Originally posted by ErEf
Vind je 1000 kcal nog wel noemenswaardig? Dat is niet representatief voor een goed dieet! Met dat kleine beetje kan je 1. nauwelijks meerdere maaltijden eten die enig effect hebben. 2. als je dat in 3 maaltijden verdeelt zijn zelfs die maaltijden zo zielig klein dat het weinig effect kan hebben. 1000 kcal dieeten ( en dat moet jij ook weten) resulteren zo goed als altijd in het jojo effect spierverlies en uiteindelijk trager metabolisme.
Ik denk niet dat het uitmaakt hoeveel kcal. je neemt. De stofwisseling zou toch moeten verhogen bij meerdere maaltijden? Dat er een jojo effect optreedt doet toch niet terzake? Dat is een heel ander onderwerp.
Maar ok hier nog een studie en een review.
Thomsen C, Christiansen C, Rasmussen OW, Hermansen K.
Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Aarhus Amtssygehus, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.
claus.thomsen@image.dk
AIMS: To compare the effects of 2 weeks on different meal frequencies on glucose metabolism, lipid levels and 24-hour blood pressure in non-insulin-dependent diabetic subjects. METHODS: Ten non-insulin-dependent diabetic outpatients from Aarhus City participated in a crossover study design. None were treated with insulin. The patients were randomly allocated to two isoenergetic diets either taken as three or eight meals per day for 2 weeks each. At the end of each period, the diurnal blood pressure and the responses to a test meal were measured. Furthermore, a hyperinsulinemic, euglycemic clamp was placed. RESULTS: Both the insulin sensitivity and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure were similar as were the responses of glucose, insulin and free fatty acids to a carbohydrate-rich test meal at the end of the two diet periods. The HDL-cholesterol level was lowest in response to the 8-meal diet (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Increasing meal frequencies in a 2-week treatment period with weight-maintaining diets on an outpatient basis subdued the HDL-cholesterol levels but apparently had no impact on glucose metabolism or diurnal blood pressure in NIDDM subjects. These results give no indications of long-term beneficial effects of increasing the meal frequency in NIDDM patients.
J Nutr 1997 Apr;77 Suppl 1:S57-70
Meal frequency and energy balance.
Bellisle F, McDevitt R, Prentice AM.
Several epidemiological studies have observed an inverse relationship
between people's habitual frequency of eating and body weight,
leading to the suggestion that a 'nibbling' meal pattern may help in
the avoidance of obesity. A review of all pertinent studies shows
that, although many fail to find any significant relationship, the
relationship is consistently inverse in those that do observe a
relationship. However, this finding is highly vulnerable to the
probable confounding effects of post hoc changes in dietary patterns
as a consequence of weight gain and to dietary under-reporting which
undoubtedly invalidates some of the studies. We conclude that the
epidemiological evidence is at best very weak, and almost certainly
represents an artefact. A detailed review of the possible mechanistic
explanations for a metabolic advantage of nibbling meal patterns
failed to reveal significant benefits in respect of energy
expenditure. Although some short-term studies suggest that the
thermic effect of feeding is higher when an isoenergetic test load is
divided into multiple small meals, other studies refute this, and
most are neutral. More importantly, studies using whole-body
calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy
expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally,
with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that
weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency.
We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of
body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food
intake side of the energy balance equation