Our eating rhythm is a social convention that has evolved over time. Is three meals a day the right model? A diet that works must adapt to your rhythm. Why not create this one by eliminating, reducing or shifting a meal of the day? Let me help you find your rhythm.
what is a good diet? A diet that works is a method of losing weight by causing a decrease in the amount of calories absorbed, but taking into account the habitsthem tastesthe news dietary practices – including the fact that we appreciate the products that the industry offers us – and integrating the some hardships that any change in the way of eating induces.
Find the diet that works
In short, he must find the system making the most painless possible weight loss. In fact, the patients who come to my practice almost all say the same thing: they would like to lose weight, but would dream of putting an end to calorie counting, avoiding dietary restrictions, doing without weighing…
Short, get rid of the forbidding, obsessive side, that this approach implies in their eyes. How do you satisfy that desire and find a diet that works?
How to provide them with this concrete, practical and stimulating comfort, while guaranteeing them a real inversion of the curve of the kilograms and a Balanced diet ? After reflection, a solution linked to the evolution of lifestyles therefore appeared to me.
Since you have to eat less to lose weight, instead of reducing each meal, isn’t it just as smart to remove part of it, or even eliminate an entire meal?
Clearly: move from a food structure with three daily meals to another that I will baptize “two meals and more”. Or, more precisely, “two meals, one snack”.
A taboo that is not one!
In formulating this proposal, I am aware that I am touching on one of the pillars of food. But, in this field more than in any other, I also find that people often react by reflex and take them stereotypes for some scientific facts.
So how many of us are convinced that the breakfast is “the main meal of the day”? This slogan was so bludgeoned that it ended up becoming an unassailable universal truth.
If to indulge in three meals a day is inscribed in our culture, it has been profoundly transformed in recent years, with the changes that have occurred in daily life: more flexible working conditions, the possibility of having access to food anywhere and any no matter when, the increase in the caloric density of food (partly responsible for weight gain)… has shattered old reflexes.
Since we will never reconnect with what some consider a golden age of nutritionthe one where the family sat down at the table, at the same time, for shared and balanced meals skilfully simmered, it is better to integrate this reality and offer something else.
Equally balanced but corresponding to the current way of eating. That other thing is diet “two meals, one snack”. A diet that – let’s repeat it – I personally tested and which seemed to me better suited to modern eating habits, therefore easier and more pleasant for everyone to follow. The trick?
To compensate for the omission of breakfastit is useful to introduce a snack that everyone will insert, according to their tastes, into the course of their day. A snack that many people already adopt… but which they add to the breakfast deemed compulsory… which increases the number of calories absorbed.
A peak, right?
Dare to say no to breakfast?
Two studies published in scientific journals have questioned the importance and sacredness of breakfast.
the Professor John Deanfieldwhose work has just been published in the Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, thus demonstrates that there is no no need to impose food rhythms on themselves, built on the traditional “French-style” social model of three meals a day.
Each meal being a sum of energy, which is added to the other meals, none has more privilege than another.
As for EJ Dhurandar, J. Dawson and associates1, they explain that jumping or taking the breakfast is in no way a criterion for gaining or losing weight. This research is all the more instructive in that it was conducted on Americans and Britons, followers of relatively rich breakfasts.
Let’s be clear: they did not attest to the need to eliminate this meal, but considerably relativized the notion an important announced meal at sunrise, reputed to protect us from obesity, improve our physical and intellectual performance.
Better still, they highlighted the fact that people who did not eat breakfast did not necessarily eat more at lunch and/or in the eveningdid not gain more weight than those who ate breakfast, nor experienced significant variations in blood cholesterol and sugar levels!
Like what, in nutrition nothing is ever fixed. And a diet that works one day is not necessarily a diet that always works!
