by roundcoconut » Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:24 am
Well, there's no one right answer for the masses, but there is probably one concept that works best for you, once you discover what that concept is. Let me see if I can shed some light:
First, where did we get this crazy idea of three meals in each day? Most of us lead sedentary lives. We eat fairly substantial portion sizes when we do eat. As a nation, we have a weird notion of the sanctity of meal times (hallowness of breakfast, lunch and dinner) and have many accept the notion of snacks as almost as important to sustain us between meals, and on top of that the endless guzzling of beverages, even apart from snack times. I would say this is one bizarre-o aspect of our out-of-whack food environment -- a tendency toward round-the-clock consumption!
Purely from the standpoint of achieving sanity with food, I think it's equally important to:
A) First and foremost, have a practice of abstaining from certain overly processed, calorie-dense foods.
So, if you happen to be sipping on a "chai latte" (i.e. drinking sugar) between meals, then no, I wouldn't suggest you cut out the meal that you're now no longer hungry for. Your body needs nutrition, and it is the liquid calories that need to be skipped, not the meals. Also, if you happen to be snacking on heavily-processed vegan foods (breads, sweets, soy milk, tofu, whatever), then it would be very devious of your body to say, "Hey, I'm full from those black bean brownies, no need for dinner tonight". My point: your vegetables and starches are the centerpiece of this way of eating, and shouldn't be skipped or skimped on to ever make room for lesser forms of nutrition.
B) Feed yourself on a regular schedule that you decide upon, and stick to, barring extenuating circumstances. When people are engaging in unsustainable diets, they are constantly asking themselves whether they are *truly* hungry, and should they *really* eat lunch today. This is the start of a crappy, adversarial relationship with food. Basically, if it is lunchtime, sit down and eat some lunch. If you are eating vegetables and starches at each meal, then it kinda doesn't matter whether your body will use those nutritional building blocks now, or in two hours. My general point: Just eat your lunch, all of it. If you need to adjust your breakfast portions down at a later date, knock yourself out.
C) Establish times when you will not be taxing the body with food. Even people who eat three meals and two snacks can decide that there is no improvised consumption between today's dinner and tomorrow's breakfast. (The lack of boundaries, I believe, starts you down a different crappy and obsessive relationship with food.) Or, if you decide that your pattern is to eat "lunch, afternoon snack, dinner, evening snack, then start again with lunch the next day", then hold firm to that. The takeaway: Give your body a predictable pattern to follow.
On the occasional extenuating circumstances where you are delayed for so long, that you'd rather skip dinner tonight, and start with an earlier breakfast tomorrow, then go for it. But use your head, and don't fall for the "less is better" approach to eating that gets you off track and into emotionally unhealthy food patterns.
Anyone else, thoughts?
