PD: Oh, and forget about the stupid "calories in, calories out" non sense. Your body is not a Bunsen burner. Your body could take what it needs(and let the remain on your waste) and calories are not equal(even different sugars have completely different metabolism pathways).
Also eat five times a day and never fast.
Better: get a mentor that really knows, not a person that just has a title but someone that has result under her belt.
Eat five times a day and never fast is very old school. When I was trying to gain weight I would eat 6 times a day. Watched low fat and low sugar.
But it seems things changed Intermittent fasting is actual working and even a 24 hour fast can be beneficial.
Also Calories in and out are a very easy way to lose weight if you calculate correctly. Lot of people overestimate what they burn.
I practice intermittent fasting and now I can maintain low BF % all the time. while using the 5 to 6 meals a day was great for getting more muscle on with a bit of fat gain. But eating 5 to 6 meals a day on low calorie consumption sucks and is not maintainable in the long run.
Calories in, calories out is a valid model. It's just not a very useful one. The reason that some foods are better than others even though they have the same number of calories is that some foods give you the feeling of being full, which causes you to eat fewer calories later (e.g. protein). Or some foods might cause you to feel fatigued, causing you to burn fewer calories later (sugar crash). But don't kid yourself, if it's a given that you eat X calories and burn/lose Y calories, then you'll gain weight proportional to X-Y. Choose foods that make it easy to keep that number close to zero.
Also eat five times a day and never fast.
Better: get a mentor that really knows, not a person that just has a title but someone that has result under her belt.