I want to do a little informal survey.
I have read a lot of books about health and diet. They seem to be divided in their opinions of whether you should eat three meals a day (with no snacking) or multiple small meals. Small meal proponents say that eating in this way keeps your metabolism fired up, but those against say that eating triggers the desire to eat more.
When I lived in Japan, the consensus was that one should not snack between main meals, but everyone eats well at those times, including copious amounts of white rice. Despite this, the proportion of the population who is overweight is tiny. Personally I like the idea of small meals, but planning becomes more difficult, and it goes against what I saw working in Japan.
So...have you tried both approaches? Which worked better for you in terms of weight loss?
I have read a lot of books about health and diet. They seem to be divided in their opinions of whether you should eat three meals a day (with no snacking) or multiple small meals. Small meal proponents say that eating in this way keeps your metabolism fired up, but those against say that eating triggers the desire to eat more.
When I lived in Japan, the consensus was that one should not snack between main meals, but everyone eats well at those times, including copious amounts of white rice. Despite this, the proportion of the population who is overweight is tiny. Personally I like the idea of small meals, but planning becomes more difficult, and it goes against what I saw working in Japan.
So...have you tried both approaches? Which worked better for you in terms of weight loss?
Comment