In terms of weight loss, really what would the difference be if I ate small 300 calorie meals a few times a day, vs doing OMAD and eating it all at once? I know I wouldn’t get the healing benefits of fasting, but weight loss wise wouldn’t it work the same?
Your body is not a car burning gas. You have a hormonal system, much of which is geared to keeping you alive. Eating a bunch of small meals sends the message that food is scarce. You are scrounging. The body doesn’t want you to starve. It doesn’t know you’re doing this on purpose. (Why would a perfectly good human stop eating when he’s still hungry except if he’s out of food). So it makes you hungrier. Slows your metabolism. Uses it’s considerable tools to encourage you to find something to eat. And is very protective of you’re body fat. You’re only protection from starving.
When you do Omad, and let your body enter the magical state called fullness during your meal, your body is comfortable that the food supply is stable. No reason to make you extra hungry. No reason to protect the fat stores. If it’s getting full every day, heck even every other day, the body feels safe. Metabolism runs full speed. Urge to eat is controlled.
You are a living being and lots of things are happening inside you that your thinking brain is not even aware of. Your mental powers over your autonomic self are extremely limited. You can’t stop yourself from blocking a fall. You can’t stop yourself from breathing for long, even if you wanted to commit suicide. Add you can’t resist the urge to eat when your body’s hormones are screaming to eat! Willpower is a weak temporary tool.
So yes, although your car might be perfectly happy stopping for gas every 60 miles to add 3 gallons of gas and never complain, your body isn’t. It’s not what your biological being wants for you. Ignore it’s input and it’ll have you overeating, like it or not.
Eating more meals continually spikes insulin.
In a perfect world, you have 5 to 9 hours to digest prior to sleeping…if you are doing omad…gunna be high end. If you eat say half your cals at supper…close to 5.
I have seen enough progress pics to see that the result of IF is not just weight loss the same way you would if you stretched the same meal out like you said. A lot (yes a lot) of people there lose relatively little yet their now a totally new person, so much slimmer. Sizes down in clothing. The theory (not sure what research there is) is that once you give your body enough time (IF), it will use fat as the fuel source.
You may lose weight spreading out the meals, but it is a lot harder that way. At about 2 months in hunger during fasting just quit. Tell me when you did a diet where you ate small meals that you didnt crave stuff, feel hunger or fall off the wagon.
When it comes to weight loss, the primary additional benefit of IF is controlling insulin. The body won’t break down fat while insulin is high. So IF creates more time for digestion and insulin to die down. It won’t make someone lose weight faster per say, but it will help to ensure that the deficit is going to mostly burning body fat.
Also I hope 1000 calories was just an example, because that’s not enough for most bodies.
It may be no different in terms of weight loss, but I think many people (myself included) will tell you that you’ll FEEL a lot better fasting than eating small meals throughout the day. If it’s easier and feels better, then sticking to your CICO will be easier. So it may be no different in weight loss if calories are the same. But if it enhances your ability to stick to the plan, then it would “work” better.