In a video posted on Instagram, Dr. Jean-Michel Cohen reminds us that avoiding a meal to accelerate weight loss can have the opposite effect. The key point: skipping a meal is not a miracle strategy, especially if it sets up hunger, frustration and then snacking.
Why can skipped meals become counterproductive?
The reasoning presented in the video is simple: when a restriction is too strong or lasts too long during the day, it can make the rest more difficult to manage. The account explains that, as part of a diet, undereating a person for a significant portion of the day risks awakening compulsions.
“If you’re doing this to lose weight faster, no, I don’t agree.“
The nuance is important. An Instagram video is not scientific proof, and the link is not automatic: skipping a meal does not necessarily cause a loss of control in everyone. On the other hand, in a logic of rigid restriction, this can promote more hunger, cravings, snacking or a feeling of loss of food control in certain people.
The other point concerns the guilt-compensation circle. Dr. Cohen says that when the person ends up eating more than expected, they may then feel like “self-punishment.” However, this reflex often fuels frustration and weakens the continuity of dietary changes. It is therefore not a question of will: a framework that is too strict can become difficult to maintain.
This is also what the French recommendations point out: for lasting weight loss, the French recommendations favor structured meals, adapted to the pace of life, rather than skipped meals which expose certain people to greater hunger and snacking.
What to do instead when the goal is to lose weight
The alternative is not to eat at normal times, nor to force yourself without listening to your body. The most accurate message is to aim for regular meals, adapted to your lifestyle, sufficiently filling to avoid arriving hungry at the next meal.
The Haute Autorité de Santé recommends structuring food intake, often around three main meals and possibly a snack according to each person’s needs and organization. It also insists on lasting changes, rather than brutal restriction. ANSES, for its part, underlined that very restrictive weight loss practices can disrupt the signals of hunger, satiation and satiety, and promote difficulties with eating behavior in certain people.
Concretely, the idea is to build a flexible framework:
- If you skip a meal to “compensate” for an excess or accelerate weight loss, it is better to review the organization of the day rather than tighten the restriction;
- If you are not hungry at a meal, distinguish between truly listening to your feelings and a punitive or control strategy;
- Keep food intake fairly regular to limit extreme hunger, without turning the schedule into a rigid rule;
- If episodes of loss of control, guilt or compensation are repeated, it is best to speak to a healthcare professional.
This approach is consistent with the advice given by Dr. Cohen: do not make skipped meals a slimming shortcut.
What about intermittent fasting?
Finally, intermittent fasting or time restriction should not be confused with cutting out a meal out of urgency or guilt. The available data do not show, overall, a clear superiority of intermittent fasting compared to traditional dietary advice or continuous calorie restriction in overweight or obese adults.
The real issue therefore remains a sustainable, balanced and non-compulsive eating plan, rather than a meal removed “to go faster”.
And if a weight loss process begins to rhyme with fatigue, food obsession or alternation of restriction-excess, this may be a sign that the chosen framework is too difficult to live with. In this case, it is better to move away from methods that are too strict and learn about the risks of an overly restrictive diet.