My mom doesn't believe that eating small meals 5-6 times day is better than!

I think it works this way, (forgive spelling errors please)

Less meals = body thinking "OMG I'M BEING STARVED!!!!" Metabolism slows down, so you store fat more and lose it slower. Survival mechanism.

More meals = body thinking "imma chill, plenty of food here" Metabolism speeds up, less fat is stored and you lose it quicker.

Of course, exersise is still needed.

More, smaller meals work MUCH better. I've spent enough years messing about with my eating in my youth to know it :D

Eating 5-6 small meals a day is much better for weight loss as this actually boosts your metabolism.

If you have 2-3 big meals a day it is likely to slow down your metabolism and you might not lose any weight.

The problem is that a lot of people find it very inconvenient to have 5-6 small meals a day and in many cases it is far more convenient for people to have 2-3 big meals a day.

no 5 to 6 small meals a day accelerates your metabolism because your body has to digest on a more frequent basis also because your meals are small it is not much different or possibly better than 2 or 3 large meals a day

what shes doing can and might work for her but id say it be much easier for her to slip up eating less because she is depriving herself of what her body wants and when she does slip up she'll unfortunately put her weight back on faster than if she had a higher metabolism as in your suggestion which she would put it back on much slower. i guess you can let her be stubborn. i lose 10 "fat" pounds in 30 days with exercise frequent smaller meals intake of water after each meal and a close watch on my calorie intake and calorie burn. i don't need to anymore but compare this that i know and trust is effective to what your mom is doing i feel like shes gonna slip up she should really spend more time researching how her body works

and your right lol good for you haha

you're both what is technically known as wrong. It is not when you eat nor how often, it is what and how much.

eating the same food at different times makes NO difference if it is more than you burn off. You can eat it a forkful at a time every 20 minutes, no difference.

to lose weight, burn off more than you take in with movement.

sorry, it's those boring facts again.

Your metabolism is like a campfire, or a furnace. You need to eat 5-6 small meals a day to keep your metabolism moving. Here's a youtube video explaining how your metabolism works:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKbFweIZq…
2 meals a day is crazy. Here's another video on skipping meals (which your mom is doing, she should be eating at least 3 meals a day):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GladiwGsf…

She might be uncomfortable eating 5-6 times a day alot of people are, but it is proven that 5-6 smaller portioned meals a day is better then 3 regular meals, it gives you more energy and boosts your metabolism which is what will help you lose weight faster.

Eating food gives you energy, when you are eating every 2 hours or so you always have energy. When are always eating every two hours it speeds up your metabolism. Faster metabolism= faster calories get burned.

She is right unless she eats less she will not loose weight although you are right that meals more often is better but they need to be small.

my friend it's time to get rid of thoese nasty pounds the rigth and healthy way

http://bit.ly/emJZtL

Advise her to nip over to Sainsburys Diets or Weight management.

I've just joined Sainsbury's diets, because I'd like to lose 2 stone over 4 months. Apparently if I calorie count to eat no more than 1500 calories a day and if I exercise 16 minutes a day burning up at least 200 calories I stand to lose between 1 - 2 lbs a week.

Being an asthmatic and having very painful joints I am limited as to what exercise I can actually do. So this diet programme and light exercise regime should be good for me.

All good diets give you three main meals plus 3 or 4 snacks a day. Which can literally be small meals. You can eat as much salad as you like, and free vegetables. So drafting a fourth meal still leaves 3 snacks.

2 medium oranges = a snack
2 medium lunchbox apples = a snack
Plus one of the following: - single milky way, finger of fudge, two finger kit kat, penguin biscuit. = 1 snack.
2 diet yogurts = a snack
2 small pub measures of spirit plus diet mixer = a snack
1 small glass of wine = 1 snack
1 half of lager or cider or beer = 1 snack

I lost a mega three stone once with Weight management ie Scottish Slimmers once, but lost the incentive to lose weight longer term.

I'm hoping this time I manage to do it properly.

Life as an overwieght person.

Actually she is right and you are wrong. Here is why:

'Each time you eat, metabolic rate increases slightly for a few hours. Paradoxically, it takes energy to break down and absorb energy. This is the Thermic Effect of Food (TEF). The amount of energy expended is directly proportional to the amount of calories and nutrients consumed in the meal.

Let's assume that we are measuring TEF during 24 hours in a diet of 2700 kcal with 40% protein, 40% carbohydrate and 20% fat. We run three different trials where the only thing we change is the the meal frequency.

A) Three meals: 900 kcal per meal.

B) Six meals: 450 kcal per meal.

C) Nine meals: 300 kcal per meal.

What we'd find is a different pattern in regards to TEF. Example "A" would yield a larger and long lasting boost in metabolic rate that would gradually taper off until the next meal came around; TEF would show a "peak and valley"-pattern. "C" would yield a very weak but consistent boost in metabolic rate; an even pattern. "B" would be somewhere in between.

However, at the end of the 24-hour period, or as long as it would take to assimilate the nutrients, there would be no difference in TEF. The total amount of energy expended by TEF would be identical in each scenario. Meal frequency does not affect total TEF. You cannot "trick" the body in to burning more or less calories by manipulating meal frequency.'

http://www.leangains.com/