We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Quantities of calories and fat storage?

determined_14
determined_14 Posts: 258 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
Okay, no one jump all over me-- I understand that the only way to lose weight is to eat in a deficit, and the only way to gain is to eat a surplus. But I do wonder if there has been research and/or if anyone has some insight into this:
If you eat, say 1,000 calories at one sitting, that is theoretically more than most of our bodies need to meet satiation and to reenergize. (Not for the entire day, just more than we need at one time!) So more of those calories would get stored (fat) than if you'd only had, oh, 400 calories at that meal. All other things (calorie count) being equal, I wonder if this would cause a difference in the rate of weight loss.
I suppose it could all even out, because if one is sticking to a calorie goal, then the next time you felt a little hungry, you might say, "Sorry, I already ate enough for the day," at which point the body would draw upon those fat stores anyway.
Thoughts?

Replies

  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    edited March 2015
    It's not how it works. Your body doesn't care about meal timing or how much you consume in one sitting.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    It doesn't work that way.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    Okay, no one jump all over me-- I understand that the only way to lose weight is to eat in a deficit, and the only way to gain is to eat a surplus. But I do wonder if there has been research and/or if anyone has some insight into this:
    If you eat, say 1,000 calories at one sitting, that is theoretically more than most of our bodies need to meet satiation and to reenergize. (Not for the entire day, just more than we need at one time!) So more of those calories would get stored (fat) than if you'd only had, oh, 400 calories at that meal. All other things (calorie count) being equal, I wonder if this would cause a difference in the rate of weight loss.
    I suppose it could all even out, because if one is sticking to a calorie goal, then the next time you felt a little hungry, you might say, "Sorry, I already ate enough for the day," at which point the body would draw upon those fat stores anyway.
    Thoughts?

    Your body is constantly cycling between fat storage and oxidation regardless of meal timing or whether you're eating very little in one sitting or a lot in one sitting.

    What's ultimately important is your net position in the end...if your net position is a deficit you will oxidize more fat than you will store...if your net position is a surplus you will store more fat than you will oxidize. When in doubt, just look at it from a logical perspective.
  • determined_14
    determined_14 Posts: 258 Member
    Thanks, cwolfman13! That explanation helps me get a clearer picture of what's going on. Like I said, I get that net calories is the ultimate determinant, but I guess I'm just one of those people who wants to know why/how the science works. :)
This discussion has been closed.