The critical part with meal spacing is that you stabilize your hormones so that you do not have those spikes in insulin that occur when you eat large meals.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Carbohydrates, and especially refined ones like sugar, make you produce lots of extra insulin. I've been keeping my intake really low ever since I discovered this. I've cut out all starch such as potatoes, noodles, rice, bread and pasta.
The more you put in your body, the more you have to regulate it with insulin. So later kickoffs, you're talking about breakfast, lunch and a pregame meal, so that's more food you've got to be aware of and what you put in your body. A noon game, light breakfast, a little fruit and some insulin, and I'm good to go.
The usual justification for eating extra meals is that it keeps the metabolism 'revved up' so that weight loss is easier. There is, however, very little hard evidence that supports this idea, and a fair amount that disputes it.
I like to eat meals I will remember. Otherwise, what's the point?
I'm pretty fit, naturally. I do moderate exercise, and I try to eat pretty well and I think it has an effect on me. But hey, I'm putting on the insulin tire like everybody else, but that's just a function of getting older.
If you get just a bit of exercise in before every meal, you'll really see a difference.
It sounds awful and sort of goody two-shoes, but I never eat between meals.
A good meal is very important to me. When I have a bad meal, especially out, it's like I'm sitting in an airport during a flight delay. It's a part of my life I can't get back.
I only eat one meal a day. Lunch, not dinner.
When people are told to 'eat many small meals,' what they may actually hear is 'eat all the time,' making them likely to respond with some degree of compulsive overeating. It's no coincidence, I think, that obesity rates began rising rapidly in the 1980s more or less in tandem with this widespread endorsement of more frequent meals.
No opposing quotes found.