I agree; this is an interesting thread--thanks for reviving it, as I probably would have missed it otherwise.



This really spoke to my experience. Back in my high-carb, low-fat days I used to consider myself a "grazer." But what it really meant was that I ate three full-sized meals every day, plus numerous snacks (anywhere from 3-6). And I snacked because I was starving all the time. I was the co-worker who could have kept the vending machines in the break room in business singlehandedly.

And of course I kept getting fatter. And fatter. And fatter....

When I first did Atkins in 2004, I planned for snacks because they were such an ingrained part of my eating habits. But snacks contributed to the carb creep that was my eventual undoing--nuts were my favorite snack, and hey, they were allowable on this WOE! Huh, right--woe, indeed.

This time out, I decided that snacking wasn't an option. For me, it's a bad habit, a holdover from my old self-destructive, sugar-addicted eating habits, and it had to go. By constant snacking, I had long since lost sight of the difference between "mouth hunger" and "stomach hunger." So I decided from the start that I would eat as much as I wanted of whatever I wanted at mealtimes, but nothing in between.

Since I've been doing high-fat (>75% of calories)/low-carb (<25g net),that's been working extremely well. I've been eating only one, and sometimes two, meals a day for the last three weeks, with no urge to snack in between. Intermittent fasting has been dead easy because I'm almost never hungry.

Unfortunately, I think it's been working a little too well--despite all the fat I'm eating, I don't think I'm getting enough calories (I've averaged ~1700/day). My weight loss has been stalled out for two weeks now, and I don't have a whole lot of energy (a sign my body's conserving energy because it hasn't got enough fuel). But rather than snacking, I'm going to ditch IF for a while and make myself eat one extra meal a day. That ought to shake things up a bit...

Most days I still need three meals, prob due to my low blood sugar issues, but I am also realizing that some days 2 meals is enough. I just get caught up in not enough carbs/cals and begin to think I NEED another meal - whether I'm hungry or not. Trying to get over that.




I do the same with fruit....I make sure I eat it in a meal with plenty of protein and fat. On the rare occasions that I eat fruit as a snack I make sure I eat it with plenty of fat.

Interesting thread. I ate 3 meals and an afternoon snack before LC and I still eat that way now. It may be psychological hunger, it may be a habit developed during years of digestive problems now largely resolved. Still a handful of nuts around 3-4 in the afternoon is a lot better than an handful or two of cookies.

What about the studies that show eating smaller meals more often, and eating breakfast, rev up the metabolism for the day?

I do think that snacks can get out of conrol. Most folks do not keep these mini meals at 200 calories each. So they end up eating more calories every day.

I've worked really hard to start eating breakfast because of all the studies showing that breakfast eaters tend to lose more weight. And I do feel hungry by lunch, but that is a good thing. That means my metabolism is going.

Before, I would skip breakfast and not feel hungry till 3:30pm, sometimes eating just once a day. And I didn't lose a pound doing this. My body seemed to slow it's use of calories down to starvation mode.

I'm really interested in this issue. I'm trying to keep my BG in the normal range - hoping to keep my insulin down to nothing.

This article was posted in 2010, and contains information about a study in Australia. My goal is to never eat when I'm not hungry. I'm only hungry once or twice per day. I figure my pancreas is quite grateful for this.

When the body isn't forced to be in digestion mode all day long, it can use its energy and resources elsewhere, like in healing, reducing inflammation, repairing damage, etc. If you keep it tied up in digestion, other things get put on hold. At least that's my theory ...

It's supported by studies like this one:



From the Protein Power blog

I used to be stuck in that don't eat too much! leave the table hungry! mindset, but I like to do creative work for hours at a time and it gets durn annoying to constantly break my concentration to hunt down food. Especially now that I'm gluten free, there are no longer an abundance of "convenience foods" unless I've cooked them, first.

I can have a low carb/high fat/adequate protein meal and then coast for a looooooooong time, and I seem to wind up eating less, with less hunger. Perhaps some people, using this strategy, have their calories drop too low. But I can honestly say I have yet to encounter that problem

When I started to work out for my weight loss plan, snacking in between meals made me guilty. I could not prevent my stomach from growling in waiting for lunch time to come or dinner, so I usually take snacks in between. I thought then that two pieces of cookie would be fine, yet I was wrong. But I should not stop from eating snack because it help me manage hunger and reduce bingeing.

I realize now then that all I need to do is to choose a healthy snack when I am hungry and I drink plenty of water to keep my hunger at bay a bit longer.

I snack on fruits and vegetables, whole grains, nuts and seeds and some Low-fat dairy products. Self- discipline is also important to make my weight loss goal effective.

The following is more input from Dr. Mike of Protein Power. It seems eating itself is an inflammatory process, with overeating and eating often being ways of increasing it to chronic levels. Inflammation isn't just something you feel as pain. Inflammation is at least part of the basis of heart disease, diabetes, etc.

Watch your lactose intake on the dairy. 13 grams of sugar per cup. It doesn't necessarily have to be non-fat, just low in sugar. And also be careful on the whole grains. A lot of stuff that's labeled "whole grain" has a little bit of fiber in it and a lot of carbohydrate. Although, if your body can handle it and you're still losing/keeping weight off then it's probably okay.

Ha ha my kind of snack is a cup of coffee. The stuff is so addictive!

Lots of recipes for snack bars made with whole grains, nuts, fruits etc in our recipes forums!

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=217797

And I just broke a nearly 2-year stall by switching from 2 largish meals a day to 5 smaller ones. So far so good. Though I enjoy a hearty meal, and I would much rather have two good meals a day rather than 5 small ones - but not only did I finally drop some weight (about 10 pounds) by making the switch, but I have better blood sugar control too.

I know you have to keep the BG level also, so I take your post to heart.

I keep reading that eating smaller meals through out the day will keep the insulin down, and level out the BG. I will be curious to see if your weight drops even further.

Keep us posted.

If there was a "like" button for your post, I would click it :-)

Congratulations on breaking your stall, that is awesome!

It seems like when I'm doing very physically demanding work, smaller meals is better on my body than 3 square meals. I get sick easily if they're big meals and have to work up a sweat.

But if I'm just working on the computer or watching TV, the bigger, less frequent meals tend to be better. And coffee... I just can't help myself!

What are your sources for this? Which study was it that proved this? Was it comparing small meals to the SAD, or small meals to 2 low carb meals?

I have heard this repeated so many times, it has been taken as gospel. But I have yet to see any evidence or proof that it is true.

My own philosophy: if you are a healthy adult who really feels the need to snack two or three times a day, then that means that your actual meals (breakfast, lunch, dinner) are incomplete, lacking in nutrients, and are probably too small.

For example, if I eat two egg whites and some steamed spinach for breakfast, you be your ass I am hungry by 10:30. If I eat a three egg omelet cooked in butter, stuffed with mushrooms and bacon, with a side salad (yes I eat salad for breakfast), then not only do I not need a snack, I very often do not want to eat lunch. Same goes for dinner. If I eat a dinner with a good amount of protein, fat and veggies, I never feel hungry before bedtime.

Hunger between meals is NOT normal if your regular meals are reasonably substantial. Also, your body was designed to go without food for reasonable periods of time. It is HEALTHIER for your body to take a break from eating. It is also perfectly fine to skip meals if you are not hungry.

All these rules about eating were completely MADE UP by human beings who have no understanding as to how the human body functions.

Snacking is a bogus, fattening, ridiculous concept that is ingrained in us from toddlerhood on and is generally unnecessary.

I don't have any studies to back it up, but in my own n=1 experiment with this it's very true for me. Five small meals a day is serving me far better than 2 LC meals. Sort of a bummer actually, as from natural inclination I would *much* rather have two hearty LC meals a day. That's my preferred eating style.

I'm not sure these are fair comparisons as I didn't see any requirement that the small meals also be low fat. Your meal of 3-egg omelet, mushroom, bacon and a side salad would, alas, cause me to get a big blood sugar spike. Been there, done that. Makes me sad as I'd love a breakfast like that -well excepr for the salad, I'm not much of a salad eater, but sauteed veggies as a side would be fine for me.

Instead I have a breakfast like 2 slices of bacon with 1 small egg fried in coconut oil, and a cup of coffee and heavy cream. Then three hours later I'll have another small meal/snack. It truly does control my blood sugar so much better doing it that way. In fact I don't even care what studies might say about it, as I am *me* and not a "study". We all react so differently, just as Werebear has reacted in a way completely differently from my reaction.