Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Bodybuilding Boards => Nutrition, Products & Supplements Info => Topic started by: flexingtonsteele on July 10, 2009, 06:59:16 PM
-
Is horseshit.
Another lie thought up by the supplement industry to get u to buy their shakes and mrp's in the 90's and now everyone lives and dies by it.
Ask arnold, surge nubret, bob paris, mohammed makkaway, or lee haney, any of the great bb'ers of the 70's and 80's how many meals they ate per day, and i doubt you'd hear a six come out of their mouths.
-
6 times a day at a minimum. There is a reason why the pros of today are bigger and by far better conditioned than those of yesteryear and it is not "all drugs".
-
true for the most part, flex !
-
Zane claimed two real meals per day with two additional "snacks" in between. Not the biggest bber but definitely one of the best.
-
How many times you eat a day is not nearly as important as what you eat daily.
-
6 times a day at a minimum. There is a reason why the pros of today are bigger and by far better conditioned than those of yesteryear and it is not "all drugs".
I honestly think the biggest reason the pros are bigger today is due to use of Growth Hormone. The most noticble result of growth hormone is the extended Abdomin, due to enlarged organs from Growth Hormone Abuse. They didn't have it back in the 70's, that is why you see pictures of arnold and his waste looks small compared to Ronny Coleman, and others.
Multiple meals each day helps the body keep the metabolism up, and makes it easier to shred the fat. It has nothing to do with marketing by supplement companies, although I agree they try to use it way to sell product.
-
Is horseshit.
Another lie thought up by the supplement industry to get u to buy their shakes and mrp's in the 90's and now everyone lives and dies by it.
Ask arnold, surge nubret, bob paris, mohammed makkaway, or lee haney, any of the great bb'ers of the 70's and 80's how many meals they ate per day, and i doubt you'd hear a six come out of their mouths.
It appears we have another lazy person who wants to come up with some excuse as to why he doesn't have to eat more than the "normal" 3 meals per day.
Haney and Schwarzenegger have stated on numerous occasions that they've eaten 5-6 meals per day.
To top it all off, a number of bodybuilders (at least when preparing for contests) cut out ALL shakes and protein bars and eat 6 meals (or more) from regular food. And, if some people can't afford commercial protein shakes, they simply make their own from milk, eggs, yogurt, etc.
So spare us the conspiracy theories of all the big bad evil supplement companies, trying to hunt you down and take your money. That can easily be mitigated by smart shopping.
-
Amen brother!
It appears we have another lazy person who wants to come up with some excuse as to why he doesn't have to eat more than the "normal" 3 meals per day.
Haney and Schwarzenegger have stated on numerous occasions that they've eaten 5-6 meals per day.
To top it all off, a number of bodybuilders (at least when preparing for contests) cut out ALL shakes and protein bars and eat 6 meals (or more) from regular food. And, if some people can't afford commercial protein shakes, they simply make their own from milk, eggs, yogurt, etc.
So spare us the conspiracy theories of all the big bad evil supplement companies, trying to hunt you down and take your money. That can easily be mitigated by smart shopping.
-
what did Zane know about gaining mass?
Zane claimed two real meals per day with two additional "snacks" in between. Not the biggest bber but definitely one of the best.
-
I try to eat six meals a day spaced 3 hours apart. I try to get 1 gram of protein per lb of bw.
many times I can only get 5 meals or 4 and a couple of shakes.
it is what it is.
most times, its no problem and I started as the proverbial 98lb weekling and now have a wt problem at 286 lbs. fortunately I have discovered the anabolic diet and believe its for me.
no drugs here, never needed them and never will.
-
what did Zane know about gaining mass?
Enough to win 3 Mr. Olympias and 3 Mr. Universe titles (one of which came at the expense of a certain guy named Arnold).
-
i read in an interview that danny padilla said he would eat 5-6 times a day pre contest
save us your wacky consiracy theories flex ::)
-
i read in an interview that danny padilla said he would eat 5-6 times a day pre contest
save us your wacky consiracy theories flex ::)
Indeed!!
This idea that eating 5-6 meals per day just popped up during the 90s (forgetting that guys like Schwarzenegger, Pearl, Gironda, Blair, and others from the old-OLD school recommended doing such) just to sell supplements is downright absurd.
-
Here's an interesting article from Brad Pilon on this very subject...
The idea of eating 6 small meals per day as a way to lose weight has never sat well with me. More than anything I have always thought of it as a major inconvenience.
I think it is a real hassle to eat that often. It's hard enough to eat three meals a day if you are preparing them well with fresh ingredients and as little processed foods as possible, I couldn’t even imagine doing that much work 6 times every day!
I also don’t like the hormonal effect of this style of eating. Eating several small meals per day does reduce insulin spikes (slightly), however it does this by substituting in an almost constant flow of insulin (with lower peaks). So instead of a couple high peaks, you end up having your total insulin increased over the course of the day. And total daily insulin is more important from a health and weight loss standpoint.
If you’ve read Eat Stop Eat, or listened to the Eat Stop Eat Advanced Audio Files then you know that when it comes to fat burning, one of the most important parts of your metabolism is the opposing effects of Growth Hormone and Insulin.
Growth hormone is secreted when we are fasting and directs nutrients toward our muscles. Insulin is secreted when we are fed and sends them the other way toward fat.
A simple rule of metabolism is that Insulin plus excess calories equals fat storage.
There is no way to avoid it.
Keeping your insulin elevated over the course of a day seems like a bad idea to me, especially if you are trying to lose weight. In this style of eating you have to be almost obsessive with monitoring the amount of calories you eat. Even the smallest mistake at each of your 6 meals and this over-eating will almost certainly cause you to store fat.
Think of it this way, even over-eating by as little as 85 Calories at each of your 6 meals would be an extra 500 Calories per day.
This is reason enough for me not to bother with the 6 meals a day mantra, however it’s NOT the biggest reason why I don’t like this approach. The number one reason I don’t like it is because it is not fair to women.
That’s right, six meals a day is sexist.
The diet style of eating six small meals a day started with bodybuilders. And it is traditionally men who read about and follow bodybuilding.
So when magazine writers are trying to think up new nutrition stories for their readers, they are doing it for guys who are into bodybuilding and who typical have much larger muscle mass and bodies than average.
This is where 6 meals per day comes in. When it was originally pitched as a way to lose weight, it was in
bodybuilding magazines, directed specifically to bodybuilders. This idea made sense to them and didn’t seem too hard.
After all, when a 260-pound heavily muscled bodybuilder is trying to lose weight he might start by lowering his calorie intake down to around 2400 (which is much more than an average person would ever need in a day).
Divide this by 6 and he is eating around 400 Calories at every meal.
Based on this math, this bodybuilder could lose weight by eating a 6-inch “steak and cheese” sub from Subway for every meal!
Now that sounds like a diet I could handle no problem.
However, a 5 foot 4 woman who weighs a 130 pounds isn’t so lucky. For this woman to lose weight her caloric intake is going to have to be much lower than the bodybuilder in the example above. If her dieting caloric intake was 1300, and she was eating 6 meals per day then she would get to eat a whopping 220 Calories at each meal!
This is the caloric equivalent of eating one medium sized banana and a half-cup of yogurt at every meal.
Obviously, I can't tell you that I understand what it feels like to be 130 pound woman, but I can tell you that to me eating a half cup of yogurt and a medium banana at EVERY meal would be torture.
Now think of this - if that medium banana is just a little larger, then she will have already gone over her meal allowance of 220 Calories! So in order for her to stick to the diet she would need to eat even LESS than 220 calories at her next meal.
Think of how wrong this sounds; Start your day off with a “large” rather than “medium” banana and a yogurt and you are already on track to overeat for the day! This style of eating requires you to be impossibly strict.
Since there really is no scientifically proven weight loss advantage to eating multiple small meals per day (this includes any supposed metabolic advantage), why do this to yourself?
I can’t imagine eating multiple small meals the size of a banana and some yogurt for weeks on end…like I said earlier -it would be torture! Especially since their is no weight loss or health benefits to eating this way.
So this is why I don’t agree with the weight loss strategy of eating 6 small meals per day - It was designed for a very specific, heavily muscled, unique group of people (bodybuilders) but for some reason it gets pushed on the rest of us.
Not only was 6 meals per day designed for a very unique group of people, but in order to be done properly, you need to give in to Obsessive Compulsive Eating.
It forces you to start worrying about how much you ate at every meal, and what the exact nutrient breakdown was for every single thing you ate, and the minute you are finished one meal, you immediately have to begin planning the next one. This is a very toxic way of living with food.
There is no benefit, and for most people who don’t weight 250+ pounds, it just makes life very difficult. Eating only 200 to 300 calories per meal is very hard to do, and because nobody can spend 6 hours a day preparing these meals, you end up having no choice but to rely on supplements and protein bars to get all your meals in without going over your calorie amount…and most likely this is the whole purpose of this style of eating.
It was bodybuilding magazines who first made this style of eating popular, and it is these same magazines that serve as the main advertising source for sports supplements.
So if following 6 meals a day is only really possible when you use protein shakes and protein bars it makes perfect sense that this style of eating is promoted so heavily by the bodybuilding/supplement/magazine industry in order to sell more supplements, protein powders and protein/nutrition bars.
Once again, we see how Obsessive Compulsive Eating benefits the food industry and how the food industry can effect the way we eat.
Here’s my advice. There is nothing wrong with supplements, but don’t let the way you eat be dictated to you by the profit needs of the supplement industry. If you want to lose weight then you need to reduce your calories by the method that suits you the best (whether it’s by following Eat Stop Eat or any other diet method).
I’m sure there is a small group of people who might even do very well eating 6 meals per day, and actually have the time to do it…but please, if it doesn’t work for you then let the 6 meals a day idea fade away just like every other industry driven fad.
Find the simplest easiest method of reducing the amount of food you eat, while still allowing you to actually enjoy the foods you eat, then use that method.
Brad Pilon
-
The problem with Mr. Pilon's rather strange hypothesis is that WOMEN currently eat in such a fashion, with great results.
Take a look at the fitness and figure girls who compete. For some strange reason, I don't hear any of them complaining about how "sexist" their dietary regimes are.
Plus, some of his statements make no sense. There are plenty of foods that women can eat that total 220 calories. They would hardly be restricted to just bananas and yogurt. On top of that, he leaves out the EXERCISE part of the equation. Since the women are (or should be) training, they will require energy to fuel that activity.
And that meal frequency is hardly a "fad"; it's been around for DECADES. As is usually the case with exercise and nutrition, the "mainstream" folks are just learning what bodybuilding enthusiasts have known from the get-go.
In essence, Pilon's article is merely a long-winded version of Flexington's gripe. And the rationale behind it may be the same: WAAAAAAAAAH!!!! It's just too hard to do. It isn't fair!! It's a conspiracy by those muscleheads!! WAAAAAAH!!!!
-
theres no advantages to eating more meals than 3 or 4...... eating 6 meals a day is fine and a good way for some people to eat because they cant stomach a big amount of food at once.... however its not at all necessary for optimal results
-
the lesson i here is fellas, do what your body is telling u to do, people need to listen to their bodies more instead of doing cookie cutter programs off of flex magazine or tnation.com
if ur hungry, that means ur body needs to refuel, so eat. if your expending extra energy that day, eat a bit more carbs, and see how u feel.
there is no set rule that says u must have this many meals per day.
if ur getting fat, eat a bit less, if ur losing size, up the cals.....its that ez.
-
the lesson i here is fellas, do what your body is telling u to do, people need to listen to their bodies more instead of doing cookie cutter programs off of flex magazine or tnation.com
if ur hungry, that means ur body needs to refuel, so eat. if your expending extra energy that day, eat a bit more carbs, and see how u feel.
there is no set rule that says u must have this many meals per day.
if ur getting fat, eat a bit less, if ur losing size, up the cals.....its that ez.
That was NOT the gist of your initial statement, Flexington.
You claimed that eating six meals a day was some evil concept, formulated by those sinister supplement companies and magazines from the 90s, to boost sales of various protein supplements.
If most people could build a significant amount more mass by eating a mere three meals per day, they do it. But, the simple fact is that they can’t. They need to eat more often to get it done.
If you need 4000 calories to grow, are you REALLY going to stuff yourself with over 1300 calories per meal? I sincerely doubt it.
And, waiting until you're hungry to eat is a recipe for DISASTER, if gaining mass is a major priority. It takes years of trial and error and experience, before you can simply go off instinct. Beginners and intermediate types need a structured program, to keep them honest and on track. Even advanced trainers can use them to their benefit.
Gaining mass/losing bodyfat is simple; but it is hardly EASY.
-
If most people could build a significant amount more mass by eating a mere three meals per day, they do it. But, the simple fact is that they can’t. They need to eat more often to get it done.
If you need 4000 calories to grow, are you REALLY going to stuff yourself with over 1300 calories per meal? I sincerely doubt it.
like i said before, 6 meals a day or more, is necessary only if the person is incapable of eating bigger amounts less frequently.
no advntage of 6 meals versus 3 meals, as long as the foods being eaten are equal(daily total).
-
Vince Taylor thrived on three meals a day for most of his career.
-
If you need 4000 calories to grow,
And, waiting until you're hungry to eat is a recipe for DISASTER, if gaining mass is a major priority. It takes years of trial and error and experience, before you can simply go off instinct. Beginners and intermediate types need a structured program, to keep them honest and on track. Even advanced trainers can use them to their benefit.
dude if u need 4,000 cals a day to grow, you've got a problem. eating even 3,000 cals a day of good whole food is a shitload of grub, and it takes a beast to get it down. I need 4,000 cals a day to get fat, not to grow.
and why would u eat if ur not hungry? that makes no sense to me. Why would i stuff my face with food even if im not hungry? that is a recipe for disaster my friend. U have it backwards. Theres only so many nutrients u need to grow, once u get more than that, then its getting stored for a later time which = FAT accumulation.
ur body can only put on so much lean mass at a time, just give it what it needs, because the rest is just going to be cushion, which none of us need.
learn to listen to your body, then you'll grow. !!!!
-
Vince Taylor thrived on three meals a day for most of his career.
At last check, you ain't Vince Taylor. That may, and I stress, MAY be all he needed. But, chances are that won't work for you.
Just as some people who hate cardio scurry around, looking for examples of people who don't need cardio to help them get ripped, you have people who don't want to put down the extra calories, scraping for examples of folks who can grow on a fairly low amount of food.
dude if u need 4,000 cals a day to grow, you've got a problem. eating even 3,000 cals a day of good whole food is a shitload of grub, and it takes a beast to get it down. I need 4,000 cals a day to get fat, not to grow.
I didn't and don't have a problem. In fact, in my college years it took more than 4,000 calories to put size on my frame.
It doesn't take a "beast" to get it down, hence the reason they have these things (from the evil supplement companies ;D ) called PROTEIN SHAKES. Whatever I couldn't eat in regular food, I drank in the form of those shakes, either commercial weight gain powders (when I could afford them) or homemade ones (when I couldn't).
I don't know where you got the idea that someone has a problem, if they need 4,000 calories (or more) to get bigger. All that means is that they are likely of the ectomorphic bend.
and why would u eat if ur not hungry? that makes no sense to me. Why would i stuff my face with food even if im not hungry? that is a recipe for disaster my friend. U have it backwards. Theres only so many nutrients u need to grow, once u get more than that, then its getting stored for a later time which = FAT accumulation.
Your body becomes more efficient at absorbing nutrients (especially when you've been training for a significant period of time). It's similar to when you grow up from a little kid into a teenager. You don't eat the same way you did when you were 5 years old, do you?
As far as the “feeling hungry” thing goes, you can down a bowl of broccoli and celery and consume all of 350 calories (if you’re lucky). Yet, because of the high fiber content, you won’t feel hungry for hours. Does that mean you’ve consume all the nutrients you need to grow? OF COURSE NOT!!
It reminds me of a saying Dorian Yates had, when it came to the subject of "instinctive training". If he trained by "instinct", he'd kick the weights in a corner and urinate on them, instead of half-killing himself trying to lift them.
ur body can only put on so much lean mass at a time, just give it what it needs, because the rest is just going to be cushion, which none of us need.
NOBODY puts on lean mass all the time. That's why bodybuilders have "off-season" and "pre-contest" modes. A lot of people don't make the major gains they seek, because they're so paranoid about putting on a little extra bodyfat.
It's the old Arnold adage about sculpting the slab of granite vs. trying to sculpt a pebble.
learn to listen to your body, then you'll grow. !!!!
I've done that. That's why I know how many meals I need(ed) to eat to get the job done. In my younger (college) years, I ate 4,000 calories per day. That wasn't enough; so I bumped it up to 5,000. That got the ball rolling for a while. I've often told the account on how one spring semester, I went from 189 to 210 lbs. My caloric intake, at that time, was around the 5,500 mark (occasionally jumping over 6,000).
This was the result of "eating" 6 meals per day. "Eating", of course, is a generic word for caloric consumption. At least, half of those calories came from drinking shakes.
-
like i said before, 6 meals a day or more, is necessary only if the person is incapable of eating bigger amounts less frequently.
no advntage of 6 meals versus 3 meals, as long as the foods being eaten are equal(daily total).
That may be true in theory. But, in actuality, most people are indeed incapable of eating bigger amounts less frequently.
Therefore, they either have to eat smaller meals more often, or they drink shakes in between their regular meals.
Given most people's school/work schedules, the latter is more practical and effective.
-
There is no doubt that when Meal Replacement Powders hit the scene, the 6-Meals-Per-Day hysteria hit an all-time high! If the supplement companies could convince everyone that they MUST eat 6 times a day - it was simply the most convenient way to do it: Drink MRP Shakes!
Did the supplement companies invent the concept of 6-Meals-Per-Day? NO. But they were the ones (Bill Phillips especially) who convinced us that it was absolutely necessary - which it most definitely is not. Still to this day - any nutrition plan put out by any magazine that's heavily sponsored by a supplement company, has half of your daily meals coming from MRP Shakes.
Supplements be damned! Why waste your precious calories on a friggin' "shake" when you could be eating some delicous food!?!?!?
If you're trying to bulk up, then MRP's are a nice way to "add calories" to your day. But using MRP's when you're trying to lose weight is absolutely ridiculous.
-
Maybe you and Phelps can go hit the bong and put on the floaties for awhile.
12,000 calories a day kept him floating through the Olympics, right?
-
That's what he claims. Smoking all that dope helps him eat those 12,000 calories. ;D
-
At last check, you ain't Vince Taylor. That may, and I stress, MAY be all he needed. But, chances are that won't work for you.
Just as some people who hate cardio scurry around, looking for examples of people who don't need cardio to help them get ripped, you have people who don't want to put down the extra calories, scraping for examples of folks who can grow on a fairly low amount of food.
I didn't and don't have a problem. In fact, in my college years it took more than 4,000 calories to put size on my frame.
It doesn't take a "beast" to get it down, hence the reason they have these things (from the evil supplement companies ;D ) called PROTEIN SHAKES. Whatever I couldn't eat in regular food, I drank in the form of those shakes, either commercial weight gain powders (when I could afford them) or homemade ones (when I couldn't).
I don't know where you got the idea that someone has a problem, if they need 4,000 calories (or more) to get bigger. All that means is that they are likely of the ectomorphic bend.
Your body becomes more efficient at absorbing nutrients (especially when you've been training for a significant period of time). It's similar to when you grow up from a little kid into a teenager. You don't eat the same way you did when you were 5 years old, do you?
As far as the “feeling hungry” thing goes, you can down a bowl of broccoli and celery and consume all of 350 calories (if you’re lucky). Yet, because of the high fiber content, you won’t feel hungry for hours. Does that mean you’ve consume all the nutrients you need to grow? OF COURSE NOT!!
It reminds me of a saying Dorian Yates had, when it came to the subject of "instinctive training". If he trained by "instinct", he'd kick the weights in a corner and urinate on them, instead of half-killing himself trying to lift them.
NOBODY puts on lean mass all the time. That's why bodybuilders have "off-season" and "pre-contest" modes. A lot of people don't make the major gains they seek, because they're so paranoid about putting on a little extra bodyfat.
It's the old Arnold adage about sculpting the slab of granite vs. trying to sculpt a pebble.
I've done that. That's why I know how many meals I need(ed) to eat to get the job done. In my younger (college) years, I ate 4,000 calories per day. That wasn't enough; so I bumped it up to 5,000. That got the ball rolling for a while. I've often told the account on how one spring semester, I went from 189 to 210 lbs. My caloric intake, at that time, was around the 5,500 mark (occasionally jumping over 6,000).
This was the result of "eating" 6 meals per day. "Eating", of course, is a generic word for caloric consumption. At least, half of those calories came from drinking shakes.
So why is six the magic number?
how about growing off of 4 or 5 meals a day?
or why not 7 or 8?
if six is so good, wouldnt 7 meals be better.
come on now bro, why do ppl eat six meals a day? ill tell u why, because the magazines say so.
learn what works for u, then you'll get gains beyond your wildest imagination.
-
cool lil' article i just read on tnation.
Myth: You need to eat every two to three hours to optimally lose fat and get shredded.
Mythbuster: Jamie Hale
This is another common belief held by bodybuilders that often does more harm than good. I mean, who the hell wants to carry around Tupperware containers full of rice and chicken all the time? It's just so damn inconvenient. The reason most bodybuilders eat every couple of hours is because...well, because someone told them to. But if they did some research, they'd see that resting energy expenditure isn't really decreased at all! In fact, there was a study done a while back that showed subjects who did a three-day fast — absolutely no food — had their resting energy expenditure rate actually increase.
Now I've experimented on myself and on my bodybuilder clients with a variety of meal frequency plans and have even tried a couple of 37-hour fasts for experimental purposes. And honestly, I haven't seen that much of a difference between three meals and seven meals a day, if the calories are equal.
The important thing to know is that after you eat a meal, you're still in a "fed state" and absorbing nutrients for six to ten hours after that meal.
True, after about four to six hours you do get an increase in gluconeogenesis, the generation of glucose from non-carbohydrate substances, which is a good reason to eat some more protein to stop any muscle breakdown. But eating seven meals is still ridiculous to me.
My bodybuilders have had great success eating three to five meals per day. As long as macronutrients and energy intake are equal, there really is no difference in the outcome. Of course, it's up to what you like. If you want to eat more often, that's fine.
But I'll leave the Tupperware at home.
-
So why is six the magic number?
how about growing off of 4 or 5 meals a day?
I did that, for a while. But, as I got larger, it took more calories to increase in size. And the meals got too cumbersome to eat.
Besides, you seem to think the magic number is 3.
or why not 7 or 8?
if six is so good, wouldnt 7 meals be better.
come on now bro, why do ppl eat six meals a day? ill tell u why, because the magazines say so.
learn what works for u, then you'll get gains beyond your wildest imagination.
NEWS FLASH!!! I've done that. My present meal count is at 8 (4 solid, 4 liquid). That works for me, just as six meals did back in college.
The issue here is your ridiculous claim that the six-meals-per-day thing was some concoction of the evil supplement companies. People recommeded it for a reason: IT'S EFFECTIVE (and it has been for DECADES, long before MET-Rx, BSN MuscleTech, EAS, etc. hit the scene).
There is no doubt that when Meal Replacement Powders hit the scene, the 6-Meals-Per-Day hysteria hit an all-time high! If the supplement companies could convince everyone that they MUST eat 6 times a day - it was simply the most convenient way to do it: Drink MRP Shakes!
Did the supplement companies invent the concept of 6-Meals-Per-Day? NO. But they were the ones (Bill Phillips especially) who convinced us that it was absolutely necessary - which it most definitely is not. Still to this day - any nutrition plan put out by any magazine that's heavily sponsored by a supplement company, has half of your daily meals coming from MRP Shakes.
Supplements be damned! Why waste your precious calories on a friggin' "shake" when you could be eating some delicous food!?!?!?
If you're trying to bulk up, then MRP's are a nice way to "add calories" to your day. But using MRP's when you're trying to lose weight is absolutely ridiculous.
Who says that drinking a shake is a waste of precious calories? Your boss/professor couldn't care less how much protein you need per day.
Downing a shake in transit or during a meeting or between classes works quite well in real-world settings. While my co-workers are downing coffee or soda, I'm guzzling an MRP or weight-gainer.
The simple fact is that it's easier (not necessarily EASY) to get those calories down by drinking half of them than eating all of them. The one issue left, of course, is the price of the commercial shakes. Worst case scenario, you can go old-school, Vince-Gironda-style, and make your shakes out of eggs, milk/half-n-half, and yogurt.
But nowadays, the commercial shakes are much better than their predecessors. And, thanks to a lay that prohibits stores from selling expired supplements, have a little patience and you can get the goodies for a FRACTION of their retail price (i.e. the markdowns at GNC; most recently I just picked up a 12-pk of IsoPure for $12 and change).
-
I did that, for a while. But, as I got larger, it took more calories to increase in size. And the meals got too cumbersome to eat.
Besides, you seem to think the magic number is 3.
NEWS FLASH!!! I've done that. My present meal count is at 8 (4 solid, 4 liquid). That works for me, just as six meals did back in college.
The issue here is your ridiculous claim that the six-meals-per-day thing was some concoction of the evil supplement companies. People recommeded it for a reason: IT'S EFFECTIVE (and it has been for DECADES, long before MET-Rx, BSN MuscleTech, EAS, etc. hit the scene).
lol bro, ive never said that its optimal to eat three meals a day, because i dont even do that myself.
and by your drinking your 4 shakes a day, ur doing just what the companies want u to do, buy their products like there going out of business drinking half of your meals per day. Muscletech thanx u bro.
-
lol bro, ive never said that its optimal to eat three meals a day, because i dont even do that myself.
That would mean you're eating 4 or5 meals per day. If at some point, you need extra calories, it means one of two things:
Either you will need to stuff yourself with more calories per meal OR.......you may have to take that dreaded SIXTH meal.
and by your drinking your 4 shakes a day, ur doing just what the companies want u to do, buy their products like there going out of business drinking half of your meals per day. Muscletech thanx u bro.
One, notwithstanding the fact that I rarely use MuscleTech's shakes, the company(ies) wouldn't be thanking me, if they knew I was buying their product for a fraction of the retail price.
Two, For the most part, I'm getting the results I seek. So, I don't see what the big problem, regarding my "doing what the companies want u to do".
It appears you have this rebel complex. You want to stand up and fight the mean, evil supplement companies that are terrorizing the masses.
Shaking your fist, Tupperware in hand, at Weider HQ: "You'll never make me eat that SIXTH meal!!!"
-
There are exceptions to every rule – sometimes more than others.
I would believe someone claiming to get favorable results on 2 meals per day as much as I would believe someone claiming the same results on 9 – especially when seeing the person in front of me. Results speak much more than claims.
The T-mag article Flex quoted may have surveyed trainers with superior genetics – the type who grow like weeds no matter what they do.
“Hard-gainers,” like myself and many others, need every edge we can get – regardless of how minor it may seem. Enough little things can lead to big results.
I’ve tried the 3 larger meals/day plan, and got negligible growth results along with gastric upset.
Smaller meals along with sipping shakes, and/or downing liver tablets or hardboiled eggs between meals throughout the day has helped tremendously.
Bottom line is you do what it takes for you to get where you want.
-
heres my opinion
more meals per day is advantageous for those who cant eat an equal amount of food in a lesser amount of meals.
if total food intake is the same, with all nutritional variables equal (macroN, microN etc)two diets..one with 3 meals one with 10 meals... they will result in equal results...
-
But we’re not all genetic freaks like you, brother. >:(
Remember, you’re a "god" among insects. ;D
-
But we’re not all genetic freaks like you, brother. >:(
Remember, you’re a "god" among insects. ;D
LOL i wish
-
Wow. There are a lot of contreversies in bodybuilding but I have not known this to be one of them. Very rarely do I hear the 6 Meal A Day recommedation to be challenged. I think the author of THE WARRIOR DIET disagreed with it because he thought that 3 hours was not enough time for the body to detoxify itself after a meal. But I havent heard anyone else. I will say that sometimes during bulking phases I have increased the number to 8 meals a day. That made getting the calories in easier and I think I actually gained less fat than I had on other bulking phases.
By the way, eating 6 meals a day is easier than every before. Not only do MRPs make it easy, but mixers make them even more convenient. I dont even use a blender any more. I just fill the two mixers with water, take the packets with me, and mix them at work.