Wide awake at 3:00 in the morning

Philtex

Question: We say weight management is nothing more than calories in, calories out. Would you weigh the same holding a donut in your hand as you would getting on the scale immediately after eating the donut? If the answer is yes, at that point in time, how long would it take before there was a measurable difference between it being an apple that weighed the same, or that donut?

Bonus question: Have you ever stood on the scale with food in your hand?

crewahl

Okay, guess who's bored? 😉

I believe the short term answer is yes. I haven’t stood on the scale with food, but I’ve weighed my self and weighed my food, and then weighed myself after eating. (My normal lunch is 2.2#, if you wanted to know.) Tenty ounce of water weighs twenty ounce of weight, whether it’s inside you or outside.

I’ll defer to medical expertise on the timing question, but I suspect the answer is “it depends”. The body has to break down the food, use what it can, store what it can’t, and offload the remainder. I would expect that process to take at least overnight (for me), and maybe 48 hours. The “use what it can” probably varies depending on your activity in that timeframe, and the “offload the remainder” is a function of things like fluid intake and fiber in the mix.

Philtex

crewahl wrote: »

Okay, guess who's bored? 😉

I knew you’d get it, yet still provide a thoughtful answer. Thanks.

steve0mania

I'm sure you're clear on this (based on the apple-donut question), but just to jump off from a key point, food weight, calories, macronutrient, and macronutrient distribution, storage, and utilization are all interrelated but different issues that all go into the question of one's physical weight.

As Charlie noted, yes, food weighs the same whether it's in your hand or in your stomach (immediately after eating).

As he also noted, "it's complicated" to sort out the timing of what happens after that.

As your food gets broken down in your GI system, some of it gets taken up into the blood, and some doesn't. That's the first complication. As an example, glucose get taken up quickly (here's a figure from a glucose tolerance test showing that glucose gets into the bloodstream quickly, and then is taken up by cells [and thus is taken out of the bloodstream] in a couple of hours for folks with normal function):



I don't know the data for fats and proteins/amino-acids, but I imagine they're similar.

Once those molecules are taken up, there are a variety of different things that can happen to them. They can be immediately converted to energy, they can be stored, or they can be used for other cellular functions (amino-acids get incorporated into new protein synthesis, for example). The "decision" about what happens to each will be dependent on myriad issues, and each cell type may use them differently.

I believe the major contributor to increased weight (i.e., "getting fat") is lipid (fat) storage. However, increased muscle mass (if you are weight-lifting, for example) will also increase weight. Glucose storage into glycogen will also presumably increase weight, and I believe there is significant water that comes along for the ride, but I don't remember all the details anymore.

Finally, also remember that there is a two-way street. At the same time that some cells (adipose tissue) might be storing fats, some are also probably being broken down and used elsewhere in the body.

Anecdotally, without being too careful about data collection, I tend to believe that my significant shifts in "real weight" (i.e., the trend of my weight) tends to lag behind my intake by a week or two. That may be because it takes a long time for 100 extra calories per day, or 100 fewer calories per day, to really translate into consistently measurable weight changes. Or stated differently, the rule of thumb is that it takes a 3500 calorie excess (or deficit) to change your weight by one pound (but this is a wild oversimplification).

Philtex

Thanks Steve. Great information. I’m going to have to re-read your response to try to soak it all in. What I will probably take away from this long-term is the 3,500 calorie rule of thumb. I love a good wild oversimplication.