Are there ANY benefits to eating once a day?

[tango02]

Any at all???

[Times Roman]

Benefits:

less mess to clean in the kitchen
more time away from the kitchen
save $$ by turning off the lights when not in the kitchen
less wear and tear on the dishwasher
don't have to brush your teeth as often
one big bowel movement means less time in the restroom


I can keep going................?

[Grandeur]

Benefits:

less mess to clean in the kitchen
more time away from the kitchen
save $$ by turning off the lights when not in the kitchen
less wear and tear on the dishwasher
don't have to brush your teeth as often
one big bowel movement means less time in the restroom


I can keep going................?

This is all the convincing i need.

[bucs4074]

Alot of people have mixed feelings about this. I've been eating one huge meal that contains all my macros in it, for about two months. It's great for fat loss without a doubt but when trying to build muscle nutrient timing becomes more important. I've lost thirty pounds of fat and little to no muscle eating this way. As stated by previous poster it's also a lot easier than eating 6 meals a day.

[tango02]

The reason I ask is because my GF does this alot. As in 4-5 times a week. And I try to tell her that its not good for your body's metabolism. But is it? I mean I have read that people have lost weight doing this and that is her only goal really. She wants to look like she did before the baby. And I dont blame her but she is still hot as hell but everyone has room for improvement no matter who you are.

So now she wants Fake double D's to replace the natural double D's she already has and a flatter stomach. What all men want actually if ya think about it.....A set of Fake double D's and a flat stomach!! HAHA!

[Times Roman]

nutrient timing, in large part, is a myth...........

if I were to eat 6 apples and I had the following three options:

1) Eat them all at once
2) Eat them, one an hour, til they were gone

at the end of the day, I would find that there was no metabolic benefit to either. You do not burn additional calories by splitting out your meals into smaller meals. For me, I eat the smaller meals frequently, because I want to avoid the big "lump" in my gut from having eating three pounds of food all at once.

[tango02]

nutrient timing, in large part, is a myth...........

if I were to eat 6 apples and I had the following three options:

1) Eat them all at once
2) Eat them, one an hour, til they were gone

at the end of the day, I would find that there was no metabolic benefit to either. You do not burn additional calories by splitting out your meals into smaller meals. For me, I eat the smaller meals frequently, because I want to avoid the big "lump" in my gut from having eating three pounds of food all at once.

You lost me at 2 Roman....sorry im slow!!

[Times Roman]

^ I do that periodically to see if anyone is paying attention

[tango02]

So my body does not have an "easier" time burning a 500 calorie meal opposed to a 5000 calorie meal?

[Times Roman]

So my body does not have an "easier" time burning a 500 calorie meal opposed to a 5000 calorie meal?

the metabolic process is a passive one. abdominal forces push your food load through a series of tubes (intestines), and, amongst other things, your intestinal flora leaches out the nutrients you need. Really doesn't matter how much of a food load is going through the tubes.

I used to think the way you do, too. But it's bro science. Breaking up meals into smaller ones doesn't reduce the amount of fat your body lays on. if you eat too many calories, you lay on fat. if you eat too few, you lose weight.

[tango02]

Very interesting. So maybe she is actually doing the right thing by only eating once a day. She has been losing weight, but I simply attribute that to the working out at the gym...maybe I was wrong.

[tarmyg]

In terms of metabolic difference in meal timing there is little to no support in the literature for the timing of meals (Talking about weight loss right now). However, if one is talking about success of long term weight loss people who have more than one meal per day which is composed of both carbs and proteins seems to take longer time before gaining the weight back. At this time a measly 5% of people keep the weight off long enough to be able to talk about it.

[jesse4466]

Seems like once a day is not healthy

[Times Roman]

Seems like once a day is not healthy

the body does not become more nor less efficient when it comes to meal frequency.

There are reasons to eat more/less frequently, but economics of the metabolic process isn't one of them, unfortunately.

[Docd187123]

the body does not become more nor less efficient when it comes to meal frequency.

There are reasons to eat more/less frequently, but economics of the metabolic process isn't one of them, unfortunately.

Completely agree. Dietary mediated metabolism effects are dependent on the macro composition and food volume, not how many times you split that volume into smaller meals.

[Bio-Active]

There is no way most of us could eat the volume of food needed to gain weight in one meal Ed and I mean clean calories from whole food. I am talking about those of us trying to put on muscle from training or bodybuilding

[Times Roman]

^true. nutritious, whole food is actually quite bulky.

no way I would be able to eat a day's worth in one sitting........

[thisAngelBites]

nutrient timing, in large part, is a myth...........

if I were to eat 6 apples and I had the following three options:

1) Eat them all at once
2) Eat them, one an hour, til they were gone

at the end of the day, I would find that there was no metabolic benefit to either. You do not burn additional calories by splitting out your meals into smaller meals. For me, I eat the smaller meals frequently, because I want to avoid the big "lump" in my gut from having eating three pounds of food all at once.

You still get the same number of calories, I agree, but there might be other factors at play.

Fasting (even for 20-24 hours) tends to promote GH release. It also tends to decrease insulin resistance and decrease insulin secretion. This often leads to decreased blood pressure, decreased triglycerides and decreased (pro inflammatory) cytokines.

All of this is the opposite of metabolic syndrome, which causes obesity.

On the other hand, if the intermittent faster were already very insulin sensitive, and in excellent shape, I wouldn't expect it to improve things much.

[Times Roman]

well, hopefully for most of us, we are already pretty lean

and I don't know what the hell is wrong with me, but fasting for me is hard. been tested for hypo glycemia and came back negative. but if I go more than a couple of hours without eating, I get irritable, and then later, I get a tremor in my hand.

[Docd187123]

You still get the same number of calories, I agree, but there might be other factors at play.

Fasting (even for 20-24 hours) tends to promote GH release. It also tends to decrease insulin resistance and decrease insulin secretion. This often leads to decreased blood pressure, decreased triglycerides and decreased (pro inflammatory) cytokines.

All of this is the opposite of metabolic syndrome, which causes obesity.

On the other hand, if the intermittent faster were already very insulin sensitive, and in excellent shape, I wouldn't expect it to improve things much.

I'm pretty sure the GH release from fasting is not clinically significant. Until you begin to fast for upwards of 72hrs. Don't quote me on that yet as I'd need to check the reference where I saw it but this is essentially the same claim Martin from LeanGains makes a it fasting and GH. I happened to glance at a few of his references and IMO it seemed like the claim was a bit exaggerated.

I do agree about the insulin part though. Been researching this for my sister as she's diabetic and it seems like many other diabetics have been having success with IF style dieting and needing less insulin.

[thisAngelBites]

Doc, I think I saw something like a 1700% increase somewhere, but the question is whether I can track that down or not. And of course that is still a small amount of GH.

[thisAngelBites]

well, hopefully for most of us, we are already pretty lean

and I don't know what the hell is wrong with me, but fasting for me is hard. been tested for hypo glycemia and came back negative. but if I go more than a couple of hours without eating, I get irritable, and then later, I get a tremor in my hand.

Roman, I hope so too, but no idea about the OPs girlfiend, who may or may not be very busy with a baby and eating whatever she could to get by.

Although I will say that people post up their bloods often with atrocious triglycerides, and high blood glucose. It surprises me, but the lure of sugar and junk is strong, and maybe even some of these health conscious peeps figure that since they're working out and aiming to eat well, they can let a lot slide (which they can, as it's their business). But they often say their diet is 100%.

[thisAngelBites]

I think this is where I read the blurb that stuck with me, but as to where you can see the data from that presentation, beats me. So who knows.

Routine periodic fasting is good for your health, and your heart, study suggests -- ScienceDaily

[thisAngelBites]

I
I do agree about the insulin part though. Been researching this for my sister as she's diabetic and it seems like many other diabetics have been having success with IF style dieting and needing less insulin.

Is she type 1 or 2? Go check out Dr Bernstein at Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution. A Complete Guide to Achieving Normal Blood Sugars. Official Web Site - he's a type 1, and is very serious about proper blood glucose levels. He aims towards normal bg for diabetic, not the US inflated bg values, where they think it's a good idea to feed diabetics lots of carbs. But then his patients live a lot longer than most diabetics do. He's a real pioneer, and eventually mainstream diabetes care will get there, but like most things in medicine, it will take 20 years or so for the knowledge to filter into most clinical practice.

[SEOINAGE]

I've done alternate day fasting and had good success. I don't do it for longer than a couple weeks at a time, but surprisingly I can do really well with it, cardio on fast days, lifting at the end of eating days. So end up fasting about 36 hours. As to getting enough calories in one sitting for growth, I believe I could do it, but it would be easier if I ate that whole evening. You'd be surprised though how long some food sits in your digestive tract.

[Docd187123]

Is she type 1 or 2? Go check out Dr Bernstein at Dr. Bernstein's Diabetes Solution. A Complete Guide to Achieving Normal Blood Sugars. Official Web Site - he's a type 1, and is very serious about proper blood glucose levels. He aims towards normal bg for diabetic, not the US inflated bg values, where they think it's a good idea to feed diabetics lots of carbs. But then his patients live a lot longer than most diabetics do. He's a real pioneer, and eventually mainstream diabetes care will get there, but like most things in medicine, it will take 20 years or so for the knowledge to filter into most clinical practice.

She is type 1. Thank you so much for the link. I will be checking it out for sure