True or False? A Calorie is a Calorie is a Calorie.
Options
Replies
-
QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »The differences between the four major macromolecules:
Note that both Lipids and Carbohydrates are composed entirely of Carbon Hydrogen and Oxygen, they're simply in different arrangements. The body can EASILY convert carbohydrates in to lipids and lipids in to carbohydrates, and it DOES. So it doesn't really matter what form you eat the calories in (carbs or fats) the body will do with it what it will. Now, the reason that fats produce more energy per gram than carbs is because fats have a greater proportion carbon-hydrogen bonds. It is through breaking these bonds that energy is released for the body to use. So more bonds = more calories.
Someone probably already asked this (I only got to page 3 before I got bored and started watching Squidbillies), but what about protein?
0 -
xmichaelyx wrote: »Yes, a calorie is a calorie. Too many calories from any source (carbs, fat, or protein) will be stored as fat. The grams of fat in your food are not automatically stored as fat.
Excess calories of one macro are not better than excess calories of another macro. Excess calories cause weight gain.
This is true: As long as you're only talking about weight loss/gain, a calorie is a calorie.
But if all calories were created equal, I wouldn't need to eat because I'd get everything I need from beer and a good multivitamin.
If you don't eat protein, you will die. If you don't eat fat, you will die. If you don't eat carbs, you'll be fine.
I don't know if you want to drink 6 liters of beer every day. Your liver will not be happy. And that's not because of the calories in the beer.
A calorie is always a calorie, like a mile is a mile. What you're talking about is the healthiness of how to traverse that mile. Jogging it is better for you than driving it in your car, but that doesn't change that it's both a mile and they're both created equal. It's not the mile's fault, it's the fault of the rest.0 -
QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »The differences between the four major macromolecules:
Note that both Lipids and Carbohydrates are composed entirely of Carbon Hydrogen and Oxygen, they're simply in different arrangements. The body can EASILY convert carbohydrates in to lipids and lipids in to carbohydrates, and it DOES. So it doesn't really matter what form you eat the calories in (carbs or fats) the body will do with it what it will. Now, the reason that fats produce more energy per gram than carbs is because fats have a greater proportion carbon-hydrogen bonds. It is through breaking these bonds that energy is released for the body to use. So more bonds = more calories.
Someone probably already asked this (I only got to page 3 before I got bored and started watching Squidbillies), but what about protein?
LOL, that question actually just came up, page 6
0 -
tracylbrown839 wrote: »Rather than yet another conversation about diet styles and Paleo, how about what the op asked about.... is a calorie always a calorie. Yes, a calorie is a unit of measurement.
How different food types, cooking styles, and "how" the body processes food, however, is far, far more complex. People would like really simple answers but it's really not quite so simple as everyone would like to believe. Your body is a very, very complex living organism and many complex chemical reactions take place to turn food into the fuel that your body uses.
Here is an article about why a "calorie counts are wrong". Video and article below.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/video/why-calorie-counts-are-wrong2013-08-20/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/science-reveals-why-calorie-counts-are-all-wrong/
It doesn't matter if the counts are "wrong". It's an arbitrary scale. If you count up your calories and are losing at a specific rate, you can use that method or adjust at will.
It's trial and error. I could substitute calories for widgets and decide a 100 g potato is 1 widget of energy. If I stop losing, I'll just cut back my intake to a few less widgets per day until I'm losing at the rate I want...
Totally agree!!!!! However, the op asked questions about how the body processes different types of food. The answer is that it is complex.
I was not, by posting this article, trying to claim that calorie counting is not worth doing.
0 -
QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »xmichaelyx wrote: »Yes, a calorie is a calorie. Too many calories from any source (carbs, fat, or protein) will be stored as fat. The grams of fat in your food are not automatically stored as fat.
Excess calories of one macro are not better than excess calories of another macro. Excess calories cause weight gain.
This is true: As long as you're only talking about weight loss/gain, a calorie is a calorie.
But if all calories were created equal, I wouldn't need to eat because I'd get everything I need from beer and a good multivitamin.
If you don't eat protein, you will die. If you don't eat fat, you will die. If you don't eat carbs, you'll be fine.
Ok, this statement is technically true albeit somewhat misleading. As another poster mentioned up thread, your body can not process calories from alcohol so it is not a an appropriate calorie source for energy for your body.
As for the statement about the necessity of protein, also true, but it doesn't technically have to do with the necessity of calories for energy. Protein isn't really a *good* macromolecule for energy. While it does have the same basic Carbon Oxygen and Hydrogen backbone that all organic molecules are formed from, it does not have the abundance of carbon-hydrogen bonds that carbs and lipids have available.
Also, the protein molecules have additional parts which include Nitrogen and sometimes Sulfur, so you can ONLY obtain those extra parts by consuming protein molecules. Your body can not simply rearrange carbs or lipids to make proteins in the way that it can rearrange carbs in to lipids and vice versus. So yes, you MUST consume a certain amount of protein, while carbs and lipids are somewhat interchangeable.
Thank you. Veering OT I know there are essential fatty acids are there essential nutrients you can only get from carbs?
Not that I am aware of. There are a variety of carb monomers (glucose, fructose, galactose etc.) but as far as I know there is no single type of carb that is *essential*.
0 -
QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »QueenBishOTUniverse wrote: »The differences between the four major macromolecules:
Note that both Lipids and Carbohydrates are composed entirely of Carbon Hydrogen and Oxygen, they're simply in different arrangements. The body can EASILY convert carbohydrates in to lipids and lipids in to carbohydrates, and it DOES. So it doesn't really matter what form you eat the calories in (carbs or fats) the body will do with it what it will. Now, the reason that fats produce more energy per gram than carbs is because fats have a greater proportion carbon-hydrogen bonds. It is through breaking these bonds that energy is released for the body to use. So more bonds = more calories.
Someone probably already asked this (I only got to page 3 before I got bored and started watching Squidbillies), but what about protein?
LOL, that question actually just came up, page 6
Ok, another good reason to try harder to meet my protein goals everyday. The struggle is real.
I see more protein shakes in my future. *sigh*
0 -
What is a bad calorie?snowflake930 wrote: »Unless, and until you make sustainable changes in eating habits, chances are you will be in the huge majority of people that lose weight and gain it all (and for many people even more) back. "Good" calories vs "bad calories. Your nutrition goals depend on the choices of where you get the calories from, how you want to nourish your body. Personal choices and goals. Eating less calories than you burn for weight loss, and to maintain eat only the number of calories you need. Regular exercise contributes to overall good health.
The one that stubbornly hangs on to my hips and doesn't want to go away?
Bad, bad kitty ... eh, calorie 
0 -
prettykitty1515 wrote: »I'm no expert, but there are so many recent books and studies that suggest that a calorie is not a calorie. So it's open for discussion.
Except on this site, where suggesting that a calorie may not be a calorie will be responded to with hostility, vitriol, ridicule and incredulity.
yep.....0 -
MissyLaRae wrote: »Um not at all. I'm a high carb low fat vegan (no animal products at all) and I'm down 16 pounds in 6 weeks eating 2500-3000 calories a day.
NOT all calories are equal. Fat calories are the worst you can eat. A diet high in milk and mean is the worst you could possibly have.
My diet is chock FULL of mean
0 -
jenjay8045 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »I'm no expert, but there are so many recent books and studies that suggest that a calorie is not a calorie. So it's open for discussion.
Except on this site, where suggesting that a calorie may not be a calorie will be responded to with hostility, vitriol, ridicule and incredulity.
yep.....
Or....asking for one of these recent books or studies that's actually legit, peer reviewed information.....and then the line goes dead....or something from LOLstig shows up.0 -
MissyLaRae wrote: »MissyLaRae wrote: »Um not at all. I'm a high carb low fat vegan (no animal products at all) and I'm down 16 pounds in 6 weeks eating 2500-3000 calories a day.
NOT all calories are equal. Fat calories are the worst you can eat. A diet high in milk and mean is the worst you could possibly have.
If you are going to make outrageous claims, please post scientific evidence to back them up.
There is a ton of scientific data to back up a nutritious plant based diet. Meat & Dairy is not healthy. It's not an outrageous claim and no I'm not going to do your research for you. I've invested years into finding the right lifestyle that works for me and done a lot of research into diet myself.
I personally eat 2500-3000 calories every single day for the past 6 weeks and my weight loss is currently at 16 pounds. I have a sedentary lifestyle as an author and walk 20 minutes a day weather permitting. So with little to no exercise I am losing weight. That isn't to say it's right for you, but if I was eating 2500-3000 calories of fat from animal products I most likely would be gaining weight, according to MFP I should be.
I guess I'm doing it wrong =(
I lost 30+ pounds by eating nothing BUT animal products.
0 -
jenjay8045 wrote: »prettykitty1515 wrote: »I'm no expert, but there are so many recent books and studies that suggest that a calorie is not a calorie. So it's open for discussion.
Except on this site, where suggesting that a calorie may not be a calorie will be responded to with hostility, vitriol, ridicule and incredulity.
yep.....
The "a calorie is not a calorie" debate is no different than the "muscle weighs more than fat" one, which rears its ugly head on these forums from time to time.
When someone states "muscle weighs more than fat," people start coming out of the trees saying that they are actually referring to density. Of course they are, but only the most pedantic worry about that difference, when dealing with economy of language. So, pages upon pages of silly rebuttals and counter-rebuttals ensue.
Obviously, when individuals state "a calorie isn't a calorie," they are discussing the effects the various types of food have on health or (as many here should be interested in) the ability to lose weight.
I have no problem eschewing sodas, "fast food," doughnuts, ice cream, or the myriad of other foods some consider "bad," when I'm cutting. Do I think they are foods you should always avoid? Nope, I love that stuff. I just want to hit my goal more quickly, and start enjoying it when I bulk.
I also have no problem with people who fit calorie-dense foods into their diets while losing weight. Do what works for you, and I'll do me.0 -
A calorie is a calorie because it is a unit of measurement and nothing more
nobody asks if a centimeter is a centimeter or a kilogramme is a kilogramme, it's all just units of measurement.
It's how that calorie is obtained, used or not used that's important.
But is a unicorn a unicorn?
No apparently a unicorn is a woman who is on the 3-5 crazy scale and 9-10 hotness scale...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuI6GTY9eVc
LMFAO0 -
tracylbrown839 wrote: »tracylbrown839 wrote: »Rather than yet another conversation about diet styles and Paleo, how about what the op asked about.... is a calorie always a calorie. Yes, a calorie is a unit of measurement.
How different food types, cooking styles, and "how" the body processes food, however, is far, far more complex. People would like really simple answers but it's really not quite so simple as everyone would like to believe. Your body is a very, very complex living organism and many complex chemical reactions take place to turn food into the fuel that your body uses.
Here is an article about why a "calorie counts are wrong". Video and article below.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/video/why-calorie-counts-are-wrong2013-08-20/
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/science-reveals-why-calorie-counts-are-all-wrong/
It doesn't matter if the counts are "wrong". It's an arbitrary scale. If you count up your calories and are losing at a specific rate, you can use that method or adjust at will.
It's trial and error. I could substitute calories for widgets and decide a 100 g potato is 1 widget of energy. If I stop losing, I'll just cut back my intake to a few less widgets per day until I'm losing at the rate I want...
Totally agree!!!!! However, the op asked questions about how the body processes different types of food. The answer is that it is complex.
I was not, by posting this article, trying to claim that calorie counting is not worth doing.
Really interesting article! And I think it does matter, although it might not make a noticeable difference in the diets of most people who eat a variety of foods.0 -
MissyLaRae wrote: »MissyLaRae wrote: »Um not at all. I'm a high carb low fat vegan (no animal products at all) and I'm down 16 pounds in 6 weeks eating 2500-3000 calories a day.
NOT all calories are equal. Fat calories are the worst you can eat. A diet high in milk and mean is the worst you could possibly have.
If you are going to make outrageous claims, please post scientific evidence to back them up.
There is a ton of scientific data to back up a nutritious plant based diet. Meat & Dairy is not healthy. It's not an outrageous claim and no I'm not going to do your research for you. I've invested years into finding the right lifestyle that works for me and done a lot of research into diet myself.
I personally eat 2500-3000 calories every single day for the past 6 weeks and my weight loss is currently at 16 pounds. I have a sedentary lifestyle as an author and walk 20 minutes a day weather permitting. So with little to no exercise I am losing weight. That isn't to say it's right for you, but if I was eating 2500-3000 calories of fat from animal products I most likely would be gaining weight, according to MFP I should be.
Amusing as a vegan/paleo face-off would be -- I'd totally be happy if that's what this thread turned into -- the question "is a calorie a calorie" isn't actually about nutrition, so the fact you think meat is and the paleo people think grains are and both of you (wrongly, IMO) think milk is, doesn't really matter for the question. Nor does the fact that you've enjoyed eating a vegan diet while losing while someone else has enjoyed eating a paleo diet while losing.
What might be interesting--were it believable--is your claim that you've lost while eating at an amount you claim is well above your maintenance. To substantiate that, would you estimate what your maintenance is and what it's based on? Also, I'm kind of curious how you regularly eat 2500-3000 calories of fruits and veggies, as I'd have a hard time doing that (I'm assuming you mean non-starchy veggies). I tried to check your diary, but it's not open, but I'd be curious to see what you are eating.
0 -
I definitely don't know enough on this subject but now want to learn more. I think for me, I find my food choice is important beyond the calories because I struggle with portion control and feeling full. If I pick up a candy bar, it might satisfy that sweet tooth or urge to indulge, but it isn't going to leave me full and satisfied. If I dip apple slices in some natural peanut butter I will be more satisfied and full overall. Even if a calorie is just a calorie, when I pay attention to the other important factors of health and nutrition, I am less tempted to go over my calorie goal for the day. Since I'm trying to lose weight, that is ultimately what needs to happen, right? In vs. Out. Working for me.0
-
LiminalAscendance wrote: »Obviously, when individuals state "a calorie isn't a calorie," they are discussing the effects the various types of food have on health or (as many here should be interested in) the ability to lose weight.
I don't think that's so. The OP's question asked about the specific effect on weight loss of overeating certain kinds of food vs. others, assuming that calories were equal. Others have popped up to insist that they can eat unlimited (or nearly so) calories of some kinds of foods while losing, and typically when this topic comes up people insist that they lose on 2000 calories of some kind of food while gaining on 1200 calories of some other.
The argument most certainly is that calories from some foods have a different effect in terms of weight loss--in other words, in terms of energy--than others. If this were so, it wouldn't actually preference "healthy" foods, as seems to be the argument, ironically. It would suggest that the problem of world hunger could be best solved by shipping candy bars or "processed junk," since that stuff apparently is able to provide calories well beyond it's actual, well, calorie count. Magic! But also a tremendous boon, were it but true.
With respect to the point that some foods (not calories) are more nutrient dense or lead to a more sustainable diet, more satisfaction, etc., I don't think you can argue that that's what's being said by "a calorie is not a calorie," since many people (including me) answering that "a calorie IS a calorie" have ALSO acknowledged that of course foods are different in these ways and what you choose to eat makes a difference. No one here ever claims that "food is just food." (Some like to claim that some kinds of food, like milk or bread, aren't really food, but that's probably for another thread.)
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »LiminalAscendance wrote: »Obviously, when individuals state "a calorie isn't a calorie," they are discussing the effects the various types of food have on health or (as many here should be interested in) the ability to lose weight.
The argument most certainly is that calories from some foods have a different effect in terms of weight loss--in other words, in terms of energy--than others. If this were so, it wouldn't actually preference "healthy" foods, as seems to be the argument, ironically. It would suggest that the problem of world hunger could be best solved by shipping candy bars or "processed junk," since that stuff apparently is able to provide calories well beyond it's actual, well, calorie count. Magic! But also a tremendous boon, were it but true.
Except, of course, for the minor fact that a candy bar isn't nutritionally complete. What good are extra "magic" calories, if you're still malnourished? Thankfully, those that are in charge of fighting global hunger don't reside on these forums.
Additionally, getting food to those in need is more of a resource issue. Even "processed junk" (as you refer to it) is much better than nothing. So to use starving individuals to buttress your arguments is, at the very least, in very poor taste.
I won't respond to the rest of your rebuttal, since there is no "winning" here. My comments are for posterity (in what limited fashion this place provides it).
Note: My reference to a candy bar having extra, life-sustaining capability was in response to your hypothetical. I don't share that view (lest someone attempt to misrepresent my stance).
0 -
LiminalAscendance wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »LiminalAscendance wrote: »Obviously, when individuals state "a calorie isn't a calorie," they are discussing the effects the various types of food have on health or (as many here should be interested in) the ability to lose weight.
The argument most certainly is that calories from some foods have a different effect in terms of weight loss--in other words, in terms of energy--than others. If this were so, it wouldn't actually preference "healthy" foods, as seems to be the argument, ironically. It would suggest that the problem of world hunger could be best solved by shipping candy bars or "processed junk," since that stuff apparently is able to provide calories well beyond it's actual, well, calorie count. Magic! But also a tremendous boon, were it but true.
Except, of course, for the minor fact that a candy bar isn't nutritionally complete. What good are extra "magic" calories, if you're still malnourished? Thankfully, those that are charge of fighting global world hunger don't reside on these forums.
Um, it wasn't a real proposal, which I think was obvious, but since one of the huge issues is a lack of adequate calories and not just nutrients, simply getting those adequate calories would be a boon, like I said. Especially if 200 really equals 2000.
The point (which I think was clear) is that this claim doesn't make any sense.
The bigger point, which you did not address, is that the argument, of course, isn't about whether the nutrient mix in foods differs. Everyone agrees that it does. It's disingenuous to claim that "a calorie is a calorie" means that the nutrient value of broccoli and Twix are identical in every way. No one claims that.
On the other hand, people do claim that the same person could gain weight eating 900 calories of pizza and lose weight eating 3900 calories of "clean" foods (however they are defined). That's the ridiculous claim that "a calorie is a calorie" opposes.
(And again, what is missed is that that would actually make pizza quite special, not bad. It's not the default situation that humans want to limit calories, which is probably one of the reasons our food pyramid is so weighed toward grains.)
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions