Metabolism Myths: Part 3
The Diet Rule That's A Total Myth
Metabolism Myth No. 3: Eating six small meals a day will boost metabolismAfter Body for Life came out in 1998, a lot of people started eating more frequently. In his book, author Bill Phillips asserted, “Studies show eating often helps accelerate the metabolism, so you burn more calories.” Again, Phillips used the word “studies,” yet the book lacks a single footnote or a bibliography.
And things took off from there. Google “six meals a day,” and you’ll see just how many people jumped on that bandwagon.
But is there any validity to it? Is eating six small meals a day really a powerful tool for weight loss? Let’s see what the “studies” say, and by studies, I mean let’s actually use some real scientific references.
France Bellisle, a specialist in eating behavior, reported in a 2004 issue of the Scandanavian Journal of Nutrition: “The notion [of high meal frequency] has been put into question by the recognition of a high level of dietary underreporting in overweight individuals. In addition, no difference in total daily energy expenditure has been documented as a function of daily meal number. Weight loss is not facilitated by high meal frequency. Snacking in obese subjects is associated with higher energy and fat intake.”
This means obese people are more likely to be high-frequency eaters rather than three-meals-a-day types, and that comment about “no difference in total daily energy expenditure” asserts that a bunch of small meals does not boost metabolism.
Additionally, M.A. Taylor and J.S. Garrow from the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics at Kings College in London published an article in the 2001 International Journal of Obesity where they asserted: “When [equal amounts of calories] was given as two meals per day or six meals per day there was found to be no significant difference in total energy expenditure.”
Again, we’re not getting a metabolism boost from higher meal frequency.
Going back as far as 1993 in the British Journal of Nutrition Wilhelmine Verboeket-van de Venne compared two meals a day vs. seven and found that there was no difference in total energy expenditure or average daily metabolic rate.
There you go: no metabolic boost from high meal frequency, determined by studies.
But what does this mean for you?
I am personally not a fan of the six small meals a day approach because:
1. It’s a pain in the ass. Seriously, who has than kind of time?
2. The meals are too small, and I feel constantly hungry.
Instead, I stick to three meals a day with bits of fruit for snacks here and there, usually right before exercise.
Although I discourage the six-meal a day plan, I also need to warn you about eating too infrequently. I recommend three or four meals a day because there are dangers associated with eating less.
Obese people eat often, so why are they obese?France Bellisle’s research mentioned above also found that “Obese people tend to eat little in the morning and much in the afternoon and evening. In extreme cases, a ‘night-eating syndrome’ is observed.” This is a common theme that obese people skip breakfast. I’m not sure why they do. Perhaps they believe that if they skip breakfast they think they will take in fewer calories during the day, but the opposite is true. Contrary to what you might have heard or read, eating breakfast does not get your metabolism going in the morning. What eating breakfast does do is help establish a regular meal pattern and keep appetite under control so that you don’t overdo it later in the day.
In addition, Astrid Smeets and Margriet Westerterp-Plantenga published research in the 2008 British Journal of Nutrition that compared three meals vs. two meals a day and found that those who ate three a day had higher feelings of satiety over a 24-hour period. Conversely, they found that it had no difference on total energy expenditure. Again, there was no metabolic boost from three vs. two meals, but it was seen as better for appetite control, which is a critical component of weight loss.
If you want to eat six small meals a day, it isn’t bad for you, but it requires a lot of planning as well as careful attention to calories to ensure you aren’t eating more in a day than if you were eating fewer meals a day. It sure doesn’t make a difference to your overall metabolism. The point I make here is that you don’t have to eat that frequently if you don’t want to. Just don’t eat too infrequently.
To conclude: It's about calories, not frequencyMy final word on metabolism is this: Stick to the basics. If weight loss is your goal, figure out how many calories you are burning at rest and also via exercise, then adapt your caloric intake accordingly to generate a consistent caloric deficit. Forget about so-called miracle methods for boosting metabolism because they don’t exist. The good news is that this makes things much less complicated for you. The formula for success is: Work your ass off at weightlifting (or some other resistance exercise), get lots of intense aerobic training and eat a healthy and calorie-restricted diet. Do that consistently, and you’ll get there. Metabolism be damned.
And if the science didn’t convince you I know what I’m talking about when it comes to how metabolism works, then perhaps these before and after pictures of me will.
Another myth you probably believed in? The effectiveness of high-intensity training. James Fell debunks it here.