Another Study "Shoots Down" The Idea of Eating 6 Small Meals Per Day

[Jeff Bearden]

I read the comments on this study on Rusty Moore's website. He gives a link to the abstract. He's an advocate of IF and has several posts about it. Here's the link

http://fitnessblackbook.com/dieting_...meals-per-day/

[Mike ODonnell]

I think I have seen reference to this study before....but still interesting...also an interesting site Rusty has....thanks for the link

[Brad Davis]

I'd advise folks to acquire the full text and read it themselves rather than the review. I did this last night. It is nowhere near as favorable to IF as the review indicates.

I IF, and love it now that I found a good feeding window time for me, and was interested in the paper.

Highlights:

Total cholesterol, HDL, and LDL rose significantly more for the IFers.

Blood pressure rose more for the IFers.

The IFers became hungrier, felt less full, etc. as time went on--kinda the opposite that I would've expected.

They measured bodyfat using a notoriously inaccurate method--one of those bodyfat measuring scales.

The lean body mass, etc. changed very little.

They used 3 meals as the control, not 6.

I definitely won't stop IFing because of the study, but it's nothing like the review.

[Gant Grimes]

Thanks for posting this, Brad. I read blog article, and...hell, the ABSTRACT of the cited study doesn't support the article, much less the actual study.

I read a few more articles on the website, and it was more of the same, traditional Globo-Gym/Weider/Maxim talk in "top secret" packaging.

[Brad Davis]

Originally Posted by Gant Grimes

Thanks for posting this, Brad. I read blog article, and...hell, the ABSTRACT of the cited study doesn't support the article, much less the actual study.

I read a few more articles on the website, and it was more of the same, traditional Globo-Gym/Weider/Maxim talk in "top secret" packaging.

Greetings Gant,

I agree completely.

There's also the Aragon article (not journal paper--a big difference) that used that study to over-reach in the other direction (IMO). At this point, I'm starting to think that I need to get the original journal paper and never go by any review. Fortunately, I can get these papers very easily and free.

I should've placed more caveats on my "highlights" of the pilot study. I do research for a living, but not medical or physiological research. MY comments should be taken with a grain of salt also, although I did my best. I'd describe the pilot study as simply being inconclusive, although a few interesting trends *might've* been starting to emerge.

In the end, the proof will be in the IF Black Box pudding.

Kind regards,
DBD