promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Anonymous
Anonymous asked in HealthDiet & Fitness · 2 months ago

So which is really true about dieting: that eating smaller meals more often is better or fasting for 12-24 hrs. between meals is better?

have heard that BOTH force your body to burn fat faster, but why? how come they are opposiing each other's theories?

3 Answers

Relevance
  • 2 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    It depends.  Here's the biochemistry:

    When you eat, particularly when you eat carbs, your body has to produce insulin to carry the "fuel" to your cells.  Insulin also tells your body not to burn fat because it is about to deliver glycogen, which is much easier for your cells to use.  If you eat every couple of hours, your body always has a source of fuel and also has insulin turning off fat burning.

    If you fast for 12-16 hours and then eat a low carb and calorie appropriate diet during the remaining 8-12 hours, your body is more likely to not only access stored fat for fuel but also become better at burning ketones (from the fat) rather than the glycogen for carbs.

    Some people are very successful on a "mini-meals" plan, but that is because they are able to decrease their calories enough.  Some people can follow IF and a keto diet and some simply can't give up the carbs.

    • Lv 6
      2 months agoReport

      it sounds like the old "Fasting" theory is the one that makes logical sense. how did all these stupid dieticians get so popular?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 2 months ago

    I think it would all depend upon what you're eating when not fasting. If you're eating sugars and grains, you're defeating the purpose.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Pearl
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    i think eating the smaller meals is better

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.