Thoughts on meal frequency
Like many of the readers of this site, I grew up with bodybuilding nutrition. I read Championship Bodybuilding by Chris Aceto like the Bible, truly devoured Arnold's Ecyclopedia, and studied my favorite bodybuilding magazines every month.
A bodybuilding style diet (six meals, specific macronutrient ratios and nutrient distribution scheme, etc.) is one of the most effective ways to change your body, there's no doubt about it. And anyone who tells you otherwise has never consistently followed this style of eating with dedication and discipline.
But as I've worked with more people in the real world, my theories have evolved as well. I have started to ask myself three main questions regarding this approach:
1. is a traditional maximal fat loss/competition prep plan sustainable over the longer term?
The answer for the majority of us is no - and this is true even for the truly hardcore athletes among us. Many competitive athletes can tell you this first hand: Post-competition binge eating, rapid rebuilding of lost weight, and the negative hormonal feedback loop associated with extreme training and nutritional approaches and/or doping programs.
Everyone can diet in some way when motivation is high - whether it's for a competition, a new photo on Facebook or even just a summer pool party where you know the bartender and have been wanting to attend for months.
But how will preparing for that one big day affect your long-term metabolic and hormonal health and your ability to get lean again the next time you try?
Is completely cutting out carbs, doing three hours of cardio a day and having the personality of a snail and the libido of a corpse the only way to get in shape? No six-pack in the world is worth that.
Someone will defend bulking and dieting as necessary, but for many it's a simple yo-yo scenario, even if it is an integral part of the athletic realm. It's neither sustainable nor good for your long-term goals or overall health. I've seen former competitive athletes become obese, develop type II diabetes and struggle with their health and body composition for the rest of their lives because of this yo-yo effect.
If this approach sounds appealing to you, then that's fine, go for it. To each their own. I'm more interested in finding a plan that I can stick with for the rest of my life and that allows me to stay in shape year round.
2. is it functional?
For years I had no problem making trips to the grocery store every other day, cooking a truckload of food twice a week, packing a bag of Tupperware containers every day, etc. Discipline and dedication are part of my personality.
When I started this sport, I mistakenly assumed that this was the case for everyone. You want to get in shape? Then do what you damn well have to do to achieve that goal.
But after working with more and more people in the real world, I realized this isn't functional or realistic for most outside of the fitness industry.
Have you ever worked with a Silicon Valley entrepreneur whose industry is moving forward at a thousand tweets per second? Have you ever counseled a doctor or lawyer who can be in the operating room or courtroom for half a day at a time? Or a college student who has a lot of classes and has to work half days to earn their degree and is trying to find enough time to score?
For these populations, taking a break every 2 hours for tuna and broccoli is simply unrealistic.
Is eating 6 to 8 small meals a day functional and doable for the next year, 5 years or the rest of your life as your priorities change and you chase other career goals and still want to stay in shape?
If you are leaning more towards "not really", then the next question is whether something like this is absolutely necessary to get results or if there is another way.
3. are there alternative approaches to meal frequency for overall fat loss and body improvement?
I'm not talking about bodybuilding competition diets at this point, which is why I don't need a bunch of angry bodybuilders throwing their sweaty posing briefs at me - unless they're women.
Getting ready for the competition stage is something else. If that's your goal, then I hope you're following a well thought out approach and not an exotic protocol for recreational bodybuilders. If in doubt, work with a good trainer.
I'm also not talking about mass building phases or people who are strictly dieting to improve their athletic performance. If your calorie requirements are 5000+ kcal, then you probably have no choice but to go down the 5 to 6 meals a day route.
However, this article - and my articles in general - are aimed more at the other 90% of the non-competitive strength athlete population who are simply looking for a sustainable approach to getting defined and who want to be able to say "I look good. I mean really good. Look at how good I look."
Anecdotal evidence
Just as I would advise you not to let an ADA or Paleo dictate your diet, I would advise you not to let a bodybuilding/fitness nutrition dogma dictate your life. If you are objective, the reality is that there are other methods and approaches to achieving great shape.
Legendary bodybuilder Serge Nubret ate only two meals a day consisting of huge amounts of horse meat with rice and beans. I know some will think of steroids now, but this type of diet didn't just work well for him. Many of his non-bodybuilding clients also reported excellent transformations in their body composition.
The "three meals a day" approach is belittled in the bodybuilding industry and often criticized as being counterproductive to fat loss or improving body development.
However, this is most likely the case because the typical American diet is used as a representative control group for this approach - mocha and coffee for breakfast, sandwiches and chips for lunch, pizza and cookies for dinner.
This is problematic for comparison because these are not the typical meals eaten by someone seeking to change their body composition.
It is more the sub-optimal dietary choices that are the problem and not the meal frequency pattern itself. Three meals a day can work well for fat loss - provided you make good food choices.
In contrast, the traditional Japanese diet (fish, lean meat, eggs, vegetables, rice, sweet potatoes, less processed foods, etc.) results in one of the lowest diabetes and obesity rates in the world. And don't get me started on genetics. There are studies that show that when native Japanese people switch to a more Western dietary pattern, their health biomarkers drop dramatically and their body fat percentage skyrockets.
I'm not trying to make everyone feel like they're turning into a Japanese person, but you can certainly learn a few things from this approach to eating - just as you can from any effective approach including Paleo or Mediterranean diets.
While I think a Paleo diet is a good starting template for an overweight, sedentary office worker, I think the traditional Japanese diet is a good template for a strength athlete looking for a healthy carbohydrate-based nutritional approach to improving their body development.
Here is a typical day. I have adjusted the values to better suit an 85 kilo man rather than a 45 kilo geisha:
- Breakfast: 2 to 3 whole eggs, 120 grams of fish, 1 cup of rice, sea vegetables*, green tea.
- Lunch: 250 grams of teriyaki chicken, 1 cup of rice, mixed vegetables
- Dinner: 350 grams salmon or mackerel, miso soup, 1 cup rice, spinach salad
- Dessert: 1 piece of fruit or ½ cup of mashed sweet potato
This provides an 85 kilo bodybuilder with about 180 grams of protein, 180 grams of carbohydrates and 40 to 50 grams of fat as a by-product of protein foods.
* Sea vegetables are basically nothing more than seaweed, which may not sound particularly tasty, but have been a staple in the Japanese diet for centuries. Sea vegetables also provide one of the widest ranges of minerals of all foods, including iron, magnesium, zinc and especially iodine. The name sea vegetables is a collective term for a number of different vegetables such as nori, hijiki, wakame, arame, kombu and dulse.
The next step is to add an appropriate training nutrition protocol on training days. For lean people trying to build as much mass as possible, a high quality weight gainer is the most effective natural method I've come across.
Heavier guys or athletes subject to weight class restrictions will probably be better off with a high quality protein powder and fewer carbs to achieve significant, but less dramatic, gains in strength and mass.
Cliffs Notes on meal frequency
When I was still in school, I tried to make up for what I missed during chemistry class because I was daydreaming about the couple hot girls in my class by reading through "Cliffs Notes" - a series of textbooks with condensed information on various topics - on the relevant subject. Here's my Cliffs Notes version on the science of meal frequency:
A study conducted by Bellisle and colleagues examined the purported benefits of frequent meals on the thermic effect of food (TEF for short). While the researchers found evidence that the thermic effect of food was higher with more frequent meals, the differences measured were neither clear nor significant, leading them to conclude that total food intake is still most important in the energy balance equation (1).
Another study conducted by Burke and colleagues looked at an identical carbohydrate intake over a 24-hour period, split into either meals every four hours or hourly meals. No significant difference in muscle glycogen storage was observed between the two groups (2).
Lastly, a study conducted by Norton concluded that although frequent intake of amino acids is a common practice, it is unlikely that eating another meal 2-3 hours after the first meal is sufficient to cause a further increase in protein synthesis, as amino acid/leucine levels are already elevated.
Norton concluded that it may therefore be more beneficial to consume larger amounts of protein during a meal and wait longer than the 2 to 3 hours between protein doses typically recommended in the bodybuilding community (3).
Leaving personal bias or tradition aside and looking at the scientific data objectively, there is clearly not much difference between smaller, more frequent meals and larger, more spaced meals when it comes to fat loss and metabolic factors associated with fat loss (food-induced thermogenesis, energy expenditure over 24 hours, etc.).
Some will use these scientific studies to "hear what they want to hear" and rail against a bodybuilding diet. "I knew it. Three meals a day is superior to a six meal a day approach. Bodybuilders are obsessive, compulsive idiots."
But that's not what the science says. It says that both approaches are more or less equally good. Translation? Both can be effective in the real world.
Remember the hierarchy of fat loss: optimal food choices, total calories, and targeted macronutrient ratios based on individual factors are the most important steps in designing an effective fat loss diet. When these variables are controlled, meal frequency is not as important.
The optimal meal frequency pattern for you is the pattern that best helps you stick to your diet. The most maintainable and functional approach in your world is the best approach for you.
In other words, the physiology of meal frequency doesn't matter that much. Both science and anecdotal experience prove this. It is the psychological and social factors that are the most important variables in your decisions.
Of course, this requires some experimentation on your part. How does a meal frequency fit into your daily routine, how does it fit with the demands of your career, lifestyle and social life?
Some have found for themselves that eating smaller, more frequent meals gives them better blood sugar control, gives them more energy and makes them less prone to bingeing and dieting slips. Even though they eat smaller, calorie-controlled meals, on a psychological level they like the idea that another meal will follow shortly. They like to stay one step ahead of hunger, or that feeling of never feeling hungry and never feeling too full.
If they have to go through a long period without food and are hungry, they find it very difficult to make good food choices. They end up overeating on junk food. A traditional fitness/bodybuilding approach might work better for this group.
Many fitness athletes suffer from the fear that if they ever go longer than three hours without eating, their body will start to "cannibalize" itself and they will lose all their hard-earned muscle mass. These people have a "feed the machine" mentality. Regardless of the physiological truths, psychology is the key component of nutritional success. Smaller, more frequent meals may be the best approach for this demographic as well.
With busy professional lives and an aversion to packing food and carrying it around in Tupperware containers every day, some find that eating 6 to 8 meals a day is very impractical and unrealistic for their lifestyle. They can't manage to fit six balanced and complete meals into their daily routine. They therefore end up eating a few solid meals and then simply resorting to snack foods - usually the highly processed, carbohydrate-rich unhealthy snacks.
In addition, when they do eat, they prefer to eat a full, filling meal. The small, fitness-style meals don't satisfy their appetite, leaving them constantly hungry and craving. From a psychological point of view, such a dietary approach makes them feel like they are constantly depriving themselves or constantly dieting.
Lastly, there are those whose career or lifestyle fits very well with the traditional "3 meals a day" approach. Ultimately, this is the pattern that society and civilization has defined as the normal structure in most forms of society. We have our breakfast meetings, our lunch breaks and our evening dinner dates.
Three balanced meals might be the easiest approach to follow for the working population who are not professional athletes. Slaving away to try to fit in a fitness approach of eight small meals a day might be unrealistic and counterproductive.
Just remember that food choices are crucial. Three balanced meals a day with good food choices will produce different results than three meals consisting of junk food and the typical foods of the Western diet.
References
- Bellisle et al. 1997. Meal frequency and energy balance. Br J Nutr Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70.
- Burke, et al. 1996. Muscle glycogen storage after prolonged exercise: effect of the frequency of carbohydrate feedings. Am J Clin Nutr 64(1): 115-119.
- Norton, L. 2008. Optimal protein intake and meal frequency to support maximal protein synthesis and muscle mass. SlideShare.
By Nate Miyaki
Source: https://www.t-nation.com/diet-fat-loss/deep-meal-frequency-thoughts