If a Trainer, Diet Book or Magazine Tells You to Eat More Often for a "Faster Metabolism"…Please Read This First!
If you haven’t seen this already, it seems that the mainstream media is starting to finally catch on to some of the research about meals and metabolism.
The NY Times has a piece entitled “The Claim: Eat Six Small Meals a Day Instead of Three Big Ones” and makes the following revelations:
Six meals, according to some weight-loss books and fad diets, is a more realistic approach.But don’t count on it. As long as total caloric and nutrient intake stays the same, then metabolism, at the end of the day, should stay the same as well. One study that carefully demonstrated this, published in 2009 in The British Journal of Nutrition, involved groups of overweight men and women who were randomly assigned to very strict low-calorie diets and followed for eight weeks. Each subject consumed the same number of calories per day, but one group took in three meals a day and the other six.
Both groups lost significant and equivalent amounts of weight. There was no difference between them in fat loss, appetite control or measurements of hormones that signal hunger and satiety.
THE BOTTOM LINE
There is no solid evidence that six small meals a day instead of three will speed metabolism.
THANK YOU NY Times…..it is about time someone else said it besides us “crazy” bloggers.
So 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 meals). Anyone who has had success using Intermittent Fasting will tell you this as well.
Does not…..nope…..no way…..no proof…..not gonna happen…….anyone saying it “speeds up your metabolism” is spreading misinformation.
So please help us kill this myth once and for all!
Tell your friends…
Tell your family…
Tell your doctor…
Heck tell a trainer…
Tell everyone, and then maybe we can get back to more important aspects of weight loss and stop buying into all the multiple-meal weight loss gimicks (as they may work…but do not in any way speed up your metabolism…it is still a lower calorie thing).
To be fair, does this mean you should not eat many times a day? That is an individualistic decision depending on food choices, lifestyle, energy and performance needs. We always say that eating 6x/day can work for losing weight, but is still because it keeps a person in a state of calorie deficit…not by magically speeding up a metabolism. Knowing this can help you create more flexibility and planning for a lasting lifestyle change.
Besides, this “snack all day” mentality may just be making more people overeat in the first place, as they think they are doing the right thing to “speed up” their metabolism (which we know is not the case). Calories matter over the whole day after all. Mindless eating is something we should all try and remove and replace with “mindful” eating.
If you still want to see more studies and information on this discussion of meal frequency and metabolism, then please read these past articles too:
- Eating more does Not speed up your Metabolism Part I
- Eating more does Not speed up your Metabolism Part II
Did You Like This?
If you enjoyed this, then join the growing "IF" revolution by signing-up above and get all new articles via email for free! (or via RSS here)
(or get RSS feed here)
This is another one of those continually perpetuated myths that everyone believes, but I’ve never once heard a scientific reason why.
You get horrible analogies like this:
“Eating a big meal is like throwing an entire stack of wood on a fire making it go out quickly and… Eating 5 smaller meals is like throwing smaller pieces of wood onto a fire throughout the day making it burn longer.”
Uh. Right.
Mike OD Reply:
The only thing I threw on the fire way back when I was trying to eat 6x a day was more money…..as I needed to have those supplement bars/shakes to keep my metabolism strong! Little did I know…..
Hi Arlo, nice analogie hi hi hi ….
I only know that my stomach and intestines appreciate it a lot if I eat twice a day, In fact if I have stomach discomfort I just do IF until the pain goes away , and then a small meal of 400-500 cal and I am new the next day…
While the study did not show a significant difference in weight loss, it did show that the ‘nibbling diet’ did decrease cholesterol, ldl, insulin and cortisol levels, all of which are generally desirable.
Mike OD Reply:
2 things worth noting on that study referenced (Nibbling versus gorging: metabolic advantages of increased meal frequency; Jenkins 1989):
1) It used an unrealistic approach of 17 mini meals vs 3 larger ones (who eats 17x a day?)
2) From what I have seen, it was a 52%+ Carb based diet which I can not find specifics on types of food eaten as well….but rest assured, most studies with higher carb intakes are usually not ideal choices. High blood sugar spikes from meals can explain the negative factors measured.
No study is perfect granted, but if you are making good food choices (along with exercise which is key) there is no real benefit to spreading out your meals….unless you are eating higher processed carbs that break down quickly.
I’m male 30 yrs, 170lbs@10%BF. I struggle to gain muscle while eating 3 times a day just because my stomach feels bad after a heavy meal (I eat only paleo foods except cream). The only benefit I have noticed is that I can get more calories with 5 meals with reduced stomach discomfort. Do you have any dietary recommendations on gaining muscle mass? Does BCAA/Glutamine help?
Mike OD Reply:
Trying to gain muscle while only on Paleo is harder on yourself, as there are many calorie dense and easier handled on your digestive system foods like rice, potatoes, milk, cottage cheese and so forth that you could also be using. You won’t bulk up much if you are always trying to force down foods heavy in fiber and lower in macronutrients. Not saying it can’t happen, it just takes more effort. Try opening up your meal choices in the pwo window for more carbs/calories and see what happens while keeping all other times more “paleo”. Of course the right kind of workout also will help, mainly more heavier weights (reps 5-8) with focus on progressing over time vs more metabolic workouts (as that will only increase your calorie demand for recovery). If you are struggling to get in enough protein (@ 0.8g/lean lb of mass), and there is no realistic way you will eat that much…then adding in a scoop of protein powder here and there during the day can help as well (put in a cup of whole milk for the extra calories too…and some nut butter).
Kishore Reply:
Thanks for the note. I do get enough protein. Here’s my current routine:
Mon: Power Cleans (5*3 @ 4RM), weighted Dips, Chins (35 reps each.10-12 sets*3 reps), Arms (2*10 reps)
Tue: Squats (3-4 sets of 5 reps plus extra volume at 75% of 1RM for hypertrophy), Farmers walk with dumbells, calves
Wed: Rest
Thu: Push press (5*3 @ 4RM), Incline DB press, one arm DB row (35 reps each), Arms (3*8 reps)
Fri: Deadlift (3-4 sets of 5 reps plus some extra volume at 75% of 1RM for hypertrophy), barbell complex (energy systems work)
Weekend: OFF
Sample diet:
Breakfast: 6 whole eggs, 1 tablespoon coconut oil, 1 apple, fish oil
Snack: 5oz almond meal mixed with cream, berries and 20g of whey powder
Lunch: 1/3 lb of beef with green vegetable, fish oil
Pre-workout: 15grams of BCAA
Postworkout: 15g of BCAA, 5g L-glutamine, 20g of whey mixed with cream
Dinner: Lamb steak with vegetables, fish oil
Any suggestions on improving diet or workout would be appreciated!
Erik C. Reply:
You want to add size….then you need to eat!!! Your not supplying yourself with enough calories in that sample diet to sustain any growth. Thats exactly what your problem is “dieting”. Most people that visit posts like this actually want to lose weight and look lean. Thats great if that is what you are looking to do, but somebody who is pursueing size like yourself needs to follow the recommendations of Mike OD plus some. I’m not a nutrionalist or a dietician, I am a guy who lives the reality of lifting weights (heavy weights) and eating. I am not naturally lean, I have to earn my muscle growth and I know what I know because I live it.
Mike OD Reply:
You might want to get that all down to how many calories that is, as your workout volume is pretty high…so you probably need to intake more. At 170lbs you probably need at least 3000+ calories to start packing on the lbs.
Kishore Reply:
Mike and Erik, thanks for the suggestions. One thing I notice is that even while eating a mostly paleo diet, ramping up calories even with such a high volume routine, I tend to accumulate some body fat mainly in the midsection. Can not consuming ample calories make your body hold on to body fat? I estimate my carbs per day to be about 60grams. I’m trying to gain mass by staying as lean as possible. Have you ever encountered this personally? Or should the strategy be to forget about definition for a while, gain some muscle and then cut body fat?
I do feel that on a higher protein/fat diet (beef, eggs, nuts) I feel some stomach ‘heaviness’ compared to lets say eating a yam with some cream and shrimp.
Mike OD Reply:
In my experience, more fat around the middle is an insulin resistance factor. Sat fat has been linked to increased insulin resistance, and with my own tests of using whole milk and cream during high calorie phases, I gained more around the middle area as well. My advice, cut down on dairy based fats and get other kinds in. Use the pwo window to eat “non paleo” for 2-3 hours and get in more carbs (worry less about protein and fats, but have some). Enjoy carbs, nothing wrong with them…and if you want more size they are needed. Use non-workout days to eat more protein/fat and eat slightly less calories, adjust to keep leanness.
Depending on how much muscle you want and how fast you want it…..here are your 2 ways:
1) Bulk up for 3-4 months, add more weight and fat….then try lean out for 3-4 months (while trying to maintain muscle)
2) Slower muscle gain and stay leaner (although you may gain some fat and need to adjust factors as you go) with IF and more pwo eating
#1 is not that enjoyable IMO (been there, done that…and my conditioning for sports went to crap)…..#2 is a wake up call about how fast you “really” build muscle….as it is not a quick thing in reality. I’d rather do #2 personally.
Here’s another article about “real” muscle gain to read over:
http://www.fitnessspotlight.com/2009/12/08/secret-build-big-muscles-hardgainer/
Note that most people (esp bodybuilders) who are “ripped” at 215lbs…probably needed to get to 240-260lbs + and then cut down.
Kishore Reply:
Thanks Mike, I will keep you posted on how my ‘experiments’ works out!
Proves that it’s calories that count when it comes to weight loss. Not the number of meals.
[...] Eating more frequently does not speed up your metabolism Steve using somewhat of an unorthodox style (i.e. lots of shin) Brian and PJ race up the rope Erin and Meredith were naturals on the ropes Jim was using a lot of arms but he made it through [...]
While six meals a day may not speed up your metabolism, it does have more physiological benefits. Keeping a more constant influx of food in smaller portions will keep your insulin levels more optimal. You won’t experience the common “insulin coma” that people have after ingesting a large meal. Also, there are no spikes or crashes of energy levels throughout the day. You have a more constant energy for the whole day. Go ahead and tell clients that six meals is no different than three in regards to metabolism, but don’t leave out the other benefits of frequent meals. Also, just because one study says that it had no difference in metabolism doesn’t mean it’s true.
Mike OD Reply:
In my experience, six meals a day also has a negative physiological aspect, addiction to eating…which can cause issues when food/calories are not kept in smaller portions and/or quality of what you eat is not addressed.
“Keeping a more constant influx of food in smaller portions will keep your insulin levels more optimal. You won’t experience the common “insulin coma” that people have after ingesting a large meal.”
You are lumping in a Thanksgiving style feast with normal sized (not mini) meals, which is inaccurate. 3 normal sized meals can keep your blood sugar stable, unless you are eating all the wrong kinds of food in the first place that will cause your blood sugar to spike (like excess of processed carbs/sugars/grains). If someone wants to eats more “processed” foods daily, then yes…you need to spread it out or your blood sugar will crash. If you eat more real foods that digest and release glucose into the blood stream at a slower pace, most will not have that issue to worry about.
“Also, there are no spikes or crashes of energy levels throughout the day.”
Not necessarily…see above. What you eat has a tremendous impact on this equation.
“Also, just because one study says that it had no difference in metabolism doesn’t mean it’s true.”
See the links at the bottom of the article to my other 2 part series….which will supply MANY studies that say the same thing. It IS true….unless you have ANY study to prove it otherwise? Which to this date I have not seen….and I’m not counting studies that show eating 6x smaller meals is better than 3x when total calorie intake is not even the same.
“but don’t leave out the other benefits of frequent meals.”
This comes more into play with body composition, slower glycogen refill strategies and people who have higher calorie demands. If people suffer hypoglycemic issues it can also be of benefit. In the end, people can eat as many times as they like during the day…but they should know the truth about why or why not it may work. The fate of your metabolism is not dictated by number of meals, and is more complicated than most give it credit for (with variables such as long term calorie load and training/muscle repair to consider as well). After that, one is able to choose a lifestyle that suits them best. As some days I may eat 4-5x…and others 2-3x. Most of the time I am more focused on recovery from a workout and meeting daily protein requirements. But I am not “tied” to thinking that “just one way is the only way”…because it isn’t.
You are welcome to explore more of this as well with a free ebook I wrote at the IF life about meals/metabolism and intermittent fasting.
There’s an interesting post over at the Health Journal Club that makes the case that people should just not eat anything that wasn’t a food 100 years ago. Gets rid of the aspartame, bleached GM flour, high fructose corn syrup garbage they try to pass off as food these days. If interested you can read on it here,
http://healthjournalclub.blogspot.com/2010/01/100-year-diet.html
[...] calories than eating three normal sized meals? Think again. Mike at Fitness Spotlight explains that six small meals does nothing to speed up your metabolism, and might just add extra calories to your [...]
[...] calories than eating three normal sized meals? Think again. Mike at Fitness Spotlight explains that six small meals does nothing to speed up your metabolism, and might just add extra calories to your [...]
Hello Mike,
I tried to download the IF ebook, but when i confirm my subscription from my email address, and I try to download the eBook, it says the file is damaged.
Could you please send me the ebook, or is it no longer available?
Thank you for the info on this wonderful blog. I want to lose weight and tone my muscles with a combination on bodyweight exercises and intermittent fasting. Trying to gather all the info i can to do this.
Thanks again.
Bill.
Mike OD Reply:
The PDF is not corrupt, just sometimes the server gets bogged down and gives that message. Give it a try again and I’m sure it should work this time (as it just pulled up on my end without issue).
[...] If a Trainer, diet Book or Magazine Tells You to Eat More Often for a “Faster Metabolism”…! [...]
[...] article: faster metabolism [...]
[...] If a Trainer, Diet Book or Magazine Tells You to Eat More Often for a .Mar 31, 2010 If a Trainer, Diet Book or Magazine Tells You to Eat More Often for a “Faster Metabolism”Please [...]