Message Boards » Food and Nutrition

TOPIC: DONT EAT AFTER 8PM!

 
Ic_disabled_photos
Topic has been inactive for 30 days or more and images have been disabled.
Display All Images
September 15, 2011 1:11 PM
I would say that every body is a little different. I noticed that I had a plateau with my weight loss for many weeks. I realized that I was eating dinner late in the evening. I have since quit eating after 6pm and for some reason that seems to have made a difference for me. Not everyone is going to see the same results I would imagine.
September 15, 2011 1:11 PM
This article actually doesn't "prove" anything. flowerforyou
September 15, 2011 1:11 PM
I don't know about others, but I always eat something like a bowl of cereal or some fruit within 30 minutes of going to bed. Otherwise, my stomach wakes me up at 2 or 3 AM, pimp slaps me, and drags me to the kitchen for something to eat. I'm losing fat, so it doesn't seem to be affecting my progress.
  6008460
September 15, 2011 1:12 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

I wonder if they took into consideration the TYPE of food the night-eaters were eating...

Maybe people who choose to eat after 8pm are more likely to choose unhealthy foods, or calories that they don't need. If someone is eating a reasonable amount of "good" calories (as opposed to sugary garbage), it shouldn't matter what time they eat.


doesn't really matter i eat ice cream almost every night before i go to bed


Well yeah, but if you're counting that in your totals and compensating for that with the rest of your lifestyle then obviously it shouldn't matter... hence my original statement regarding "eating a reasonable amount," rather than just eating whatever they feel like in whatever quantity they want.
  8759565
September 15, 2011 1:13 PM
I'm guessing that heavier are more likely to eat ANYTIME. This sounds like a bogus study to me. I try not to eat after 8pm, so I won't go over my calories, but the time doesn't really matter. If I have 500 calories left at 8pm, you better believe I eat.
  10126217
September 15, 2011 1:15 PM
"Part of the reason for these findings is probably that late-night snackers tend to pick high-calorie options, and people who eat a larger number of calories in the evening end up eating a larger number of calories over the whole day."

...That's taken directly from the article... which was actually my exact point. LOL. So this article doesn't "prove" anything. This article isn't even a scientific study... it's just some person talking about some other studies and what was found, and what may/may not have caused those findings.
  8759565
September 15, 2011 1:15 PM
I eat before bed, in bed and sometimes get up to eat. Wifey appreciates that!!! Thread hijacked.
  7760780
September 15, 2011 1:15 PM
QUOTE:

i'll have to read the study, but some arbitrary cutoff time where eating somehow becomes bad is ridiculous


I agree. From my own research, it seems that it depends on your body and your eating patterns. Naturally, you don't burn a ton of calories while you sleep, so theoretically if you eat before bed you don't have much time to burn it off. However, people have various bedtimes, so one straight cut off for EVERYONE is nonsense.

I think more important than the time you eat, is how much eat. It's also important to spread out your calories through the day-- you shouldn't just gorge yourself at night and only nibble on snacks in the morning/day time.

Also, many people don't have time to work out until night, and I think it is very important to have post-workout calories to refuel your body and recover your muscles. Sometimes you just have to listen to your own body and actually get to know what works for you and what doesn't.
September 15, 2011 1:17 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:


correlation =/= causation



Bingo!! Very basic, but so often ignored...!!


I was thinking someone was going to say this right before i pushed "enter" on my otherr post. That saying I don't like at all. That's like saying "just because eating too much sodium has been linked to high blood pressure, doesn't mean salt is the cause." Okay that's absolutely true... but it's also true, "just because because eating salt has been linked to high blood pressure DOESNT MEAN it's not related too." That cause != correlation, is completely dismissed.
September 15, 2011 1:19 PM
QUOTE:


I was thinking someone was going to say this right before i pushed "enter" on my otherr post. That saying I don't like at all. That's like saying "just because eating too much sodium has been linked to high blood pressure, doesn't mean salt is the cause." Okay that's absolutely true... but it's also true, "just because because eating salt has been linked to high blood pressure DOESNT MEAN it's not related too." That cause != correlation, is completely dismissed.


Well yeah, but basically the saying means that the correlation alone is not enough to determine a cause. A correlation indicates nothing more than a relationship. Whether one variable causes the other must then be determined by additional study.
  8759565
September 15, 2011 1:20 PM
When my husband was on 2nd shift, I never had dinner before 8pm. And I typically have huge dinners.
  3240741
September 15, 2011 1:22 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:


correlation =/= causation



Bingo!! Very basic, but so often ignored...!!


I was thinking someone was going to say this right before i pushed "enter" on my otherr post. That saying I don't like at all. That's like saying "just because eating too much sodium has been linked to high blood pressure, doesn't mean salt is the cause." Okay that's absolutely true... but it's also true, "just because because eating salt has been linked to high blood pressure DOESNT MEAN it's not related too." That cause != correlation, is completely dismissed.


"Epidemiological studies can only go to prove that an agent could have caused, but not that it did cause, an effect in any particular case"

Stolarz-Sk­rzypek K Et Al. Fatal and nonfatal outcomes, incidence of hypertensi­on, and blood pressure changes in relation to urinary sodium excretion. JAMA. 2011 May 4;305(17):­1777-85.

"CONCLUSIO­NS:

In this population­-based cohort, systolic blood pressure, but not diastolic pressure, changes over time aligned with change in sodium excretion, but this associatio­n did not translate into a higher risk of hypertensi­on or CVD complicati­ons. Lower sodium excretion was associated with higher CVD mortality.­"”

Image not displayed
Edited by Acg67 On September 15, 2011 1:22 PM
September 15, 2011 1:24 PM
My husband gets home from work @ 2:30 a.m. and that is when we eat supper- we are to bed around 6 a.m. There is no way we could put 8 p.m. as a cut off time as we live night shift hours. We walk before bed and exercise in the late afternoon/early evenings (him on his days off). Since joining MFP I have already lost 13lbs (2 weeks) and 37 total since March. My husband is losing too so the 8 p.m. thing isn't a factor for us. :)
  10726775
September 15, 2011 1:25 PM
QUOTE:

Am I going to turn into a gremlin?


No a zombie
I ate last night at 8:01 and look at me nowsad
September 15, 2011 1:25 PM
I have had people tell me this a lot. I used to try and follow it but I always felt like I was starving later on since I stay up super late at night.

And on top of that I get up super early to go running and if I stop eating that early I do not feel like I have enough energy to get through my run. Now I eat whenever I feel hungry.
I have a light snack before bed usually around 12M and when I get up at 530am to go run I feel better and have more energy.

I think it is just whatever works for the individual person. I have read a lot of studies that sound great but when I try them they don't work for me. Who knows?! drinker
Edited by lucythinmint On September 15, 2011 1:26 PM
September 15, 2011 1:26 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:


I was thinking someone was going to say this right before i pushed "enter" on my otherr post. That saying I don't like at all. That's like saying "just because eating too much sodium has been linked to high blood pressure, doesn't mean salt is the cause." Okay that's absolutely true... but it's also true, "just because because eating salt has been linked to high blood pressure DOESNT MEAN it's not related too." That cause != correlation, is completely dismissed.


Well yeah, but basically the saying means that the correlation alone is not enough to determine a cause. A correlation indicates nothing more than a relationship. Whether one variable causes the other must then be determined by additional study.


I do understand what you're saying. I do agree with you. Everything is a relationship and anything can be said not to be the cause. I just finished my computer science major, and started my chemistry major this semester. We basically plot data, see results of things, and plot more data. Just what a scientist does. What i learned there are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO many errors in science it's crazy. For example, each person had to write data on the chaulk board. So we had like 30 samples. Then we heeded to make a trend line. Some people forgot to add "decimals" aka periods. Which completely threw the data off. My lab partner just sat back, and i'd record data, and i'd say "okay i measured this at .5 ml" he would just copy my answer. So we only have 1 sample out of test researches which would also lead to inaccurate results. Of course we're beginners in this field, but I can see how errors can be produced very easily.
September 15, 2011 1:32 PM
People know to gain weight you need a caloric surplus. To lose weight you need a deficit. Lets say you burn 2000 calories a day. So if you eat 1500 calories a day you'd be in a caloric deficit. Doesn't matter if you eat 1500 calories in the morning, or evening, it's still 500 calorie deficit either way.
September 15, 2011 1:32 PM
Everyone knows that late night snacking and obesity are linked, but it has nothing to do with WHEN your eating. It has to do with the fact that typically people who eat at night eat MORE then people who don't. So basically, it all goes back to calories in vs calories out. If you stick to your calorie allowance, it doesn't matter when you eat. For a person who doesn't track calories...yes, eating at night may be a potential issue because generally people are less active,bored, alone, watching tv, reading, on the computer and it's easier to just mindlessly eat.
Edited by 123456654321 On September 15, 2011 1:33 PM
September 15, 2011 1:34 PM
QUOTE:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:

QUOTE:


correlation =/= causation



Bingo!! Very basic, but so often ignored...!!


I was thinking someone was going to say this right before i pushed "enter" on my otherr post. That saying I don't like at all. That's like saying "just because eating too much sodium has been linked to high blood pressure, doesn't mean salt is the cause." Okay that's absolutely true... but it's also true, "just because because eating salt has been linked to high blood pressure DOESNT MEAN it's not related too." That cause != correlation, is completely dismissed.


"Epidemiological studies can only go to prove that an agent could have caused, but not that it did cause, an effect in any particular case"

Stolarz-Sk­rzypek K Et Al. Fatal and nonfatal outcomes, incidence of hypertensi­on, and blood pressure changes in relation to urinary sodium excretion. JAMA. 2011 May 4;305(17):­1777-85.

"CONCLUSIO­NS:

In this population­-based cohort, systolic blood pressure, but not diastolic pressure, changes over time aligned with change in sodium excretion, but this associatio­n did not translate into a higher risk of hypertensi­on or CVD complicati­ons. Lower sodium excretion was associated with higher CVD mortality.­"”

Image not displayed


love your signature pic, it's funny. Here's the question though, how many "correlatoins" do you need for it to be determined as the cause? You know.
September 15, 2011 1:36 PM
Even if you totally STOPPED digesting your food at 8 PM (which is completely ridiculous, btw), a calorie is a calorie. It takes 3500 of them to gain a pound-- no matter what time you consume them. 200 calories after 8PM will effect your body the same as 200 calories before 8PM. Even if they sit in your stomach and don't get digested until morning... it's still the same calorie and you're not going to gain extra weight from it.
  3849501
September 15, 2011 1:37 PM
QUOTE:


love your signature pic, it's funny. Here's the question though, how many "correlatoins" do you need for it to be determined as the cause? You know.


you would need to design a controlled experiment controlling for all potential confounding factors to prove if something actually is the cause of something or not
September 15, 2011 1:41 PM
Arg. This is a frustrating read.

There is not enough information in the article to make any comments.

If this was a scientific study, you can be pretty sure that the scientists understand that causation does not equal correlation. These people are quite well versed in biostatistics, and they understand how to control for variable and how to detect which variable are statistically significant and which are not. There are software packages that make it pretty easy to do this.

It should be pretty obvious to a scientist that if a fat person consumes more calories than a thin person it probably doesn't matter what time of day they eat those calories. So if you are eating more icecream after 8pm in addition to all the crap you eat all day long, it doesn't take a scientist to know that obviously you will be gaining weight.

It seems its hip to be anti-science these days, but scientists really do understand about things like correlation, causation, and statistical relevance.
  9683157
September 15, 2011 1:44 PM
Just so you don't eat right before crawling into bed, I don't think it matters. Even then a small snack shouldn't be a problem imo
  4074988
September 15, 2011 1:49 PM
Yeah I don't agree with it. I think it matters what you're eating and how much sleep you're getting to digest it. Also, I think it has to do with metabolism of the individual as well as the fitness they're getting.
  9824420
September 15, 2011 2:29 PM
Acg, did you take that graph from one of my earlier posts, or are you a fellow Pastafarian?!
  6857672

Reply

Message Boards » Food and Nutrition

Posts by members, moderators and admins should not be considered medical advice and no guarantee is made against accuracy.