actual time between eating and seeing either fat or muscle



J

Jeff

Guest
I have searched Google but can't find an answer to a simple
(OK, not so simple) question: What is the approx. time (in
hours or days) between eating and seeing either fat or
muscle appear on your body? My girlfriend is a workout
monster, but also very nervous about everything "bad" she
eats. She thinks eating a piece of apple pie for dessert
will "appear" on her body as fat the next morning, or she
will "gain a pound!" I think it takes AT LEAST 24 hours for
this to happen, if not possibly as long as a week. (It also
must be true that 90% of the pie calories are burned off for
normal metabolism, and perhaps more, especially after
running for 30 mts. and doing 15 mts. of crunches every
morning!). How long does it take to appear as weight (fat or
muscle)? Anybody? Thanks, Jeff
p.s. I'm an English major who doesn't know his DNA for his
RNA, so go easy on me! Just your best guess of the
elapsed time in hours, give or take. Thanks!
 
If she has been working out aerobically for many years her
metabolism will probably be quite high. Usually this takes
about five years to drop leaving the recipient staring at
the scales in wonderment why they haven't changed anything
in their routine and they are gaining weight like crazy.

If her metabolism is high the sugars will probably make her
lose weight the next day because of body confusion. This
cannot be repeated for very long without negative
consequences.

"Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have searched Google but can't find an answer to a
> simple (OK, not so simple) question: What is the approx.
> time (in hours or days) between eating and seeing either
> fat or muscle appear on your body? My girlfriend is a
> workout monster, but also very nervous about everything
> "bad" she eats. She thinks eating a piece of apple pie for
> dessert will "appear" on her body as fat the next morning,
> or she will "gain a pound!" I think it takes AT LEAST 24
> hours for this to happen, if not possibly as long as a
> week. (It also must be true that 90% of the pie calories
> are burned off for normal metabolism, and perhaps more,
> especially after running for 30 mts. and doing 15 mts. of
> crunches every morning!). How long does it take to appear
> as weight (fat or muscle)? Anybody? Thanks, Jeff
> p.s. I'm an English major who doesn't know his DNA for his
> RNA, so go easy on me! Just your best guess of the
> elapsed time in hours, give or take. Thanks!
 
"Jeff" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have searched Google but can't find an answer to a
> simple (OK, not so simple) question: What is the approx.
> time (in hours or days) between eating and seeing either
> fat or muscle appear on your body? My girlfriend is a
> workout monster, but also very nervous about everything
> "bad" she eats. She thinks eating a piece of apple pie for
> dessert will "appear" on her body as fat the next morning,
> or she will "gain a pound!" I think it takes AT LEAST 24
> hours for this to happen, if not possibly as long as a
> week. (It also must be true that 90% of the pie calories
> are burned off for normal metabolism, and perhaps more,
> especially after running for 30 mts. and doing 15 mts. of
> crunches every morning!). How long does it take to appear
> as weight (fat or muscle)? Anybody?

IF she eats something, the except the calories that are
immediately used, the calories will mostly be stored in the
liver as fat or glycogen (sugars are stored as glycogen,
fats as fats, and extra protein not used for building
muscle, brain, etc., as fat or glycogen). Eventually, if you
don't burn it up, it will move to the muscles or fat cells
or fuel storage. One of the liver's jobs is to absorb extra
calories after a meal and to release them at times of need,
like overnight, during excercise and between meals. I don't
know the exact time course, but I imagine that extra desert,
etc., is converted into fat rather quickly, like hours to a
day or two, depending on the quantity and metabolism and
immediate metabolic needs of the person.

BTW, the actual answer doesn't really matter too much.
If you take in more calories than you use, the calories
are converted to fat. Calories gained = calories taken
in - calories burned. And calories get converted to fat
if not used.

Jeff

> Thanks, Jeff
> p.s. I'm an English major who doesn't know his DNA for his
> RNA, so go easy on me! Just your best guess of the
> elapsed time in hours, give or take. Thanks!
 
Jeff writes:

> I have searched Google but can't find an answer to a
> simple (OK, not so simple) question: What is the approx.
> time (in hours or days) between eating and seeing either
> fat or muscle appear on your body?

The changes are almost immediate, but they are so small that
it takes a while before they become visible.

> My girlfriend is a workout monster, but also very nervous
> about everything "bad" she eats. She thinks eating a piece
> of apple pie for dessert will "appear" on her body as fat
> the next morning, or she will "gain a pound!"

Sounds like she needs to learn a lot more about human
physiology, and stop relying on superstition.

> I think it takes AT LEAST 24 hours for this to happen, if
> not possibly as long as a week.

No, it can happen right away. But the change is often too
small to detect, and it is masked by much larger daily
changes, such as shifts in hydration (loss or gain of
water weight--remember, the human body is mostly water, so
even a slight change in water balance can produce a big
shift in weight).

> It also must be true that 90% of the pie calories are
> burned off for normal metabolism, and perhaps more,
> especially after running for 30 mts. and doing 15 mts. of
> crunches every morning!

Calories from a specific food item aren't burned off with
any special preference. However, calories from
_somewhere_ are burned, and it all evens out. So burning
a number of calories equal to the content of a pie
effectively "burns the pie."

> How long does it take to appear as weight (fat or muscle)?

Almost immediately for fat, a few days for muscle. But
remember, the changes are too small to reliably detect over
such short periods. You have to look at periods of weeks or
months instead.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach
me directly.
 
Pizza Girl writes:

> If she has been working out aerobically for many years her
> metabolism will probably be quite high.

Frequent workouts do not change basal metabolism.

> If her metabolism is high the sugars will probably make
> her lose weight the next day because of body confusion.

Sugar will eventually be turned to fat, if the energy is not
used promptly.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach
me directly.
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Jeff rambled on about "actual
time between eating and seeing either fat or muscle." Our
champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts,
thusly ...

>She thinks eating a piece of apple pie for dessert will
>"appear" on her body as fat the next morning, or she will
>"gain a pound!" I think it takes AT LEAST 24 hours for this
>to happen, if not possibly as long as a week.

Actually, I was under the impression that food has weight.
And, thus, your body immediately experiences a weight gain
from the act of eating food. Men and Black II had a charming
video on this. Don't you go to the movies?

Food obviously contains a large volume of water which will
be excreted within 24 hours. What ever food is not burned
up running and maintaining the body will either end up as
muscle or as fat depending upon your activities and
activity levels.

Aerobic exercise does not build muscle, so unless burned off
will end up as fat.

Just my opinion. But, I am *right* as usual!
 
John 'the Man' writes:

> Actually, I was under the impression that food has weight.
> And, thus, your body immediately experiences a weight gain
> from the act of eating food.

True, but much of it is rapidly lost again.

> Food obviously contains a large volume of water which will
> be excreted within 24 hours. What ever food is not burned
> up running and maintaining the body will either end up as
> muscle or as fat depending upon your activities and
> activity levels.

True, except for the indigestible part of food, which is
excreted along with the water it contains.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach
me directly.
 
Once upon a time, our fellow Mxsmanic rambled on about "Re:
actual time between eating and seeing either fat or muscle."
Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts,
thusly ...

>John 'the Man' writes:
>
>> Actually, I was under the impression that food has
>> weight. And, thus, your body immediately experiences a
>> weight gain from the act of eating food.
>
>True, but much of it is rapidly lost again.
>
>> Food obviously contains a large volume of water which
>> will be excreted within 24 hours. What ever food is not
>> burned up running and maintaining the body will either
>> end up as muscle or as fat depending upon your activities
>> and activity levels.
>
>True, except for the indigestible part of food, which is
>excreted along with the water it contains.

Where there it is!

I was right all along. :)

Just thought that you might want to know. :)
 
Pizza Girl wrote:

>
> If her metabolism is high the sugars will probably make
> her lose weight the next day because of body confusion.
> This cannot be repeated for very long without negative
> consequences.

Hmm "body confusion" - a good solid scientific principle. Do
you simply make this **** up on the fly, use a Ouji board or
smoke the weed?

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
"Body confusion" is a well accepted principle among body
builders, weight lifters, athletes in general and dieters.
You ignorance and/or lack of experience does not make it
more unsound.

"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Pizza Girl wrote:
>
> >
> > If her metabolism is high the sugars will probably make
> > her lose weight
the
> > next day because of body confusion. This cannot be
> > repeated for very
long
> > without negative consequences.
>
> Hmm "body confusion" - a good solid scientific principle.
> Do you simply make this **** up on the fly, use a Ouji
> board or smoke the weed?
>
> --
> Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 06:47:30 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Pizza Girl writes:
>
>> If she has been working out aerobically for many years
>> her metabolism will probably be quite high.
>
>Frequent workouts do not change basal metabolism.

Unless you're in a coma or extremely sedentary, basal
metabolism doesn't really mean that much. Frequent workouts
increase total calories burned. The question is, how long
can the average person keep it up?.

>Sugar will eventually be turned to fat, if the energy is
>not used promptly.

Only if glycogen stores are full. People forget that the
body has other ways to store calories besides fat cells. An
active person is more likely to store excess calories as
glycogen, intermuscular triglycerides, and creatine
phosphate then in adipose tissue. Ironically, in the short
term this means more weight gain per excess calories then if
they were stored in fat but in the long run this minimizes
excess fat. (but doesn't prevent it if you are still
overeating)

However, try telling this to your average weight obsessed
female who lives and dies by a number on a bathroom scale.
 
Ron Ritzman writes:

> Unless you're in a coma or extremely sedentary, basal
> metabolism doesn't really mean that much. Frequent
> workouts increase total calories burned. The question is,
> how long can the average person keep it up?.

And that is a _very_ important question, because successful
weight control means adopting a lifestyle that you can
maintain _permanently_, not a frenzied and artificial "fat-
burning" regimen that you plan to abandon as soon as you
lose x pounds of ugly fat. If you don't maintain a lifestyle
(eating and exercise) that holds calories down to match your
desired weight, you'll just get fat again. But few fat
dieters seem to understand this (I don't know if they are
just stupid, or if they are being willfully obtuse).

> Only if glycogen stores are full.

Glycogen can only hold 2000-3000 kcal, and some fat people
can go through several times that each day.

Besides, glycogen is even bulkier than fat, so if you are
constantly carrying a lot of glycogen around, that
contributes to fatness, although 2000 kcal doesn't
contribute very much.

> However, try telling this to your average weight obsessed
> female who lives and dies by a number on a bathroom scale.

A common mistake is to fret over daily changes in weight. I
ignore daily changes and typically look only at overall
monthly trends.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach
me directly.
 
Pizza Girl writes:

> "Body confusion" is a well accepted principle among body
> builders, weight lifters, athletes in general and dieters.

None of whom generally knows anything about human
physiology.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach
me directly.
 
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 23:44:12 GMT, "Pizza Girl" <[email protected]>
posted:

>"Body confusion" is a well accepted principle among body
>builders, weight lifters, athletes in general and dieters.
>You ignorance and/or lack of experience does not make it
>more unsound.

So you can't define it?

That's the skeptics' motto: "If they can't define it (with
units) it's ********!" :)

>"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> Pizza Girl wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > If her metabolism is high the sugars will probably make
>> > her lose weight
>the
>> > next day because of body confusion. This cannot be
>> > repeated for very
>long
>> > without negative consequences.
>>
>> Hmm "body confusion" - a good solid scientific principle.
>> Do you simply make this **** up on the fly, use a Ouji
>> board or smoke the weed?
>>
>> --
>> Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
>
 
Pizza Girl wrote:

> "Body confusion" is a well accepted principle among body
> builders, weight lifters, athletes in general and dieters.
> You ignorance and/or lack of experience does not make it
> more unsound.

I am very athletic and if you are using body builders and
weight lifters as evidence you are really living is a
mythical world. To be fair I would enjoy being pointed to
some relevant work that provides some details of this
"confusion." To cite iron heads as authority is like sayin
TC understands nutrition and Dahmer was a vegetarian.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
Who would you quote for exercise references? Your doctor
or dentist?

The body confusion principle is one defined by Weider for
bodybuilders to advance their muscle size. (of course you
would know all this since it was developed back in 1960 and
you have been doing a pushup from time to time). This also
applies to other things in life such as low fat diets. Try
eating a greasy pizza the night before weighing in and see
for yourself.

Weider prinicple #8? Muscle Confusion Principle (Muscles
accommodate to a specific type of stress ("habituate" or
"plateau") when you continually apply the same stress to
your muscles over time, so you must constantly vary
exercises, sets, reps and weight to avoid accommodation)

"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Pizza Girl wrote:
>
> > "Body confusion" is a well accepted principle among body
> > builders,
weight
> > lifters, athletes in general and dieters. You ignorance
> > and/or lack of experience does not make it more unsound.
>
> I am very athletic and if you are using body builders and
> weight lifters as evidence you are really living is a
> mythical world. To be fair I would enjoy being pointed to
> some relevant work that provides some details of this
> "confusion." To cite iron heads as authority is like sayin
> TC understands nutrition and Dahmer was a vegetarian.
>
> --
> Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:19:01 GMT, "Pizza Girl" <[email protected]>
posted:

>Who would you quote for exercise references? Your doctor
>or dentist?
>
>The body confusion principle is one defined by Weider for
>bodybuilders to advance their muscle size. (of course you
>would know all this since it was developed back in 1960 and
>you have been doing a pushup from time to time). This also
>applies to other things in life such as low fat diets. Try
>eating a greasy pizza the night before weighing in and see
>for yourself.
>
>Weider prinicple #8? Muscle Confusion Principle (Muscles
>accommodate to a specific type of stress ("habituate" or
>"plateau") when you continually apply the same stress to
>your muscles over time, so you must constantly vary
>exercises, sets, reps and weight to avoid accommodation)
>

Must be right then....

>
>"Doug Freese" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>> Pizza Girl wrote:
>>
>> > "Body confusion" is a well accepted principle among
>> > body builders,
>weight
>> > lifters, athletes in general and dieters. You ignorance
>> > and/or lack of experience does not make it more
>> > unsound.
>>
>> I am very athletic and if you are using body builders and
>> weight lifters as evidence you are really living is a
>> mythical world. To be fair I would enjoy being pointed to
>> some relevant work that provides some details of this
>> "confusion." To cite iron heads as authority is like
>> sayin TC understands nutrition and Dahmer was a
>> vegetarian.
>>
>> --
>> Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
>
 
Pizza Girl wrote:
>
> Who would you quote for exercise references? Your doctor
> or dentist?
>
> The body confusion principle is one defined by Weider for
> bodybuilders to advance their muscle size.

And has nothing to do with sugars making you lose weight,
which is what you originally claimed.

> (of course you would know all this since it was developed
> back in 1960 and you have been doing a pushup from time to
> time). This also applies to other things in life such as
> low fat diets.

How does muscle confusion apply to low fat diets?

> Try eating a greasy pizza the night before weighing in and
> see for yourself.

Do greasy pizzas not confuse muscles then?

MattLB
 
Once upon a time, our fellow MattLB rambled on about "Re:
actual time between eating and seeing either fat or muscle."
Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts,
thusly ...

>> The body confusion principle is one defined by Weider for
>> bodybuilders to advance their muscle size.
>
>And has nothing to do with sugars making you lose weight,
>which is what you originally claimed.

What does the unnecessary duplicant have to do with
real exercise?

Go back to your yoga, .... WIMP!

Ha, ... Hah, Ha!

Just thought that you might want to know. :)
 
I am very sorry you cannot follow a thread.

"MattLB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Pizza Girl wrote:
> >
> > Who would you quote for exercise references? Your doctor
> > or dentist?
> >
> > The body confusion principle is one defined by Weider
> > for bodybuilders
to
> > advance their muscle size.
>
> And has nothing to do with sugars making you lose weight,
> which is what you originally claimed.
>
> > (of course you would know all this since it was
> > developed back in 1960 and you have been doing a pushup
> > from time to
time).
> > This also applies to other things in life such as low
> > fat diets.
>
> How does muscle confusion apply to low fat diets?
>
> > Try eating a greasy pizza the night before weighing in
> > and see for
yourself.
>
> Do greasy pizzas not confuse muscles then?
>
> MattLB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back