What are
Meal replacements, or substitute meals, are food supplements that, in some cases, have physical and chemical characteristics very similar to those of dietary foods;
Being packaged and single-dose, meal replacements are particularly convenient to use; the strengths of these products are: high shelf life, convenient transportability and rapid consumption. The relative defects instead concern: the NON specificity of the energetic and nutritional contributions, the alimentary miseducation, the lack of secondary microelements and nutraceutical components.
Meal replacements are available in the form of: powders, solutions, bars, biscuits and snacks.
When and how to use them
Meal replacements can be consumed as an alternative to 1 of the 3 main meals: breakfast, lunch or dinner. They provide, on average, 1/3 of the mineral salt and vitamin inputs for a 1800kcal diet, although (obviously) this does not guarantee the coverage of specific needs; for example: iron for fertile women, folic acid for pregnant women, calcium for growing subjects, calcium for nurses, calcium for the elderly, etc.
Therefore, meal replacements are the quick and disengaging alternative to pleasure / need to eat; remember that these products provide a share of energy and nutrients STANDARDIZED, which: if it is good for one person, it may not be good for another ! This is the salient aspect to take into consideration BEFORE trying to use them because, due to this "inconvenience", meal replacements CANNOT replace more than 1 of the 3 main meals per day.
Ultimately, meal replacements could be a suitable choice ONLY in the event that the need to feed lightly arises; for my part, I believe that the application is advisable mainly for dinner, if the other alternatives to meal replacement are fasting or fast food junk-food.
Do they lose weight?
Traders who treat meal replacements often make use of some studies published in favor of their products, in which it is found that the inclusion of these dietary supplements in the diet can favor the reduction of excess body weight. All clear and shareable; if (for example) an 800kcal dinner was replaced with a 100 or 200kcal smoothie, in the long term, the effect would undoubtedly be the slimming one.
On the other hand, I invite readers to use a new interpretation, as an essential attitude for greater awareness of the subject; the objective is to evaluate in a CONCRETE way the relevance of meal replacements (or any other supplement) within one's diet:
" If instead of the meal substitute 1 or 2 apples were consumed, with about the same caloric intake (78-180kcal), would the slimming effect be the same? "
Obviously yes.
Some loyal consumers could object pointing out that, between the one and the other alternative, there is a notable impartiality of nutritional balance ... BUT thinking carefully, remembering what has already been mentioned above, you will notice that one of the primary precautions in the use of the substitutes of the meal is to consume them at most once a day, in order to fill the relative nutritional deficit with the ordinary feeding of the other meals. So:
"Why not do the same with easily transportable foods such as a fruit, a slice of bread, some dried and dehydrated fruit ... saving a considerable amount of money?"
Are they really necessary?
Meal replacement: lots of smoke (in the eyes) ... and little roast!
A final reflection must be made on the experimental methods mentioned by the meal replacement traders, or on their slimming effect; who among the readers has already done some research on the net, will have stumbled on the abstract of a couple of scientific studies that support the use of these supplements.
Since most users DO NOT have the knowledge needed for an impartial evaluation, I believe it is appropriate to highlight some interesting details; well, all the investigations carried out have contextualized the substitutive meals inside DIVOLVESLY HYPOCALORIC diets, often further emphasized by the desirable physical activity ... well, God forbid that they would not lose weight! To be honest, weight loss was not even the most effective, which (given and considered the MISERO caloric intake of the related schemes) would seem to indicate a REDUCED compliance of the therapy associated with replacement meals (translated: subjects ate more than prescribed !). To make it short, consumers are not fooled: by prescribing low-calorie diets weight loss would in any case be guaranteed and the merit of a successful weight reduction program is therefore not attributable to meal replacements.
Use in sports
Could a sportsman successfully use meal replacements?
In conclusion, I believe it is right to recall how the nutritional needs, and therefore the diet, of a sedentary person are NOT ABSOLUTELY comparable to those of a sportsman or even less of an athlete; for the latter, replacing meals with bars or shakes could compromise both health and sports performance, negating the preparation work carried out in the field or in the gym.
