6

votes

Needing to snack on paleo: good, bad, or indifferent?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created November 08, 2011 at 2:26 PM

It seems to me that snacking is a cultural phenomenon that isn't particularly good for us ... and not particularly paleo. Paleo snacks are certainly an improvement over the stuff in the vending machine, but I'd think that once you've adapted to paleo, it shouldn't be necessary.

Don't most of us have sufficient fat and/or glycogen stores that should carry us over from one meal to the next? Isn't digestion helped by letting one meal properly digest before eating again?

Some obvious places where snacking might be useful is for those doing lots and lots of physical activity, or those with funky schedules (e.g., long flights w/o proper meals).

So tell me: what's your hack on snacking?

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on December 04, 2011
at 01:27 AM

Oh yay, I can now join the cool kids who IF club since I don't snack. ;)

91f8f992b1fa6c1f3bfe0805e4007dcb

on December 04, 2011
at 01:17 AM

sound good to me.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on November 09, 2011
at 09:56 PM

I cant hack something i dont do.....or advocate.

D3f3b91d1dd9ce60865654faeb2ec809

on November 08, 2011
at 07:22 PM

Right to the point. IF all the way!

306aa57660d911781231f8090c2a5619

(3808)

on November 08, 2011
at 07:03 PM

I agree - I have a hard time imagining that prehistoric people ate 3 discrete meals a day with nothing in between, regardless of stage of development or level of physical activity, and never ever popped a few berries in their mouth while out picking. On the other hand, "I must have elevenses or my blood sugar bottoms out and I get all shaky and faint" doesn't strike me as normal.

64433a05384cd9717c1aa6bf7e98b661

(15236)

on November 08, 2011
at 06:54 PM

That sounds nice and simple, but people who are metabolically deranged get hunger cues more often than they arguably should.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on November 08, 2011
at 04:04 PM

With your activity level and schedule, this makes perfect sense. I bet you're not carrying lots of reserves either.

64433a05384cd9717c1aa6bf7e98b661

(15236)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:53 PM

You said it! After adjusting to an optimal diet, you don't need to snack. Also, even though you said you weren't a big snacker, you used to always need a snack between lunch and dinner. This is so common but I don't think it's optimal.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:27 PM

Me too! A former ravaging lunatic ...

7dc950fc76a046048e683d2a27dced37

on November 08, 2011
at 03:18 PM

Looking forward to your report in a few months!

Frontpage book

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

9 Answers

8
Ef9f83cb4e1826261a44c173f733789e

on November 08, 2011
at 03:01 PM

The only hack I have is to eat the right foods. Eat something if you're hungry. Labels like snack, breakfast, lunch, dinner, etc. are the cultural phenomenon, along with the scheduled times of day we eat.

64433a05384cd9717c1aa6bf7e98b661

(15236)

on November 08, 2011
at 06:54 PM

That sounds nice and simple, but people who are metabolically deranged get hunger cues more often than they arguably should.

4
64433a05384cd9717c1aa6bf7e98b661

(15236)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:14 PM

I've recently started researching this for my master's thesis, so in a few months I'll be able to give yu a very good answer.

In the meantime, I'll say that I don't think people should snack, or even break up their meals into 6 small ones throughout the day. However, there are studies that suggest both ways are better.

Some people are against labeling things as a snack or a meal (like I was), but here is an interesting look at differences in glucose and insulin levels before eating to differentiate before a meal or a snack.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14984807

The best candidates for the definition of a meal appeared to be a high motivation to eat associated with preprandial declines in plasma glucose and insulin concentrations....

In conclusion, we show that for eating occasions composed of similar food items and occurring at a similar interval between lunch and dinner, there was a linear decrease in glucose and in insulin concentrations before the eating occasion associated with a high hunger score.

Not all that shocking, but I think people who need to snack have impaired gluconeogenic abilities in their liver and are unable raise their blood sugar appropriately. If there was some kind of protocol to help reset (ahem) their internal signaling they might be able to have increased hormonal sensitivity.

We all have sufficient fat stores that should be able to get us the 4-5 hours between meals without becoming a ravaging lunatic.

  • I should include the caveat that snacks after a hard workout may be fine, but I'm not even sure you can't just consider workout and meal timing to avoid the extra snack.

7dc950fc76a046048e683d2a27dced37

on November 08, 2011
at 03:18 PM

Looking forward to your report in a few months!

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:27 PM

Me too! A former ravaging lunatic ...

3
E167c0387a5f0b87bb1f2c3e6aec73a8

(1240)

on November 08, 2011
at 05:47 PM

No snacking. that's my hack.

D3f3b91d1dd9ce60865654faeb2ec809

on November 08, 2011
at 07:22 PM

Right to the point. IF all the way!

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on December 04, 2011
at 01:27 AM

Oh yay, I can now join the cool kids who IF club since I don't snack. ;)

2
Cfc7dee889a66db9cd76c4f348109294

on November 08, 2011
at 03:58 PM

My schedule and activity level lead me to have 4 eating episodes. Since going paleo, I've dropped from 6 small snacks to 4. I wake up early to exercise - I'm also a part time part time personal trainer and have to teach or train in the early AM. So, I'm hungry for breakfast around 7 or 8. I have lunch midday and a "small meal" around 4 - I eat dinner late - around 9 after my bf finishes night class. This isn't ideal for many, but it works for me. On the weekends when my schedule is more flexible, I tend not to need to snack as much. I've considered playing around with my schedule - and I'd be curious about my glucose levels, but this seems to work for me now.

96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on November 08, 2011
at 04:04 PM

With your activity level and schedule, this makes perfect sense. I bet you're not carrying lots of reserves either.

2
96bf58d8c6bd492dc5b8ae46203fe247

(37227)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:31 PM

I looked at your question from both sides--in the beginning, I imagine Grok and family stopped to nibble anything edible as they moved around. I also imagine they either had prime metabolism or didn't last long.

Today, those who eat most often seem to be those who are out of control or desperately trying to gain control. Everyone I've known with a good body profile was relatively indifferent to food even when there was a potluck spread at the office.

306aa57660d911781231f8090c2a5619

(3808)

on November 08, 2011
at 07:03 PM

I agree - I have a hard time imagining that prehistoric people ate 3 discrete meals a day with nothing in between, regardless of stage of development or level of physical activity, and never ever popped a few berries in their mouth while out picking. On the other hand, "I must have elevenses or my blood sugar bottoms out and I get all shaky and faint" doesn't strike me as normal.

1
13a44ea00b0c9af0b6d0f3d5f5c2cfca

(7223)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:47 PM

I don't know that there really is any one right answer to your question--at least not with the research/knowledge currently available. Studies seem to show both can work.

On a personal level I've never been a big snacker, but I used to always need a snack between lunch and dinner. Since going paleo that happens very rarely and usually I can look back and see that my lunch did not have sufficient fat or protein. I find that if I am eating well-balanced full meals I don't get hungry until it's time for the next meal.

64433a05384cd9717c1aa6bf7e98b661

(15236)

on November 08, 2011
at 03:53 PM

You said it! After adjusting to an optimal diet, you don't need to snack. Also, even though you said you weren't a big snacker, you used to always need a snack between lunch and dinner. This is so common but I don't think it's optimal.

1
Medium avatar

on November 08, 2011
at 03:33 PM

It's true, there's evidence both for and against the many mini-meals practice, and, by extension, for and against "snacking." I once bought into the 4-6 small meals model, based on Barry Sears' rather compelling metaphor that the approach approximates a "drip system" thus minimizing sharp insulin spikes. Metaphors can be persuasive but that doesn't make them veridically true, nor should it immunize them from serious scrutiny.

As for myself: currently enjoying substantial success via IF (Berkhan 16/8, two meals between 1pm and 9pm). I experience hunger primarily in the 1-2 hour prior to breaking my daily 16-hour fast, yet that sense of "being hungry" lacks the urgency I used to experience. I think the food timing cycle partly explains this salutary change, but I think it's also mental/psychological, and I say that not to minimize that factor, the way we often do when we ask, "But are you sure it's not just psychological?" To the contrary, I sense I have learned, or more accurately, am still learning, a new relationship to the shifting polarity of satiated/hungry. Such that: I feel satiated most of the time these days. But not the "satiated" that was closer feeling filled up, gorged, after a meal, sometimes to the point of stupor.

I could almost say: "Eating doesn't matter much any more," to which I would quickly append: at least not in the way it used to. That is, I don't think about, look forward to, plan "eating" (beyond stopping at the store for provisions and making appropriate advance plans for the next meal I'll be preparing). It feels deliciously sane. Let me add this significant detail. I used to be a long-distance runner, and so got used to feeding/fueling pre- and post-event. I'd go on a training run, knowing I'd have some appropriate eating to do after the workout, to restore glycogen and all the rest. Looking back, I spent a lot of time thinking about that process. Also spent a lot of time snacking, though I tended to call it "grazing" and I was felt good about my food choices. These days on IF: I work out (lifting, sometimes followed by short run) in a fasted state, and then have my first of two meals after working out. So, yes, still eating post-workout. But there's something splendidly different about placing eating inside an 8-hour window, keeping it focused in that way ??? and very much enjoying all the tastes ??? yet knowing I'll be done with it when the 8-hour period is over, and I won't be "hungry" again for 14-16 hours.

So, anyhow. I suspect we will continue to discover that meal timing and meal frequency are two relevant factors among many, including caloric load and macronutrients, and all the other usual suspects under frequent discussion here at PH. It continues to appear to this observer that Life is unapologetically multifactorial. Not to say some factors arn't far more important than others, nor to argue for some blithe "let's not get too excited by any one dimension, because everything's connected" premise.

Still, kind of makes sense not get too excited by any one dimension, because eveything's connected...

0
91f8f992b1fa6c1f3bfe0805e4007dcb

on December 04, 2011
at 01:17 AM

If you are active,an athlete or have a considerable amount of muscle mass. You will and should be a snacker. being very active and having Muscle mass plays a key role in insulin and glucose level

0
8508fec4bae4a580d1e1b807058fee8e

on November 09, 2011
at 08:29 PM

When my hubby, parents, brother, and me all went Paleo initially we were eating a lot! I think it takes about 3-6 weeks for the body to learn to use the fat as fuel instead of glucose.

After a month we stabilized and stopped snacking, and cut back even our portions of meals.

We were snacking quite a bit on the following:

1) nuts

2) cheese

3) cold cuts, jerky

4) fruit (only with fat like nuts, cheese or heavy cream)

5) unsweetened almond milk

6) 85% or higher dark chocolate

7) eggs

8) avocado

9) tuna, sardines

91f8f992b1fa6c1f3bfe0805e4007dcb

on December 04, 2011
at 01:17 AM

sound good to me.

Answer Question


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