Is eating 5 small meals better than say 3 normal meals if daily

File: -90052eac86e8e4d6.jpg (121KB, 960x694px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 960x694px

Stop eating.

calories in calories out is the only thing that matters

anyone that says otherwise is a fucking retard

>>42879805
3 meals are a scan anyways

so the metabolism argument is BS then?

>>42879805
you want to eat your meals as close together as possible, or alternatively eat breakfast and dinner and skip lunch
give your digestive system a break

>>42879805
>not eating 86,400 extremely tiny meals over the course of a day
not gonna make it

>>42879818
Big meals = big metabolic increase
Small meals = small metabolic increase
It basically becomes moot; you'd burn the same extra number of calories regardless (don't count these in calories out though of course)
Personally I prefer eating more, smaller meals because I get bloated with big meals and just get really tired. Also I legitimately believe the protein absorption thing, since my piss always smells really bad after eating a lot of protein in one sitting.

>>42879805
doing 1 meal a day for a year and i can guarantee the efect of increased growth hormone, i think is the best way to gain weight

>>42879805
debated ad nauseam here

short answer: it doesn't matter one way or the other, at all

https://examine.com/nutrition/do-i-need-to-eat-six-times-a-day-to-keep-my-metabolism-high/

>>42880325
The first two lines in your post are false statements. They are actually disproved in the sticky with links.

OMAD