What you’re describing in closer to what muslim endure during Ramadan, which is fasting, by definition.
If you feel fine with such regimen, good, but how adequate for common practice can it be?
My own anecdotal observation tells me the “grazer” (not a word I enjoy using) tends to put on a lot of weight. That constant eating is putting unnecessary calories into the body, regardless they eating “healthy” snacks.
P00ptart@lemmy.world 5 days ago
Your metabolism goes up when digesting. So snacking a little at a time keeps your metabolism high and keeps your blood sugar from spiking. Also it keeps you from gorging in larger meals than is necessary, because when you feel hungry, you overestimate how much you really need. Then after you overconsume, how do you feel? Lethargic and not ready to do as much.
nerv@fedinsfw.app 5 days ago
I can only reply with sitting down and stopping to eat, instead of the opposite. Keeping a schedule. Avoid junk food.
I’m quoting my doctor here.
Unless there is a need for a special regime, it is what I have been advised for decades.
42firehawk@fedinsfw.app 5 days ago
That is the “classic” approach, but dietician increasingly recommending varied strategies fire different people.
I’ve been trying to gain weight for years and the most effective method has been 2 meals a day and intentionally snacking on small candies throughout since those teens to make me feel hungry as an appetizer rather than full like other snacks did. If I needed to lose weight the recommended practice based on how I live would be 4 meals a day and never snacking.
The way gaining or losing weight works is simple, it’s calories in versus calories burned. For some people snacking, so long as it reduces how much is eaten at meals, increases calories burned by a significant amount. Therefore keeping them at a lower weight. For others it doesn’t have that effect, and usually it’s because those people eat a consistent amount in their meals regardless.