and in effect your insulin won’t spike. Insulin spikes ‘encourages’ your body to store fat, whereas low or steady insulin helps to regulate your fat storage.

     Of course if you eat 6 meals and eat the same as before you’re probably not really going to loose weight, but there is the next part of the 6 meal plan. When eating small meals you only eat until satisfied, you no longer have to eat enough food to get through 5hrs or 4hrs. Instead of cramming 600 calories in at a sitting you’re eating about 150-200 and you stop.

     Caloric deficit is the only way to loose fat, the way you do it determines what kind of ‘weight’ you loose. Too much of a deficit and you start loosing muscle, too little and you’re going to be at it forever.

     

     "2 Meal" Mike Reply:
     

     Eating 6 meals a day isn’t an old concept done in centuries gone by, it’s some new idea. People just didn’t do this in the past, and they didn’t suffer from as much obesity as we have today. Much of this also can be attributed to the food choices made and their effect on the metabolism.

     Stable blood sugar is important, but eating real foods many do not find that an issue with larger meals less often. Real food is slow to digest, processed snack bars are not.

     Not sure where you got starvation mode from the article. Doctors also have about one nutrition course in their education, and many who do independent research are finding the truth about meals and metabolism.

     Skipping a meal doesn’t waste muscle, as studies show (not bodybuilding magazines). This is the hardest thing for people to let go of, but just try it and see what happens for yourself.

     In the end, do your own research and come up with what works for you and you enjoy…whether it is 6 meals or 3. Both can work, although enjoyability factor can differ.
127. vicki
     

     To each is their own. What works for some may not work for others. 3 out of 5 of the ladies in my office do the 6 meals a day and showed a bigger loss in weight than the two who eat one to 2x a day. I think you have more energy when your giving your body the “proper” fuel to burn all day and not just starving yourself for your next meal.

     

     "2 Meal" Mike Reply:
     

     Everyone is free to choose what works…but also it is important to known what is sustainable. It’s still about calories overall and whether it can be maintained.

     FYI starvation does not happen between meals unless you are already very skinny and eat very low calories overall.
128. The 2 Meal Philosophy | The IF Life with 2 Meal Mike
     [...] already pointed out many times that the research shows there is no advantage to daily energy expenditure (metabolism) when you eat more often (total daily calories being the [...]
129. Sean Quigley
     

     I agree with the philosophy of this book and I think I may give it a read. Humans weren’t programmed to eat throughout the whole day. Our bodies are still pretty primitive and are still adapted to the lifestyle where food was scarce and there would usually be one or two big meals throughout the day, usually after a hunt or long trekking for food. Our bodies were programmed as hunter gatherers, as our minds evolved ideas like farming developed, and suddenly food wasn’t a constant search. However our physiological bodies are still very much the same as in ancient times.

     

     "2 Meal" Mike Reply:
     

     Well put Sean. I think the greatest danger out there is encouraging people to eat all the time, as it just becomes a mindless obsession (and usually on all the wrong kinds of foods). Taking a break from that and allowing the body to encounter some intermittent stressors, also allows it to get stronger and become more efficient in burning stored fat as fuel (improved glucose metabolism).

     But in the end, I’d mainly just rather eat this way as it keeps life simple and enjoyable.
130. Yoda
     

     I agree…everyone’s metablism is different. I have a really slow metabolism. If I eat three meals a day, I get sluggish and tired and put on serious weight. I’ve eaten 1 or 2 meals a day since I was 18. When I reverted back to 3 meals, after hitting 30, I got very sluggish. Regular fasting is underrated (thought seek medical advice if you’re going to fasting)
131. asdf
     

     So first you bash the 6 meal plan because when you did it, you were ‘starving and miserable’ while doing it and then you go on to recommend literally starving yourself? You’re a moron.

     

     "2 Meal" Mike Reply:
     

     Hunger was my main problem with continuous mini meals regardless of calorie load…the “sense” of starvation through hunger all day, not actual starvation. I’ll help clarify it, thanks for pointing it out with your oh so gentle opinion (note tremendous sarcasm there).

     I’m not recommending anyone starve themselves just by not eating 6x a day. Point is that meal frequency is just not needed for a higher metabolism. You can still get plenty of daily calories in a condensed eating window, since starvation is really more about overall calories/nutrients after all. Even morons like me know that.
132. One Meal a Day | The IF Life with 2 Meal Mike
     [...] (like the 3 Meal/day people). They did not gain weight just by lowering the meal frequency (as I’ve pointed out in the past with studies about meal frequency and metabolism not effecting energy [...]
133. 5 Myths « Why not?
     [...] IF article with research links [...]
134. 40 things I've learned in 40 years | The IF Life with 2 Meal Mike
     [...] often (6 mini meals compared to 3 larger ones..and calories/nutrients are the same overall) has NOT been proven to speed up overall metabolism, control hunger better, nor have very good long term adherence for [...]
135. Diet Rules That Are More Myth Than Fact | Losing My Mommy Fat
     [...] Eating More Meals Does Not Speed Up Your Metabolism Logic Does Not Apply Part 1: Meal Frequency Skipping Meals Can Be Healthy for You [...]
136. Busted: Top 3 Myths About Your Metabolism | The Great Fitness Experiment
     [...] Busted: The studies that showed an increased metabolism due to multiple small meals were a) few and b) showed only a very small increase. While the “thermogenic effect” – i.e. the increased output of energy your body uses to burn food – is real, it’s so slight as to be inconsequential in most practical situations. Unless you are a pro athlete, bodybuilder or fitness model it’s unlikely that this will make much difference to you. In addition, other studies on intermittent fasting have showed that prolonged periods without eating can be excellent for your metabolism because it allows for better hormone regulation of leptin and gherlin, among other benefits. Lastly, all the research has shown that it’s way more important what you eat than when you eat it. [...]
137. Why Are Some People Always Cold? « Willowy Endeavor
     [...] hear how important it is to eat every three hours or whatever to keep our metabolisms in check. There is a lot of debate about this topic recently however. Also, this is often part of the reason anorexics are always cold and cover up with many layers of [...]