If you take in more Calories than your body requires, will you gain the same amount of weight regardless of what time period the equal amounts of Calories are distributed over?
For example, let’s say I have a dozen big, fresh, chocolate chip cookies. I eat them in addition to whatever food I would normally eat that meets my caloric needs. Would it make a difference to my total weight gain if I scarfed them down all at once, versus having a cookie a day?
It has the same overall effect. Once you’ve taken in 10,000 calories, you’ve taken in 10,000 calories.
Although eating so much that you’re sick might reduce the amount of calories that actually get used as opposed to… expelled.
Related- the “Twinkie Diet”.
Approximately 10% of calories are used in digesting the food. I suspect that if you eat the cookie with other food, then it will just piggy back off of the other food’s digestive efforts and it’ll take less extra effort to absorb the cookie than if you ate the cookie solo. A sort-of dietary network cost, if you will.
Google ‘overfeeding study’. Results of massive amounts of extra calories daily vary extremely between individuals.
Interesting thought, Chessic Sense. Is that kind of piggybacking/synergy possible, though, where the cost of digesting food is lowered by eating more of it at once? I.e., is consuming a larger quantity of food more “efficient”?
I’d say that would be to be expected, given how much people’s metabolisms vary. But that’s not the question–it’s whether, for a particular individual, will it make a difference whether those extra calories are consumed all at once or spread over a longer period of time.