"Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

[regandy]

One of the GREAT things about Atkins is the lack of the nawing, nagging hunger. I have been rereading DANDR and one of the things Dr. A said was that if you weren't hungry, don't eat i.e. don't eat by the clock.

So...

Then there is the other camp that says you need several small meals throughout the day to feed your metabolism.

How do YOU balance that?

Today I wasn't hungry at breakfast. I had a cup of coffee w/ splenda and cream. I brought a salad to work for lunch, but I just didn't want it. I wasn't hungry -- so I ate a dill pickle. Then I finally felt hungry at dinner and ate some tuna salad (tuna, eggs, mayo).

I hope I'm not opening up a "confusing" topic with a lot of "opinions", because I am looking for the "Atkins" answer... by the book.

Anyone dealt with this before?

[Elizellen]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

Your appetite will probably vary day to day so if you eat to your hunger then you shouldn't have a problem. Some days you might seem to always be hungry and eat more, others not so hungry and eat less. Just make sure you have a small 'something' comprising fat/protein rather than just carbs every 6 hours as Dr Atkins suggested.

On those not-hungry days do be careful to select a snack/small meal of somehting nutritious rather than just nibble celery sticks for example, so your body gets something to work on and give you energy.

[quotidianlight]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

I agree with elizellen. One thing I have found is that I need to eat several small meals to loose consistently and not accidently end up starving. The problem is that when I started I had no idea how much to eat and when. I couldn't tell when I was hungry unless it was a really dramatic stomach turned wrong side out feeling. I would eat too much or too little. As I made myself have at least something several times a day I've noticed some subconscious changes. My dinners became much smaller for one. This caused me to have room for a breakfast. Two of my "meals" ended up being very small high protein snacks. While I started craving fat in the morning, I ended up eating most of my carbs around lunch time. I've also learned that what I thought was hunger really isn't, hunger is a much more subtle sensation to me. I think by making yourself eat several smaller meals your body has a chance to re-learn how to sense and manage hunger and you get used to it. I can't eat just 2 or 3 meals anymore or I'll crash and when I started I had to practically force myself to eat some of those snacks.

[sallyseachange]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

Ditto what Elizellen said.

[regandy]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

Thanks for your replies. It can get very confusing when you listen to all the different "versions" of this diet out there.

I'm reading DANDR over and over to try and be very clear of doing it "by the book".

I did a diet called "Weigh Down" which strongly advocated to NOT eat if you were not hungry and basically "most" people ended up eating ONE meal a day. Then there was the diet scam of recent that had people eating less than 500 calories a day. Then there were the "voices" about eating something every 3 to 4 hours. I think I even ran across a "fasting" diet where you ONLY ate for 5 hours during the day. hahahaha And round and round it goes!! I often refer to all of these as "diet schizophrenia".

SO BOTTOM LINE ... DON'T EAT IF YOU AREN'T HUNGRY BUT MAKE SURE YOU DON'T GO MORE THAN 6 HOURS WITHOUT SOME FUEL (PROTEIN/FAT).

Thanks again.

[OzLover]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

I find that I need to make sure I eat something even if I'm not hungry. What ends up happening is I get hit hard with extreme hunger along with a headache & being lightheaded. Of course I usually end up overeating as I'm so hungry~~~I get a bit out of control trying to feed the hunger.

[murphy'smom]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

Sometimes I have to 'force' myself to eat, but it seems after the first bite I am ok with it. I really do not go more than 6 waking hours without eating. I also try to keep my calories around 1500, and I watch my fat/carb/protein percentages on Fitday. I try to eat balanced meals, and I really think that helps (and its what the book says). Good luck!

[losetocruise]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

I think Dr. Atkins was an excellent dietician and probably an excellent doctor, but kind of a crummy author. His various books contradict themselves in small but confusing ways. In his 1992 book he said absolutely do not eat unless hungr except for a small protein snack with vitamins or meds. In his 2002 book he said absolutely don't go for more than 6 hours without at least a small meal.

Probably an excellent agrument for using one book across the board.

But those of us who have been on and off several times for several years are somewhat educated by each of his books and it is a shame to miss out on some of the wisdom we have gained from past versions too.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that he tried to write keeping in mind that individual circumstances vary and sometimes this resulted in his changing things to work better for the masses as a whole. Just my opinion.

But to me eating about every 6 hours in small increments if not hungry is a good idea since your blood sugar will stay stabilized.

[brandywine1241]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

I think the confusion comes from the fact that he tried to write keeping in mind that individual circumstances vary and sometimes this resulted in his changing things to work better for the masses as a whole. Just my opinion.

Also, each book reflected new knowledge in the field. I'm sure if Dr. A were writing a new book today, it would be slightly different based on what has been learned since the early 2000's.

[regandy]

Re: "Don't eat if you aren't hungry" vs. nutrition

I think Dr. Atkins was an excellent dietician and probably an excellent doctor, but kind of a crummy author. His various books contradict themselves in small but confusing ways. In his 1992 book he said absolutely do not eat unless hungr except for a small protein snack with vitamins or meds. In his 2002 book he said absolutely don't go for more than 6 hours without at least a small meal.

Probably an excellent agrument for using one book across the board.

But those of us who have been on and off several times for several years are somewhat educated by each of his books and it is a shame to miss out on some of the wisdom we have gained from past versions too.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that he tried to write keeping in mind that individual circumstances vary and sometimes this resulted in his changing things to work better for the masses as a whole. Just my opinion.

But to me eating about every 6 hours in small increments if not hungry is a good idea since your blood sugar will stay stabilized.

You are precisely correct. I have read several versions of his book and was a little confused about this issue.

I don't want to mess up my metabolism again AND I don't want to eat more than my body needs. I would like to learn to listen to my body. It's a process.

Thanks