1

votes

what do you think of frequent eating?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created May 24, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Is it really so bad? I have a quite small stomach and constant hunger.. I really hate the feelings of heavy stomach after a meal, but I can't eat less, don't overeat and feel satiated more than 3 or maximal 4 hour after having a meal...Honestly, 4 hours is really fine, today I had omellet( 2 eggs), tomatoes, butter, and I was hungry 2 hours after that...I eat enough of fat. if I'm hungry, I'm very anxious, angry and can't think of anything else than a FOOD. Is this normal?? I am 25, 175 cm, female, 22% of bodyfat (would like to have a bit less). I would be happy with 4 or 5 meals per day. Have anyone similar feelings? thank you so much for sharing!

A968087cc1dd66d480749c02e4619ef4

(20436)

on May 25, 2012
at 01:00 PM

I find that it is easier to get more protein in the morning by eating meat rather than eggs. It seems easier to eat 4 ounces of meat rather than 4 eggs - which are both around 25 grams of protein.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:44 PM

Ah, but then you sneak this in: "more meal frequency/regularity". They are not the same thing. Don't conflate them.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:31 PM

I assume this was all regarding the first study. I'm saying that a study on a small group of diabetic people eating a diet high in simple carbs does not apply to someone who isn't diabetic and doesn't have to eat a meal of simple carbs every three hours to not feel like crap. The contents of the meal DO matter, because the study only applies to people eating meals of similar composition. You can't just say "they weren't testing for that variable, so it doesn't matter what it is" and then try to extrapolate their results to the population as a whole.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 11:17 AM

Since the study participants are eating crap throughout the whole study, it can be said that CETERIS PARABUS, more meal frequency/regularity results in more favorable health markers as compared to lower meal frequency/regularity.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 04:30 AM

Also, I do better with carbs in my diet so I guess that makes be a sugar addict too and that I would be better served eating with a higher meal frequency spread throughout the day.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 04:25 AM

The contents of the meal would matter, if that's the variable they were trying to isolate, but it is not. They were trying to isolate meal frequency.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 04:24 AM

Since the study participants are eating crap throughout the whole study, it can be said that CETERUS PARABUS, more meal frequency/regularity results in more favorable health markers as compared to lower meal frequency/regularity.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 03:37 AM

Okay so then the only studies that apply are those done on perfectly insulin sensitive individuals of perfect body weight and perfect health who are perfectly "fat adapted" who eat only bacon and eggs for breakfast and beef and vegetables with butter for their other meals to consider it a worthwhile study. Right on man.

Fab409ac4a30957e3ed508514f7bff02

(295)

on May 25, 2012
at 01:17 AM

I'm of the opinion that if you can't skip a meal here and there without it being a big deal than it's something to work on. A lot of feeling hungry is simply habit or insulin. Try starting with one day a week where you don't start eating until lunch time. Make it a day you are going to be busy so you're less likely to think about food.

A968087cc1dd66d480749c02e4619ef4

(20436)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:50 AM

Don't be too dogmatic about it. If you are hungry, eat. Generally, protein and fat will hold you longer, but I wouldn't worry too much about it. Now that I think about it, two eggs is only around 15 grams of protein. See if you can't push it to 20-25 grams without being uncomfortable. Maybe 3 eggs or add some bacon to the 2 eggs if you can manage it.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:47 AM

"so it doesn't even matter if the sample size is small, because cumulatively it ends up being a lot drawing similar conclusions" It doesn't matter if it's bad science because there's a lot of it?

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:41 AM

ate*. Also, as I said, the first test was done on diabetics, meaning it applies to diabetics. Regarding the fourth study, they are once again eating cereal (but this time with Kit Kats!), so it's not too surprising that omitting breakfast made them eat more overall--they're sugar addicts. This, once again, does not apply to someone who doesn't have to eat every three hours to not feel hungry.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:34 AM

Study 1: So you're saying that meal composition doesn't matter? That a breakfast of bacon and eggs will have the same glucose/insulin response as a muffin and cereal? That's nonsense. It specifically doesn't contradict John's advice to "eat fewer but bigger meals containing fat and animal protein". Did you even read studies 2 and 3? In the first phase, women ate their regular meals six times a day. In the second phase, they at a random number of times that was different on each day. The randomness is what caused the observed changes. That study says nothing of eating 2 meals a day regularly.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 11:05 PM

If this doesn't satisfy you, then I suppose only n=1 does. I'll just say then that I do better with smaller amounts of food spread throughout the day because I don't like feeling full.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 11:03 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15699226

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 11:03 PM

Okay, your critique of study #1 is nonsensical because she asked nothing of the type of food and the variable we are looking at is "meal frequency." Study 2 and 3, the regular eaters ate anywhere from 3-9 meals per day. 9 is greater "regularity" in this context, and 2 would be less "regularity." Also, just for fun, here is a study that shows omitting breakfast results in decreased health markers. This just one study, but there are myriad others along similar lines, so it doesn't even matter if the sample size is small, because cumulatively it ends up being a lot drawing similar conclusions

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on May 24, 2012
at 09:26 PM

Nothing starchy or grain based. You can get away with eating salad.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 09:11 PM

no carbs means no veggies at all?

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:55 PM

It also doesn't help that the studies are tiny (n around 10) and the first study is done on people with diabetes.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:54 PM

First study: Doesn't say WHAT they ate, so it's inapplicable. Second study: This says that eating meals with the SAME frequency is better than eating randomly. It says nothing of the # of meals. Third study: Same as the second. Basically, none of these studies show "the exact opposite" of what John posted.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:46 PM

protein and fat only for breakfast (no-carbs) will keep you going to lunchtime. I tend to have a small protein-and-fat breakfast, a big lunch (half a chicken) and a small dinner. I'm never tempted to snack anymore.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:41 PM

omg, where is the truth?? LOL. i am so confused!!!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:32 PM

This jsut not true. In fact, there is clinical research showing the exact opposite. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8422824 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15640455 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15220950

92d67b02a709cad2250f10848f9178e6

(2422)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:14 PM

As mentioned above, you can try eating more protein for breakfast. One egg only has about 6 g of protein. Also, you can try eating more calorically dense food that has little volume like nuts or nut butter since you don't like being too full.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:09 PM

I really don't know, if I'm adjusted. it seems like not yet. I will try eat a bit more for breakfast tomorrow and see how I feel later

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:05 PM

it depends, do you think that I should be eating more protein in the morning and for lunch?

  • 174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

    asked by

    (30)
  • Views
    1K
  • Last Activity
    1282D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

3 Answers

2
92d67b02a709cad2250f10848f9178e6

on May 24, 2012
at 07:55 PM

It sounds like you are still a sugar burner. Has your body adjusted to ketosis yet? or maybe you are just not eating enough. I am much smaller than you but I need at least 4 eggs to fill me up! For healthy people eating mostly whole foods, meal frequency doesn't matter that much. If you are insulin-resistant, you may want to reduce the number of meals. Eat the right foods when hungry. =)

92d67b02a709cad2250f10848f9178e6

(2422)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:14 PM

As mentioned above, you can try eating more protein for breakfast. One egg only has about 6 g of protein. Also, you can try eating more calorically dense food that has little volume like nuts or nut butter since you don't like being too full.

A968087cc1dd66d480749c02e4619ef4

(20436)

on May 25, 2012
at 01:00 PM

I find that it is easier to get more protein in the morning by eating meat rather than eggs. It seems easier to eat 4 ounces of meat rather than 4 eggs - which are both around 25 grams of protein.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:09 PM

I really don't know, if I'm adjusted. it seems like not yet. I will try eat a bit more for breakfast tomorrow and see how I feel later

1
2e5dc29c61f97d335ffb990508424719

on May 24, 2012
at 08:01 PM

When you eat every few hours it tends to keep your chronic insulin levels high. Less frequent meals will tend to resensitize you to insulin. Eat fewer but bigger meals containing fat and animal proteins. In a few weeks as you ketoadapt the hunger will go away. Coconut meat was a good breakthru snack for me.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:41 PM

omg, where is the truth?? LOL. i am so confused!!!

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:47 AM

"so it doesn't even matter if the sample size is small, because cumulatively it ends up being a lot drawing similar conclusions" It doesn't matter if it's bad science because there's a lot of it?

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:31 PM

I assume this was all regarding the first study. I'm saying that a study on a small group of diabetic people eating a diet high in simple carbs does not apply to someone who isn't diabetic and doesn't have to eat a meal of simple carbs every three hours to not feel like crap. The contents of the meal DO matter, because the study only applies to people eating meals of similar composition. You can't just say "they weren't testing for that variable, so it doesn't matter what it is" and then try to extrapolate their results to the population as a whole.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:55 PM

It also doesn't help that the studies are tiny (n around 10) and the first study is done on people with diabetes.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 04:24 AM

Since the study participants are eating crap throughout the whole study, it can be said that CETERUS PARABUS, more meal frequency/regularity results in more favorable health markers as compared to lower meal frequency/regularity.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:34 AM

Study 1: So you're saying that meal composition doesn't matter? That a breakfast of bacon and eggs will have the same glucose/insulin response as a muffin and cereal? That's nonsense. It specifically doesn't contradict John's advice to "eat fewer but bigger meals containing fat and animal protein". Did you even read studies 2 and 3? In the first phase, women ate their regular meals six times a day. In the second phase, they at a random number of times that was different on each day. The randomness is what caused the observed changes. That study says nothing of eating 2 meals a day regularly.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 03:37 AM

Okay so then the only studies that apply are those done on perfectly insulin sensitive individuals of perfect body weight and perfect health who are perfectly "fat adapted" who eat only bacon and eggs for breakfast and beef and vegetables with butter for their other meals to consider it a worthwhile study. Right on man.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:32 PM

This jsut not true. In fact, there is clinical research showing the exact opposite. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8422824 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15640455 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15220950

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:54 PM

First study: Doesn't say WHAT they ate, so it's inapplicable. Second study: This says that eating meals with the SAME frequency is better than eating randomly. It says nothing of the # of meals. Third study: Same as the second. Basically, none of these studies show "the exact opposite" of what John posted.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 11:03 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15699226

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:41 AM

ate*. Also, as I said, the first test was done on diabetics, meaning it applies to diabetics. Regarding the fourth study, they are once again eating cereal (but this time with Kit Kats!), so it's not too surprising that omitting breakfast made them eat more overall--they're sugar addicts. This, once again, does not apply to someone who doesn't have to eat every three hours to not feel hungry.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 11:05 PM

If this doesn't satisfy you, then I suppose only n=1 does. I'll just say then that I do better with smaller amounts of food spread throughout the day because I don't like feeling full.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 11:17 AM

Since the study participants are eating crap throughout the whole study, it can be said that CETERIS PARABUS, more meal frequency/regularity results in more favorable health markers as compared to lower meal frequency/regularity.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 04:30 AM

Also, I do better with carbs in my diet so I guess that makes be a sugar addict too and that I would be better served eating with a higher meal frequency spread throughout the day.

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on May 25, 2012
at 12:44 PM

Ah, but then you sneak this in: "more meal frequency/regularity". They are not the same thing. Don't conflate them.

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 24, 2012
at 11:03 PM

Okay, your critique of study #1 is nonsensical because she asked nothing of the type of food and the variable we are looking at is "meal frequency." Study 2 and 3, the regular eaters ate anywhere from 3-9 meals per day. 9 is greater "regularity" in this context, and 2 would be less "regularity." Also, just for fun, here is a study that shows omitting breakfast results in decreased health markers. This just one study, but there are myriad others along similar lines, so it doesn't even matter if the sample size is small, because cumulatively it ends up being a lot drawing similar conclusions

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on May 25, 2012
at 04:25 AM

The contents of the meal would matter, if that's the variable they were trying to isolate, but it is not. They were trying to isolate meal frequency.

0
B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on May 24, 2012
at 07:54 PM

How much protein are you eating? It sounds to me that you're filling your tummy but not meeting your protein requirement, and then being forced to come back for more later.

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on May 24, 2012
at 09:26 PM

Nothing starchy or grain based. You can get away with eating salad.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:05 PM

it depends, do you think that I should be eating more protein in the morning and for lunch?

B3173217a49b5b0116078775a17eb21d

(11488)

on May 24, 2012
at 08:46 PM

protein and fat only for breakfast (no-carbs) will keep you going to lunchtime. I tend to have a small protein-and-fat breakfast, a big lunch (half a chicken) and a small dinner. I'm never tempted to snack anymore.

174916155b2b80a3c0e4af123a6811bf

(30)

on May 24, 2012
at 09:11 PM

no carbs means no veggies at all?

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!