# Kids Eating Constantly?



## MA-Caver (Mar 2, 2010)

Interesting article about child obesity. Studies finding children eating at least 3 snacks a day on top of their daily 3 meals leading to the increasing child obesity rate in this country.  



> *Snacks mean U.S. kids moving toward "constant eating"*
> 
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100302/hl_nm/us_obesity_children_usa
> ...



I know that a growing child has high caloric demands upon it's body as it moves into teenage and young adult years. Growth spurts make a child hungrier than usual and thus they want to eat more. But that's their body talking to them. Yet a child can consume a lot of food ... so long as it's the RIGHT kind of food. Fatty chips and sugary candy and sodas, along with fast food restaurants ... no, that ain't gonna cut it and therein lies the problem of a kid getting fat or being fat when they're of college age. 
But lack of exercise also contributes to it. Sitting around the house playing those damned video games or texting to dozens of friends at once doesn't aid one bit except the thumb muscles. 
I'm glad that the folks here who are MA-instructors are at least lending a hand in the fight against childhood obesity by providing a healthy way to burn off those calories. More activities like these, school sports (soccer, baseball, et al) contribute as well. 
But that's still only part of the solution. Psychologically a child will sometimes keep on eating because it's a coping mechanism to deal with what's going on in their own little world (home/school/life). 



> Other studies have shown that obese children are more likely to stay obese as adults, and they develop chronic conditions at younger ages, burdening the healthcare system.
> "You see kids who are at higher risk of conditions like diabetes, and cancer, and heart disease -- conditions that cost billions of dollars a year to treat," Michelle Obama said.
> The administration has launched an initiative to tackle the issue by improving nutritional standards, getting food companies to voluntarily improve nutrition standards, help kids exercise more and educating parents.
> The effects extend beyond health. Bethell's study found that overweight or obese children were 32 percent more likely to have to repeat a grade in school and 59 percent more likely than normal weight kids to have missed more than two weeks of school.



Thoughts and comments?


----------



## Stac3y (Mar 2, 2010)

My kids are rail skinny, and they never stop eating. Granted, it's not usually junk food, but it's not raw veggies, either.


----------



## Steve (Mar 2, 2010)

Eating 6 times a day is healthier.  I eat 6 or 7 times each day and lost 40 lbs doing so.  

It's not how often they eat, or even how much they eat.  It's *what* they eat.  Contrary to what my kids might try to tell me, I know that a fruit roll up, even if it's "made from real fruit" is not just as good as a real banana.  

Combine that with a lack of exercise and it's no friggin mystery why kids are chubby.


----------



## terryl965 (Mar 2, 2010)

Almost every single trainer will tell you to eat 6-8 times a day, the body need fuel to burn fat and calories so eating is not a bad thing it is the amounts that people eat when they eat.


----------



## wushuguy (Mar 2, 2010)

I think that people choose to eat junk food because of the taste. why do some kids eat lots of junk while others dont? i think one hand is personal discipline, some parents are real tough on what their kids eat, others not so, some kids even can go to great lengths to get that junk food high. 

junk food is really addicting. while kids need to eat often, if they have help to eat right, it's possible to curb the junk and obesity.

I know I am like that, I love junk food, and grew up eating it. my parents didn't do anything to fix those bad habits. not until i married, then my wife helped me to change my diet. I still have cravings for junk, but more or less I've given it up, and just snack occasionally.


----------



## chungdokwan123 (Mar 3, 2010)

MA-Caver said:


> > Interesting article about child obesity.
> > Thoughts and comments?
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 3, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> Eating 6 times a day is healthier. I eat 6 or 7 times each day and lost 40 lbs doing so.
> 
> It's not how often they eat, or even how much they eat. It's *what* they eat. Contrary to what my kids might try to tell me, I know that a fruit roll up, even if it's "made from real fruit" is not just as good as a real banana.
> 
> Combine that with a lack of exercise and it's no friggin mystery why kids are chubby.


 

I agree.  It is *what *they eat, but also *how much* they eat as well.  If you are eating 6-7 times a day, you are still losing weight because your body is taking in less calories than it burns.  Also, portion size is a lot different when applying this concept properly.  Michael Phelps has to consume 12,000 calories a day to supply his body with the energy it needs.  Eating healthy is not going to give him the caloric intake he needs, so he eats alot of fast food that is burned right back off.  But, for the average person who sits around this concept is ridiculous.

How this applies to a regular person is just that.  There is no burning of calories right away.  Kids are eating WAY too many carbs that the body doesn't need because they aren't active.  Almost all snacks are chips, crackers, etc.  Not even including the pops and candy.  All that excess sugar is being stored as fat because their body isn't using it as fuel.

The diet message is getting mixed up with eating 6-7 *smaller *meals throughout the day.  Kids are eating 3 big meals a day and then eating sugary carb ladden snacks (which triggers the hunger response and makes you feel hungry even when you aren't) in between, and are taking in too many calories for the body to use.

Let's say you need 2000 calories a day to stay at your current weight.  You spread that out over 5 meals and you should be having around 400 calories each meal.  Some people will spread that out over 3 meals, and then 2 small snacks.  It depends, but your calories match your needs.

What I see, especially with younger kids (and alot of adults) is that they spread out the meals/snacks, but they have around 500-600 at each setting which adds up to over 500 extra calories a day. Which in turn adds up to extra pounds being added on a regular basis.

Contrary to popular belief.  Carbs are *NOT *the body's primary energy source, fat is.  Fat supplies the body with a slow steady burn for going about most of our daily activities.  Carbs come into play when the body needs quick bursts of energy for short periods of time.  So if you are athletic and have alot of physical work, then you will need more carbs to help supply the body to do what it needs to.  Kids and adults that sit in a chair all day do NOT need a large amount of carbs for their body to function properly.  Their carbs should be coming from fresh fruits and vegetables, which are actually lower in carbs than starchy foods and pastas.  

Just a quick look at some figures. 

1 slice of bread has about 60 calories, 12 grams of carbs
1 small apple has about 55 calories and 14 carbs
1 cup of carrots has about 52 calories, and 12 carbs.

They all have around the same amount of calories and carbs, but which ones are going to make you feel fuller through the day?  I'm not anti-carb, just using them properly in the scheme of things based on activity level and nutritional value.


----------



## MA-Caver (Mar 3, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> I agree.  It is *what *they eat, but also *how much* they eat as well.  If you are eating 6-7 times a day, you are still losing weight because your body is taking in less calories than it burns.  Also, portion size is a lot different when applying this concept properly.  Michael Phelps has to consume 12,000 calories a day to supply his body with the energy it needs.


Yeah, but Michael Phelps is a stoner so they _always_ have the munchies. :uhyeah:


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 3, 2010)

MA-Caver said:


> Yeah, but Michael Phelps is a stoner so they _always_ have the munchies. :uhyeah:


 

Good point!


----------



## Steve (Mar 3, 2010)

I see your point and agree to an extent.  I mean, if you're stuffing yourself all the time, you'll gain weight.  

But, dude, I eat like crazy.  My total caloric intake is actually about a third higher than it used to be.  I exercise more now, but I also don't eat a lot of crap. It's a function of exercise and eating regularly that keeps my metabolism chugging along.

Of course the total number of calories matters.  I mean, I'm sure that if I ate more than I do (around 4k per day), I'd gain weight.  Beer kills me.  But I stand by my statement that it's not how often you eat, it's what you eat that really matters.  All calories aren't equal.  500 calories of lean chicken is going to have a different effect on your body than 500 calories of twinkie.


----------



## JWLuiza (Mar 3, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> I see your point and agree to an extent.  I mean, if you're stuffing yourself all the time, you'll gain weight.
> 
> But, dude, I eat like crazy.  My total caloric intake is actually about a third higher than it used to be.  I exercise more now, but I also don't eat a lot of crap. It's a function of exercise and eating regularly that keeps my metabolism chugging along.
> 
> Of course the total number of calories matters.  I mean, I'm sure that if I ate more than I do (around 4k per day), I'd gain weight.  Beer kills me.  But I stand by my statement that it's not how often you eat, it's what you eat that really matters.  All calories aren't equal.  500 calories of lean chicken is going to have a different effect on your body than 500 calories of twinkie.



Totally agree. Strangely enough, after controlling for total calorie intake,they haven't been able to find a benefit for 6 small vs. 3 moderate meals a day for weight loss. So it might just be controlling food intake as the benefit here. I'm not sure if the studies have been done haven't looked at weight gain (muscle) though. It basically comes down to that our body is really efficient at dealing with food appropriately. Storing it when we don't need it and using it when we do. It comes down to simply Calories In vs. Calories Out (metabolic disorders not withstanding). Interstingly, your body needs the flexibility of working in both a fasted AND a fed state to maintain health. Also, over eating creates calorie excess that often acts like compound instead of simple interest, which is why losing weight is so hard. Also, diets and activity level compound their effect on weight loss. Just cutting calories doesn't get your metabolism to the point you want for health.

Yay Medical Fuel Metabolism!


----------



## xJOHNx (Mar 4, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> Just a quick look at some figures.
> 
> 1 slice of bread has about 60 calories, 12 grams of carbs
> 1 small apple has about 55 calories and 14 carbs
> ...


It's not the just the carbs that matter. It the nutrition that matters. The amount of fat in it.

Bread is mostly simple refined sugars. They make you hungry and fat. Because the nutritional value is zip.
An apple consists of fructose, which is not a refined sugar. Acts completely different than sacharose (white sugar). Plus it has lots of enzyms, cellulosis (good for the bowels) and vitamins.
Carrots : great nutritional value. Natural Carbs. Lots of betacaroteen which is good for the eyes (as most kids these days need glasses) and some other minerals.

Ditch bread, eat the rest


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 4, 2010)

xJOHNx said:


> It's not the just the carbs that matter. It the nutrition that matters. The amount of fat in it.
> 
> Bread is mostly simple refined sugars. They make you hungry and fat. Because the nutritional value is zip.
> An apple consists of fructose, which is not a refined sugar. Acts completely different than sacharose (white sugar). Plus it has lots of enzyms, cellulosis (good for the bowels) and vitamins.
> ...


 
That was my point about food selection and eating throughout the day.  People need to make healthier more informed decisions.  People are eating things things that are "empty calories" and end up eating even more than if they had chosen something natural and healthy.


----------



## Steve (Mar 4, 2010)

JWLuiza said:


> Totally agree. Strangely enough, after controlling for total calorie intake,they haven't been able to find a benefit for 6 small vs. 3 moderate meals a day for weight loss. So it might just be controlling food intake as the benefit here. I'm not sure if the studies have been done haven't looked at weight gain (muscle) though. It basically comes down to that our body is really efficient at dealing with food appropriately. Storing it when we don't need it and using it when we do. It comes down to simply Calories In vs. Calories Out (metabolic disorders not withstanding). Interstingly, your body needs the flexibility of working in both a fasted AND a fed state to maintain health. Also, over eating creates calorie excess that often acts like compound instead of simple interest, which is why losing weight is so hard. Also, diets and activity level compound their effect on weight loss. Just cutting calories doesn't get your metabolism to the point you want for health.
> 
> Yay Medical Fuel Metabolism!


Here's the real benefit of 6 meals per day vs 3 for me.  I am NEVER hungry.  When I get hungry, THAT'S when I start craving a burger, fries and a beer.  I make poor choices because my salivary glands go nuts at the thought of red meat.  I also begin craving sugar and carbs when I allow myself to get hungry.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 4, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> I see your point and agree to an extent. I mean, if you're stuffing yourself all the time, you'll gain weight.
> 
> But, dude, I eat like crazy. My total caloric intake is actually about a third higher than it used to be. I exercise more now, but I also don't eat a lot of crap. It's a function of exercise and eating regularly that keeps my metabolism chugging along.
> 
> Of course the total number of calories matters. I mean, I'm sure that if I ate more than I do (around 4k per day), I'd gain weight. Beer kills me. But I stand by my statement that it's not how often you eat, it's what you eat that really matters. All calories aren't equal. 500 calories of lean chicken is going to have a different effect on your body than 500 calories of twinkie.


 
Correct, I think we are both saying the same thing, just emphasizing different points.  Eating throughout the day keeps the metabolism working and doesn't put alot of stress on the body to digest large amounts of food all at once.

Also, eating healthy makes you feel fuller with less calories (example I gave of the bread slice vs. fruit or veggie).  Eating healthy also allows us to eat more food with less calories.  Like you mentioned eating chicken vs. a twinkie.  Chicken is both better for you and will make you feel fuller so you don't keep eating.

But, even if you are eating totally healthy foods, if you eat way more calories than you need, you will gain fat. Because the body stores what it can't use.  

It is a balance of healthy eating, small meals and caloric intake that makes losing and keeping the weight off the easiest.


----------



## JWLuiza (Mar 4, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> Here's the real benefit of 6 meals per day vs 3 for me.  I am NEVER hungry.  When I get hungry, THAT'S when I start craving a burger, fries and a beer.  I make poor choices because my salivary glands go nuts at the thought of red meat.  I also begin craving sugar and carbs when I allow myself to get hungry.



Yeah, I totally believe that's what's going on. The common thought was that it was keeping metabolism up, but that's probably not the case. It's just that you never feel starved, so you don't over eat. You hit the nail on the head.


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 4, 2010)

stevebjj said:


> Here's the real benefit of 6 meals per day vs 3 for me. I am NEVER hungry. When I get hungry, THAT'S when I start craving a burger, fries and a beer. I make poor choices because my salivary glands go nuts at the thought of red meat. I also begin craving sugar and carbs when I allow myself to get hungry.


 

Preaching to the choir on that one!! 

In times of famine, we would have the urge to eat as much as we could and pile in as much food as we could for storage later.  I think eating small meals throughout the day 1) satisfies hunger and 2) psychologically, we don't feel the urge to eat everything in sight because we know we have food in a littel bit.

I know, for me, I also eat better when I have meals preplanned ahead of time.  I usually get fast food when I am hungry and I know I can't eat when I want to because I still have to prepare the food and get it ready.


----------



## xJOHNx (Mar 5, 2010)

punisher73 said:


> That was my point about food selection and eating throughout the day.  People need to make healthier more informed decisions.  People are eating things things that are "empty calories" and end up eating even more than if they had chosen something natural and healthy.


I think I misread your post a bit than :asian:


----------



## punisher73 (Mar 5, 2010)

xJOHNx said:


> I think I misread your post a bit than :asian:


 

No sweat, I probably wasn't as clear and it could have been taken more than one way.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 5, 2010)

terryl965 said:


> Almost every single trainer will tell you to eat 6-8 times a day, the body need fuel to burn fat and calories so eating is not a bad thing it is the amounts that people eat when they eat.



True, and agreed, but that presupposes that people are training or at least are physically active. What goes hand in glove with children overeating is a lack of physical activity. 

Since I became an elementary teacher ten years ago, I've noticed that the recess time snack has become a staple that I don't remember from my own childhood. The "snack" is typically snack food, marketed and portioned for kids.

I am so grateful for the foresight of my school to have a recess snack program. Every morning one of our ed. assistants prepares a tray for each class, consisting of anything from celery and carrots to veggies and pita or crackers and cheese, bananas cut in half, orange slices, and so on. The portions are bite sized. We emphasize trying a little bit if the child feels hungry and then waiting until after recess to see if they really want more.

The program means that parents in our low-income community are not throwing away money on snack items, the kids are getting fed, and a bunch of unnecessary packaging is not winding up on the ground or in a landfill.


----------

