Why do you snack ?

[Dreamliner]

This is not a flame, is an earnest inquiry, and is directed towards those who desire to lose weight. I ask the question because:

Americans are consuming more calories than ever and it seems that the increase is coming from snacking. Americans now get at least 25% of their daily calories from snacking.

We know that more frequent feedings do not 'ramp up the metabolism.'

We know that more frequent feedings do not afford better appetite control. Indeed, a recent study shows better appetite control on three feedings a day than on six feedings a day.

Interested in hearing your reasons.

[chrisleakfan4life]

When i put on weight i basically snacked while watching TV or when i got bored.

Now i try to avoid it and stick to two meals a day, lunch and dinner.

Sent from my iPhone using GatorCountry

[chrisleakfan4life]

Like today i got a haircut before work and i had an hour to kill.

I was going to get Chipotle but i know its a good 800 calories so i skipped lunch and i wont be eating till afterwork and im getting a Chipotle burrito bol with chicken.

I havent eaten today and i wont be until later tonight. Not eating the whole day will make Chipotle that much better!

Sent from my iPhone using GatorCountry

[jeffh11]

Im no genious when it comes to health, but doesn't snacks keep your metabolism going?

Like I have always been told you are supposed to eat breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, and then dinner..

[Dreamliner]

Im no genious when it comes to health, but doesn't snacks keep your metabolism going?

Like I have always been told you are supposed to eat breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, and then dinner..

It's basically a myth. All food requires some energy to digest, regardless the meal frequency. The larger issue is that Americans eat too many calories during the day. That's why we're fat. And doing something we've never done until only recently in our history, 'eat breakfast, snack, lunch, snack and then dinner' has pretty much ensured that we get more calories than we burn off. It is interesting that you cited five daily feedings. Since 1980 Americans have increased daily feedings from 3.8 to 4.9. And what has it done for us ? :no:

[anstro76]

I've recently been put on a dr ordered diet due to liver damage, was encouraged by the dietician to eat 4 meals a day (very limited and structured) and given ways to snack to fool my body into feeling full.

Sent from my android

[Dreamliner]

While on the subject, most adults have to go lower than they think to lose significant amounts of weight. If you need to limit daily calories to, say, 1,500 to lose weight, why would you want to eat five 300 calorie meals a day ? Wouldn't you prefer to eat three 500 calorie meals a day ? Or maybe two 750 calorie meals a day ? Or maybe one 300 calorie meal, a 500 calorie meal and a 700 calorie meal ? Or how about one 1,500 calorie meal ?

Frequency really doesn't matter. It's the calories that matter.

[Dreamliner]

I've recently been put on a dr ordered diet due to liver damage, was encouraged by the dietician to eat 4 meals a day (very limited and structured) and given ways to snack to fool my body into feeling full.

Sent from my android

Let us know how it works!

[anstro76]

35 pounds so far, i'm really new to this.total lifestyle change, lucky for me i've worked in kitchens since I was 15 or else my meals could get very boring. Gonna be lurking more around here cause I'm learning as I go.

Sent from my android

[kalaniocc]

we snack cos we think we hongry

[jeffh11]

I have lost 40 pounds since mid February, I do cardio, and I eat breakfast, snack, lunch, snack, dinner...

The way i try and eat pretty much every day.

[Dreamliner]

That's fantastic, guys. My post is motivated from the standpoint that snacking generally works AGAINST weight-loss. And secondarily, it is not necessary. But again, if you snack, and you're losing weight, if it ain't broke ...

[jdrgator]

If I snack, it's at night because I've gotten too few calories during the day. Otherwise, I don't really snack.

[Dreamliner]

If I snack, it's at night because I've gotten too few calories during the day. Otherwise, I don't really snack.

What would 'too few calories' look like ? 800 ? Less ?

[malscott]

Me thinks it's because daddy beat me and told me I'd be a nothing when I was a wee one. I eat very little and have at least two snacks/mini meals during the day. One big meal/dinner and several snack types. I do circle the pantry if I'm bored. No more sugar or dairy, just fruit, nuts and fiber inbetween meals.

[jdrgator]

Probably anything less than 1400. I keep it down to about 1400 cals sometimes (about once a week right now) but I prefer not to that often. My trainer has me targeted at 2400 a day but I don't usually need that much. Between 1700-2000 is working well for me.

I do eat the same things for breakfast and lunch (protein shake with a fresh banana, a few strawberries and a teaspoon of pb for breakfast, and a tuna sandwich and salad, no dressing for lunch). Though my dinner changes regularly since my wife does the cooking.

[Dreamliner]

You may indeed be relatively lean. On the other hand, I rarely consult with a potential trainee who is keen to admit that they eat too much. In fact, the pretty much constant refrain is, 'I'd like to lose X pounds, but I really don't eat that much."

Then the snacking confession comes out later.

[Dreamliner]

Hehe, I can tell this is going to be a tough crowd for Intermittent Fasting.

[jdrgator]

I'll admit, mindless snacking was one of the reasons I went north 300 lbs for the first time (sadly) in my life.

I'm 42, and gained 100 lbs over the past decade (and 115 since 1997). It was a combination of three things I believe. Plain overeating/little exercise, particularly since 2006, and snacking, especially since other than the 9 hours a week that I teach, I am at my computer writing, which is pretty damn sedentary.

[Dreamliner]

I'll admit, mindless snacking was one of the reasons I went north 300 lbs for the first time (sadly) in my life.

I'm 42, and gained 100 lbs over the past decade (and 115 since 1997). It was a combination of three things I believe. Plain overeating/little exercise, particularly since 2006, and snacking, especially since other than the 9 hours a week that I teach, I am at my computer writing, which is pretty damn sedentary.

It certainly fits the pattern I see on the ground. My most recent trainee is a 50-year old man who pulled up his shirt, grabbed gobs of fat and then went on to claim that he really didn't eat that much ... then later admitted that he drinks sodas and other sugary drinks during the day. It almost always comes out in the form of an "Oh, yeah ...".

But snacking is something we've been encouraged to do. And not just by the food manufacturers. I mean the nutritionists.

[jdrgator]

I agree. I used to encourage people to snack when I trained them. But there's quite a bit of psychology in training people both in exercising and eating well. Getting people to think differently about their approach to food is a tall order, especially when their (bad) habits are so ingrained. They think they are hungry (and in a sense they are) but they don't necessarily need to indulge that hunger, particularly with empty calories. Though I do believe those who body build should eat more than four times a day. But those looking to shed lbs, it's very different.

For me, it was identifying the triggers and where/when I had the least amount of self-control. For me, I don't necessarily need junk food, but one problem is if it's brought into the house, my self control goes awol :) But if it's not there, I am fine.

[LeafUF]

But snacking is something we've been encouraged to do. And not just by the food manufacturers. I mean the nutritionists.

I know you dont believe in good or bad foods so you are lumping all snacking together. Really sometimes it almost borders on all eating is bad from you. But, there is a difference between mindless snacking of calorie laden vending machine fare and the types of controlled snacking that is recommended by nutritionists.

Eating mindfully, no matter what your strategy seems to be the key. We all agree that it is the end calories that matter. So, if you having a snack problem cut it out. Or, maybe you replace those high calorie snacks with mindful lower calorie replacements which helps create that deficit.

I definitely see the merits of IF. Simply limiting the window you are eating in and the number of times you eat should definitely work. Still, it has to be done mindfully. I cant do a 14 hour fast then have a 1500 calorie lunch and a 1500 calorie dinner and not gain weight just because I dont snack.

[Dreamliner]

I agree. I used to encourage people to snack when I trained them. But there's quite a bit of psychology in training people both in exercising and eating well. Getting people to think differently about their approach to food is a tall order, especially when their (bad) habits are so ingrained. They think they are hungry (and in a sense they are) but they don't necessarily need to indulge that hunger, particularly with empty calories. Though I do believe those who body build should eat more than four times a day. But those looking to shed lbs, it's very different.

For me, it was identifying the triggers and people's self-control. For me, I don't necessarily need junk food, but one problem is if it's brought into the house, my self control goes awol :) But if it's not there, I am fine.

Typically, I discover that my obese trainees are snackers. So, that's the first change I encourage them to make. Then the troubleshooting begins.

If there were any evidence that they were disciplined in their snacking, say, a regularly scheduled mid-afternoon snack and a regularly-scheduled late-night snack, I might have them eliminate a snack at a time. But that is rarely the case as they can't really get a handle on how much snacking they do, so I start by suggesting no snacking and limiting one's self to, say, three meals. And even there they need to guard against compensating by eating larger meals. So then smaller meals and no snacking becomes my general advice.

[anstro76]

snacking for me is as follows.. a bananna after b-fast, a handful of frozen grapes after lunch(freezing them helps compensate w/ my 1.5 liter fluid alottment, mentaly) then whatever fruit i have made into a smoothie w/ skim milk(as long as i have left room for so w/ my fluid restriction)so far my energy levels are rising and the lb's are dropping.

[Dreamliner]

I know you dont believe in good or bad foods so you are lumping all snacking together. Really sometimes it almost borders on all eating is bad from you. But, there is a difference between mindless snacking of calorie laden vending machine fare and the types of controlled snacking that is recommended by nutritionists.

Eating mindfully, no matter what your strategy seems to be the key. We all agree that it is the end calories that matter. So, if you having a snack problem cut it out. Or, maybe you replace those high calorie snacks with mindful lower calorie replacements which helps create that deficit.

I definitely see the merits of IF. Simply limiting the window you are eating in and the number of times you eat should definitely work. Still, it has to be done mindfully. I cant do a 14 hour fast then have a 1500 calorie lunch and a 1500 calorie dinner and not gain weight just because I dont snack.

I think you're misreading me. I do recommend IF, but I do not push it. Indeed, only one of my trainees is doing it. I do agree that 'mindful' eating is key, however one chooses to do it, whether through snacking or not. I do NOT agree with the nutritionists' recommendation for snacking because their rationale for snacking is ill-founded. And then the reason I find 'good foods vs. bad foods' annoying is because it takes the focus off the larger problem, which is overeating. I swear, if I hear the term 'clean bulk' one more time I may scream.

[jdrgator]

Typically, I discover that my obese trainees are snackers. So, that's the first change I encourage them to make. Then the troubleshooting begins.

If there were any evidence that they were disciplined in their snacking, say, a regularly scheduled mid-afternoon snack and a regularly-scheduled late-night snack, I might have them eliminate a snack at a time. But that is rarely the case as they can't really get a handle on how much snacking they do, so I start by suggesting no snacking and limiting one's self to, say, three meals. And even there they need to guard against compensating by eating larger meals. So then smaller meals and no snacking becomes my general advice.

That's the psychological part. Disciplining oneself, which means exacting control over what goes into ones body.

[LeafUF]

I think you're misreading me. I do recommend IF, but I do not push it. Indeed, only one of my trainees is doing it. I do agree that 'mindful' eating is key, however one chooses to do it, whether through snacking or not. I do NOT agree with the nutritionists' recommendation for snacking because their rationale for snacking is ill-founded. And then the reason I find 'good foods vs. bad foods' annoying is because it takes the focus off the larger problem, which is overeating. I swear, if I hear the term 'clean bulk' one more time I may scream.

Fair enough. I think we are on the same page then because it is true that the rationale of eating more often can be flawed. And most bodybuilding advice is simply not relevant to the average person just trying to lose weight.

[Dreamliner]

Fair enough. I think we are on the same page then because it is true that the rationale of eating more often can be flawed. And most bodybuilding advice is simply not relevant to the average person just trying to lose weight.

And interesting that you should mention bodybuilders. It's my impression that the nutritionists' advice spun out of bodybuilding practices, a case of the fringe leading the mainstream if I ever heard one.

Another pet peeve of mine is the notion of foods that can be added to the diet to impart health. And of course the corollary is foods you can add that will cause fat loss. I suspect that cinnamon is in this category.

[LeafUF]

Yeah, a fitness athlete and writer that I follow on Twitter recently got hacked and a link was posted to some junk Acai Berry diet. The writer quickly followed with saying they would never suggest some pill over diet and exercise.

Speaking of Twitter, there is some good info out there if you follow the right people. Martin Berkhan actually posts a lot of good articles there.

[Dreamliner]

Leaf -

Speaking of Martin Berkhan, are you aware that he recommends a four-way, upper-lower split ? It's actually a lot like 5-3-1 but with three important distinctions:

(1) His four primary lifts are deadlift, squat, bench press ... and weighted chinups and

(2) he uses Reverse Pyramid Training. That is, he works up to a heavy set of 3-4 reps, reduces the weight 10% and does a follow-up set, done. And he may do an accessory exercise or two and

(3) he lifts to failure.

[LeafUF]

I was unaware of his training specifics. What he gives out for free, at least with my limited amount of searching, does not go into great detail. I do like reading his overall philosophies and he links to a number of good articles. As I have said I have moved to something close to what would be his 1 meal before training plan. Though without actually paying for his services its just a rough guide.

I have also tapered off 5-3-1 recently because I have not been in the gym consistently for the past 6 weeks, usually I get in lifting for about 2 weeks straight before hitting the road and ending up at the mercy of hotel gyms. So 5-3-1 isn't sustainable. Instead I do mostly body weight exercises on the road and then see what type of splits I can get in the gym when I am home.

[Dreamliner]

FWIW, Chad Waterbury is arguing that a bodyweight template + barbell deadlift ONCE A WEEK is all you really need. He's heavy into training MMA fighters these days. He's also pushing the Warrior Diet after having been a smaller, frequent meals proponent for years.

In summary: One big meal day, one big lift a week, bodyweight the rest of the week.

FWIW, I can't argue with Berkhan's results, but I do think he's too fussy on meal content, macro-nutrient proportioning, protein requirements, etc. I STRONGLY suspect that the results stem from the calorie deficit that IF creates, along with brief, intense workouts and little if any cardio.

[LeafUF]

FWIW, I can't argue with Berkhan's results, but I do think he's too fussy on meal content, macro-nutrient proportioning, protein requirements, etc. I STRONGLY suspect that the results stem from the calorie deficit that IF creates, along with brief, intense workouts and little if any cardio.

Yeah, I have read a bit on Waterbury and his transition to Warrior Diet.

As to Berkhan being too fussy. I think to the point he gets his clients to it may be necessary. When you are getting people to single digits those things may start to matter more than just average 50 pound overweight Joe. I am not sure that it does matter but I wouldn't argue with someone that said it did. And if you are training someone to be competition ready his strategies may be better than just saying eat x calories no matter what they are made of. For me it will probably never matter and my macros change daily as to my calorie intake.

[Dreamliner]

No doubt that competition bodybuilding is a bit of a different animal. There is a difference between visible abs and 'shrink wrapped' abs. But most of his clients aren't competitive bodybuilders. They look very much like the bodies that John Barban is producing with simple, sustained calorie deficits with people eating the foods they enjoy. Now, Barban is too fussy on the training end. :wink:

I suspect that 99% of men will look fabulous if they: (1) do some sort of strength training (2) sustain a calorie deficit long enough and (3) get about 60g of protein a day, maybe a little more.

[Dreamliner]

Have to brag on a new trainee of mine. He was by his own admission and anxiety-driven, mindless-snacker. He estmated that he got untold hundreds of calories a day from snacking.

He has not had a single snack since we started a week ago. And not only that, he works in a social setting where people are constantly acosting him with snack foods. Just yesterday, he was twice offered cookies and twice refused them.

And this is what really blew him away (I didn't actually teach him this), on both occasions he resisted the urge to distance himself from the cookies. Rather, both times he stared them down and spurned them. Coincidentally, this is probably a sound strategy for deconditioning the 'hunger hormones.'

[LeafUF]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-8HA5JfPmM

[Dreamliner]

He owned that muffin!

[LeafUF]

Thought that clip was fitting. And pretty funny.

[StrangeGator]

My body makes me snack. I obey because I'm afraid my body will punish me by reverting to where I was 25 years ago, when it made me take cocaine. FWIW, I snacked a lot less back then.