I don't mean to 'burst your bubble', but it's been proven beyond a doubt that meal frequency has zero bearing on metabolism. Basically, if you consume 2000 calories (for instance) over the course of 7 meals eaten every 2 hours, or 3 meals eaten every 6, your body has 2000 calories to metabolize. The whole 'stoking the metabolic flame' or 'feeding the furnace' analogies were good ones and seemed to make sense from a logical standpoint - but they're simply incorrect.
I suspect the 'smaller frequent meals' mantra came about as more of a way to help people control their calories. i.e. people who tend to overeat wouldn't be able to do so with smaller portions eaten more often. Also, in theory they'd be less hungry, and less likely to snack in between meals when another meal was a mere couple hours away.
Don't take that to mean there's anything wrong with eating smaller more frequent meals; there's not. I've eaten that way, and a huge portion of the bodybuilding community does too (although a huge portion of the bodybuilding community are idiots, so take that for what it's worth lol), but it's not necessary in order to 'speed up' metabolism.
Other than drugs and exercise, there really is no way to speed it up as it's essentially dictated by genetics.
I'll repost the carb cycle i'm doing now and you can check it out in my thread.![]()