i'd have to disagree.. esp if you take macro timing and blood levels into consideration... more frequent meals have been a staple of my philosophy. i know there are different schools of thought.. this is just my opinion
i agree
people piss me off with If it fits your macros because yes it makes sense but people completely forget about micro nutrients. If it fits your macros was just the point that you can eat some junk and still lose weight or build muscle.
But some douchebags eat shit and expect to get the same energy from a donut vs a sweet potato.
Youd actually get a bigger burst of energy from a donut in isolation.
have fun with your insulin crash and cravings after!!!!
![]()
He's right....you can never just eat one donut. They come in dozens.![]()
i agree
people piss me off with If it fits your macros because yes it makes sense but people completely forget about micro nutrients. If it fits your macros was just the point that you can eat some junk and still lose weight or build muscle.
But some douchebags eat shit and expect to get the same energy from a donut vs a sweet potato.
He's right....you can never just eat one donut. They come in dozens.![]()
With regards to the whole 3 meals thing, I know personally I wouldn't be able to do it. I mean I have three meals in the span of about 4 1/2 hours around my workout. Plus, if I tried to take in an even amount of carbs in three meals (on my high carb days) I would just get fat. I mean a 1000 calorie meal, for example, is going to have a much different effect when ate in the morning vs. in the night before bed.
I get tired of trying to eat 6 meals a day, if I could get all my macro's in 3 meals a day would I be limiting my progress?