This is a really weird question which I feel almost embarrassed to ask, I'm not entirely sure what I'm asking. I think its can the human adipose cell, which is the fat cell we think of, somehow store or accrue fat and enlarge itself, or multiply from more than the energy coming into the body, i.e. some internal displacement or process?
It sounds an absurd question to ask but you have to wonder, how can a body get so large without taking in commensurately huge amounts? Or just as much, how can it take in huge amounts without even becoming fat, which is the other side of the previous situation?
Someone who weighs hundreds of pounds may eat 2/ 3 or more times the recommended daily amount of 2,000 calories for women. Yet there are people who eat that and are slim and upwards, certainly often they weigh far less. Although the biggest may be more likely to be the biggest consistent eaters, that warp and weft, eating lots and a little, is itself internal.
That is, very few will keep eating thousands of calories everyday, purely out of habit, whether intake varies or not is about demand.
What is capable of producing such a seemly divergent scale of outcomes? Is it only the ability to convert calories, rather than some kind of displacement of energy which is then converted and stored?
It is said that calorie intake corresponds closely to weight, but then it is also said that diets work and frankly if such a lack of perspective can dominate on something as easy as that to work out, nothing said by that same mentality can be taken on face value. No-one on board with that can be really be trusted on any facts which happen support their view, or should that be the opposite, as supporting their view is their overweening urge, they can only be trusted to be true to that, even if they wanted to be fair?
Then there's output being an influence. We are told inactivity=weight gain. But I'm a little unsure about this. Hunger is related to your physical energy needs. It follows that inactivity should adjust that need (downward) accordingly, so weight should be neither gained nor lost. If activity has such little effect on hunger, how can it said to be the reason a person is fat? And if you're full of energy, from food, why would you not feel energetic, in the same way you tend to feel depleted when you are hungry and in need of food?
For instance, when people have a hospital stay, even though they tend to be far less active than normal, it's not known for making people necessarily gain a whole lot of weight. People say that's due to the (high) energy demands of healing, but emotional crises also seem to require a lot of energy without seeming to use up a lot of it, ergo, people can put on weight. Their body seems to demand energy its not using, is that a security thing? So it doesn't run out, a just in case measure?
Often, people who do a lot of exercise stop and put on weight-then return to activity and lose weight-becoming another calorie manipulation poster child.
But rarely do these people wind down their activities slowly, to nothing, the reverse of how they tend to progress into more and more activity, how do we know what would happen if they allowed their body to adjust at its own speed?
I'm drifting, from my original question, can/ does the body turn energy that is not purely from food intake into ( or add to existing) fat cells?