The cheat meal: benefit or harm

A planned “cheat” on a diet is considered by some the secret of steady weight loss and by others a direct road to a breakdown. The editorial team broke down what studies say about the physiology of overeating, when a cheat meal helps and when it harms, and what more controlled alternatives exist.

What a cheat meal is and where the idea came from

A cheat meal (from the English “cheat meal”) is a planned meal during which a person on a diet deliberately departs from their plan: eats favorite dishes, more calories, “forbidden” foods. Alongside it exist the concepts of a cheat day and a refeed, and they are often confused, although they differ substantially.

The popularity of the cheat meal rests on two arguments. The first is psychological: knowing that on Sunday you can eat pizza, it is easier for a person to stick to the plan on weekdays. The second is physiological: it is believed that a large meal “revs up the metabolism,” raises leptin and helps overcome a plateau.

Both arguments have a grain of truth but also serious caveats. In this article the editorial team examines what science says about the physiological effects of overeating, where a cheat meal can be useful and where it harms, and how it differs from a more controlled tool — the refeed.

It is important to draw a line right away: this is not about a moral evaluation of “unhealthy” food. The very concept of “cheating” in nutrition already carries a certain emotional subtext, to which we will return in the section on psychology.

Does a cheat meal “rev up” the metabolism

Short-term overeating does indeed affect hormones. Dirlewanger and colleagues (2000) showed that a few days of overeating carbohydrates in women raised leptin levels and daily energy expenditure, whereas overeating fats had almost no such effect. It is this work that the idea of a “carbohydrate” cheat meal is often based on.

However, the magnitude of these changes is small. The increase in energy expenditure during overeating amounts to only a fraction of the additionally eaten calories, and the leptin level returns to baseline quickly after a return to the deficit. That is, a single large meal cannot “reboot” the metabolism for weeks ahead.

More substantial effects are observed with longer diet breaks — weeks at maintenance calories. In the MATADOR study (Byrne et al., 2018) such an approach improved the effectiveness of weight loss in men with obesity. But this is already an entirely different tool than a one-off feast.

In lean athletes on a prolonged cut there is a noticeable effect from a carbohydrate meal — filling the muscles with glycogen, improved well-being and training quality. This is a real benefit, but it is linked to glycogen, not to a “revving up” of the metabolism.

When a cheat meal harms the result

The main practical problem of the cheat meal is energy arithmetic. A moderate daily deficit adds up over a week to a relatively small sum, and an uncontrolled meal of fast food, desserts and alcohol can easily cover it. As a result, a person “is on a diet” six days a week, and the weight does not change.

The second problem is escalation. A cheat meal turns into a cheat day, a cheat day — into a weekend. The control a person maintained on weekdays weakens, and the boundaries of the “permitted” blur.

The third is well-being. A large amount of fatty and sweet food at once often causes bloating, heaviness, worsened sleep. The next day the scale shows a plus of several kilograms due to water, salt and bowel contents, which can be demotivating, although it is not fat.

For people with metabolic disorders — diabetes, insulin resistance, gout, gallbladder diseases — very large meals can be dangerous and require discussion with a doctor.

Psychology: “cheating” and eating behavior

The very name “cheat meal” divides food into “clean” and “dirty,” and behavior into “correct” and “cheating.” For some people such a frame is neutral and even convenient. For others it heightens the feeling of guilt and fuels the cycle of strict restriction followed by overeating.

Pila and colleagues (2017) analyzed images with the hashtag #cheatmeal on social media and found that a significant share of the posts show very large amounts of food, which in nature resemble episodes of overeating, presented as the norm and even an achievement. The authors draw attention to a possible link between such content and disordered eating.

If a cheat meal is perceived as a “reward” for suffering on weekdays, this is a signal that the main diet is too strict. A sustainable eating plan should allow a moderate amount of favorite foods every day rather than concentrating them in a single evening.

Warning signs for which it is worth turning to a specialist: a feeling of loss of control during a cheat meal, hiding food, compensatory actions (exhausting cardio, fasting, inducing vomiting), constant thoughts about the next “permitted” meal.

The alternative: a refeed and a flexible plan

A more controlled alternative to the cheat meal is considered to be a refeed — a planned day with increased calories, mainly through carbohydrates, while keeping protein and relatively low fat. Unlike a cheat meal, the calories of a refeed are calculated in advance.

A study by Campbell and colleagues (2020) in trained people showed that a diet with two refeed days per week preserved lean mass better than a continuous diet with a similar loss of fat. The data are still limited, but they are consistent with the logic: carbohydrates support training quality.

Practical principles, if you still plan a cheat meal:

• one meal, not a whole day;
• a protein base for the dish and moderate portions;
• limiting alcohol, which adds “empty” calories and lowers control;
• a return to the plan from the next meal without compensatory fasting.

Editorial conclusions

A cheat meal does not “rev up” the metabolism substantially: the effect of a single large meal on leptin and energy expenditure is small and short-lived. At the same time, an uncontrolled cheat meal can completely cover the weekly deficit.

For some people a planned departure from the plan is a useful psychological release. For others it fuels the cycle of restriction and overeating. A refeed or a diet break are more controlled alternatives with better justification.

If a “cheat” causes a feeling of guilt or a loss of control, it is worth reconsidering the strictness of the main diet and, if needed, turning to a specialist.

Related topics: metabolic adaptation during dieting, the reverse diet after cutting, nutrition during cutting.

References

1. Dirlewanger M, di Vetta V, Guenat E, et al. Effects of short-term carbohydrate or fat overfeeding on energy expenditure and plasma leptin concentrations in healthy female subjects. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000;24(11):1413–1418.
2. Byrne NM, Sainsbury A, King NA, Hills AP, Wood RE. Intermittent energy restriction improves weight loss efficiency in obese men: the MATADOR study. Int J Obes (Lond). 2018;42(2):129–138.
3. Campbell BI, Aguilar D, Colenso-Semple LM, et al. Intermittent energy restriction attenuates the loss of fat free mass in resistance trained individuals. A randomized controlled trial. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2020;5(1):19.
4. Peos JJ, Norton LE, Helms ER, Galpin AJ, Fournier P. Intermittent dieting: theoretical considerations for the athlete. Sports (Basel). 2019;7(1):22.
5. Pila E, Mond JM, Griffiths S, Mitchison D, Murray SB. A thematic content analysis of #cheatmeal images on social media: characterizing an emerging dietary trend. Int J Eat Disord. 2017;50(6):698–706.
6. Trexler ET, Smith-Ryan AE, Norton LE. Metabolic adaptation to weight loss: implications for the athlete. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2014;11:7.