How much, how often?

Big meals versus small meals

October 24, 2011

In the recent New York Times Sunday magazine devoted to food, health reporter Gretchen Reynolds briefly noted a Purdue University study that concluded a conventional meal pattern of three squares a day was actually a perfectly reasonable way to eat.

Why is this surprising? Because, as WebMD noted, many health specialists advise eating six small meals a day to avoid overeating and encourage weight loss. The study, heavily promoted back in March, declared that eating three regular-sized, protein-rich meals a day was more satisfying (and therefore less likely to lead to overeating) than eating six smaller meals throughout the day.

Caveats: The study followed a group of men only, no women. And as Reuters noted, the National Pork Board and the American Egg Board funded the study, so it’s not surprising that the study’s authors recommended that dieters should consume lean pork and eggs.

There are no comments on this item
Add a comment

Think before you type

Culinate welcomes comments that are on-topic, clean, and courteous. For the benefit of the community we reserve the right to delete comments that contain advertising, personal attacks, profanity, or which are thinly disguised attempts to promote another website.

Please enter your comment

Format: Bare URLs are automatically linked; use this style: [ "place text to be linked here"] for prettier links. You may specify *bold* or _italic_ text. No HTML please.

Please identify yourself

Not a member? Sign up!

Please prove that you’re not a computer

Our Table

Joy of Cooking app

A new tool for the kitchen

The latest in our collection of cooking apps.

Graze: Bites from the Site
First Person

The secret sharer

A father’s legacy

The Culinate Interview

Mollie Katzen

The vegetarian-cooking pioneer


Down South

Barbecue, tamales, cocktails, and more

Local Flavors

A winter romesco sauce

Good on everything

Editor’s Choice