Meta-analysis on the effects of meal frequency on body composition

Discussion in 'Dieting / Supplement Discussion' started by scottm, Jan 14, 2015.

  1. scottm

    scottm Green Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
  2. snakeybizz

    snakeybizz Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2013
    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    20
    Location:
    England
    for me 3 meals > 6 meals for improved body composition... not for physical reasons but purely psychological...on 3 meals a day, meals are much more satisfying, I don't feel starved and it is less stressful...easier to adhere to for me.
     
  3. Pathogenic

    Pathogenic Wo Cao Ni Ma

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,828
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    The Swell Dungeon
    Brad Schoenfeld is perhaps the greatest vanquisher of broscience in history.
     
  4. Synapse

    Synapse Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Maine
    Same, but 2 meals for me. Really, after reviewing the literature my stance is - if meal frequency/timing has practically no effect (save pre/post workout), then do whatever the hell makes your life easier.
     
  5. snakeybizz

    snakeybizz Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2013
    Messages:
    1,504
    Likes Received:
    20
    Location:
    England
    yeah exactly, 2 is fine, hell any number is "fine" whatever works for you...I honestly don't care about the bro science hypothesis of increased meal frequency/timing increasing calorie expenditure...maybe it does maybe it doesn't (most likely doesn't, or has very little effect) for me its about making it a lifestyle...and to do that I have to eat as often or as little as I want to eat to get under X calories...for me that is around 3 meals and light snacking...either way I'm consuming just under maintenance to keep a healthy body comp, I happen to find it easier eating my allocated calories spread over 3 meals as opposed to 6 even if the caloric content is the same...I dunno why that is, there must be a mechanism to explain this

    I tried the whole 6 small meal thing and with my stomach rumbling 20 mins after eating my tiny Tupperware meal I decided it wasn't for me...that along with the 2 hour food prep zzzzzzzzz
     
  6. HockeyBjj

    HockeyBjj Putting on the foil

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    16,645
    Likes Received:
    33,154
    By the review I saw, there's really no pro or con to any eating frequency? It's just do what does best for you to give energy levels on current calorie level?

    All I know is I need a real meal within an hour and a half of lifting or there's a chance of manslaughter....
     
  7. selfcritical

    selfcritical Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,700
    Likes Received:
    815
    They didn't do an analysis for any performance factors to my knowledge. Nutrient timing will probably matter a lot more depending on energy system being stressed. I don't think the authors are going to advise doing tons of lactic conditioning on an intermittent fasting diet.
     
  8. Synapse

    Synapse Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    529
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Maine
    I agree, but I think it can still be kept as simple as "If you're about to do/just did work, eat. Otherwise, eat whenever you want."
     
  9. scottm

    scottm Green Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Yep, Aragon's study on Nutrient timing last year ... http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f15/nutrient-timing-revisited-2393911/
     
  10. RafailNadull

    RafailNadull Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    3,547
    Likes Received:
    16
    That's incorrect. The evidence might be such that conclusions are subject to considerable uncertainty, but the formation of evidence based conclusions is always possible.

    [​IMG]
    Disproportionate weighting? If the standard error was much smaller in that study and this smallness is not an artifact of model assumptions unsuitable for the experiment that was performed (as it often is, in say, regression analysis of non experimental data), then the weight should be much larger. A big properly done experiment (which would lead to a small standard error) doesn't provide the same evidence as a poorly done small experiment, and should indeed receive much greater weight in a meta analysis.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.