Does it matter if you consume more calories in some meals than others. for example, if i have 400 calories in one meal and 1000 calories in another? i am still getting at least 40g protein in for all of my meals, but is it better to keep the calories consistant?
You want to be consistant. If you eat a big meal and your body does not need the extra calories from that meal (protein, carbs, fats) they may “spill Over” into fat cells. (Or cause too much of an insulin responce.)
On the other hand those extra nutrients probably have a better chance of being absorbed a few hours later when your muscles need them.
I would keep it equal-eating more only for post workout meals.
Nic: No…calories do not need to be consistent during the day. The Human body has evolved to “even out” caloric expenditure over ROUGHLY a 24 hour period. This is why we speak in terms of total DAILY caloric intake. However…there are some authors that have suggested that we should divide caloric expenditure into these hourly “blocks” for maximal development under the premise that during a 24 hour period we are more active at certain times than at others. While the THEORY has merit, I think that overall the body’s efficiency does not require us to be so exact. Also, there ARE times where we should be conscious of the macronutrient content of what we injest in order to maximize that efficiency (e.g. Post Workout). Hope this helps!
Tricky Nicky…Fred Hatfield and the crew at ISSA advocate eating for activity level, and it makes sense. I personally try to incorporate this scheme and think it works well. It takes a little more planning but may pay off. One time though when I don’t factor this in is pre-workout…that’s a hella lot of food to be going balls-to-the-wall on…for that reason, I usually do it up right in my post-Surge meal, around 700-1000 calories. So, in a nutshell, no, calories need not be identical at every meal. It makes it easier if you do it that way, I guess. The physiology behind it is a little more complicated, as far as how your body uses the nutrients consumed at each meal (glycogen storage, protein synthesis, fat storage, etc).
I wouldn’t be anal about it, but on the other hand I do think it’s better to keep calories reasonably consistent, so that none of the day is spent in starvation, and none is spent in gross excesss. In other words, there’s nothing wrong with your biggest meal being twice as large as your smallest, but if for example on a 3000 calorie diet, there is something wrong
with having five meals of 150 calories each
and one of 2250 calories. The benefit you get
from the high calorie meal doesn’t equal the price you paid for all of the sub-par meals.
You’d have been better off with six meals all closer to 500 calories.