On Jan 06, 2005, at 4:36 pm, Todd Moody wrote:

> I am considering trying it again, just to see what effect it has on
> fasting BG.  Ori Hofmekler claims that eating this way enhances
> nutriest
> utilization, especially protein utilization.  And he concedes that this
> way of eating goes against virtually all nutritional guidelines.  I
> recall a study, a few years back, involving two groups of people
> consuming the same number of calories each day; one group consuming
> them
> all at one meal, the other distributed over 5 or 6 small meals.
> Although the calories were the same, the ones eating more frequently
> lost more weight--another blow to "calories are just calories", but
> seemingly not a finding that supports this way of eating.  Of course,
> it's possible that the once-a-day group lost less weight because they
> gained muscle.  I don't remember if the study looked at that
> (unfortunately, too few diet studies look at body composition) and I
> can't locate it again to check.

Todd,

I can well believe that the grazers lost more weight than the gorgers-
based on the idea that if the body believes food is abundant it will
minimize food stores.  But this only applies to overweight people; just
because eating frequently corrects a fault in the body doesn't make it
applicable to healthy people.  I see grazing here like a medicine- you
don't take aspirin unless you've got a headache  because it's not worth
suffering the side-effects for no reason.

>
> We have discussed intermittent fasting (IF) more than once on this
> list.  The animal study of IF involved alternate day eating, without
> net
> reduction of calories, and the results indicated that the benefits of
> caloric restriction could be achieved in this way.  Hofmekler believes
> the same results can be obtained by once-a-day eating (plus his
> "allowed" nibbling)--daily IF, if you will--but I don't think it has
> been tested yet.

What is Hofmekler's "allowed nibbling"?  This must be something you all
discussed before I joined the group.

>
> Like you, Richard, I find this approach psychologically easier.  It
> really doesn't bother me much to forego eating during the day if I know
> I can have what I want at dinner.  The key to any diet, as I see it, is
> to minimize the mental energy that must be expended to stay on it,
> whether it be counting carbs, calories, fat grams, points, or whatever.
> The advantage of the Hofmekler approach is that instead of counting,
> it's a discipline of waiting.  He recommends eating around 7.  When
> I've
> tried this, I found that the only difficult part of the day was the
> period between about 4 in the afternoon and dinnertime.  And I believe
> that was psychological/habitual, as much as anything.  I'd get home
> somewhere during that window of time, and as soon as I get home I
> instinctively would want to eat something.  It hasn't changed since I
> was a kid.  I'd come home from school and the first thing I'd do is
> look
> for something to eat.  If I simply stayed out til 7 I don't think it
> would bother me at all, but that doesn't work for various other
> reasons.
>
> Anyway, I'm willing to give it another go.

I have found a similar thing.  When I get home from work, my first
instinct is to eat.  Sometimes I start eating and then realise I wasn't
really that hungry.  But what *really* makes me struggle on once-a-day
eating is exercise.  If I do any training, I find I can't concentrate
on what I'm doing because I'm too hungry.  Maybe it's a further stage
of will-power, but for now I will eat in the day when I'm physically
active.

Regards,
Ashley