Are all calories equal?

jwdieter

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

MyChocolateDiet

One calorie of sugar will turn into crack in your nervous system and into cocaine in your brain.

Awesome. A kilo of sugar is way cheaper than a kilo of blow. I'm going to have a lot of spare cash on hand soon.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1003077-super-hotties-ony-date-guys-with-money-good-looks?hl=hotties+&page=1#posts-15354197

KatLifter

It triggers your body to think it's starving because of the lack of nutrients and will in turn trigger the "fat storage" mode.

Source?

SarahStarr86

You all are really great! And hilarious!! I feel so empowered now knowing that I don't have to eat super clean/healthy 100% of the time. It seems doable for me now. Thank you so much ) You have know idea how much you have helped me.

jonnythan

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

I like how you put quotes around that sentence, even though no one said it. Cute.

RllyGudTweetr

Scaring people off Hot Pockets and Domino's, if they love Hot Pockets and Domino's, are the best way in the universe to set them up for failure and binging.

If you look around on this site, the most successful and happiest people are often the ones who eat things like Hot Pockets, Domino's, ice cream, Pop Tarts, etc., regularly.

The important thing is to hit appropriate macro goals. Thinking of certain foods as inherently bad or unhealthy is flat-out wrong.

So here is an honest question - you guys may be winning me over. I've seen people say there is no extra credit for eating extra nutrients. Nutrients go a lot further than the macros we track here. I have 300 calories left after dinner. How do I know I really hit my nutrient goals and am free to spend those 300 calories on ice cream, or if I should try to eat some more veggies etc?

With 300 calories to go, where are you in relation to your macros? Where is your vitamin A, vitamin C, potassium, iron, calcium, and B-complex intake sitting, relative to needs (it is possible to overdo it on vitamins, incidentally). If your macros are reasonably close to filled, and your micronutrient goals are reasonably close to met, eat the ice cream.* If not, make food choices that better fill those goals with your remaining calories.

*Unless you like the veggies better, I suppose.

jwdieter

I like how you put quotes around that sentence, even though no one said it. Cute.

I reduce requotes to reduce spam. Katlifter posted that question.

luvriden

Something that I really like and NEED to help me with my lifestyle change is the counting calories and exercise. I count everything I eat and boy does that help me make better choices most of the time. My son came home for 2 weeks after being in Belgium for 3 years and we ate and ate and ate all the yummy fattening foods we as a family have always loved. I counted every oz. of it. I also counted every walk we took at the zoo and museums too. Toward the end of his visit we were all eating better choices and less fattening foods because we had enjoyed our foods and needed to get back on track. Do I regret all those extra calories and foods. NOPE! Just kept on moving forward...because it is a lifestyle not a "diet".

shortie_sarah

I am done trying to explain to everyone. I may have worded things wrongly in the beginning. It's not what's best for everyone, it's what's best for me. Some of your responses have honestly left me in tears because I feel that none of you are understanding where I'm coming from. Thanks for that. Thanks for such great support in something that I feel so strongly about. I am officially done with this...

Sorry dear, but if THESE posts left you in tears please stay away from the forums, or thicken your skin. This was nothing.
Good luck.

what an insensitive thing to say...you all really need to reevaluate the way you come across to people. you have no idea just how damaging you can be...

And YOU basically said everyone will fail unless they follow YOUR example. Seems the possibility for damage is higher than some people with proven results showing you the way you can succeed. Sorry you got your knickers in a knot, but with an all or nothing mindset, you have a long, hard uphill climb.

I have already corrected myself. I have already explained that I think it's what's best for me... I agree that it may not be for everyone. If I fail, then I fail. I'll get back up and try again. But I have already tried the way of moderating those bad things and it didn't' work for me. Left me wanting more. I'd much rather view those foods in a way that will almost force me to say no to them.

KatLifter

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

It does look like some of the differences are statistically significant. Interesting.

jonnythan

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

It does look like some of the differences are statistically significant. Interesting.

The macro contents of the meals aren't the same. One had three times as much fiber and 33% more protein than the other.

shortie_sarah

Seriously, I don't know if I'm wording things wrongly or what the issue is but you all are really taking me wrong. I admit, I was wrong in the beginning. I should not have said that it's the only way to succeed but even after me saying this you still see me as some pompus know-it-all.... that's not me at all

magerum

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

Here's your sources conclusion.

Conclusions
A higher thermogenic response was observed after a meal composed of whole foods than after an equivalent and isocaloric meal comprised of highly PFs. The lower DIT of the PF meal indicates greater net-energy assimilation. These findings are currently relevant only to this type of meal, and future studies are required to determine whether a reduction in DIT is characteristic of PFs generally. Such a pattern is, however, predicted on thermodynamic grounds. If the findings of the present study are supported by future work, this would indicate that diets with a high proportion of PFs will result in increased energy assimilation and may be a contributor to weight gain.


All it concludes is that you actually assimilate more energy from processed foods. Beased one ONE meal. Either way, if you account for 800 calories, you've accounted for 800 calories.

KatLifter

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

It does look like some of the differences are statistically significant. Interesting.

The macro contents of the meals aren't the same. One had three times as much fiber and 33% more protein than the other.

That was explained because of the processing, the fiber was lost.
I imagine that's similar to a pizza with whole what crust or Dominos?

jonnythan

Seriously, I don't know if I'm wording things wrongly or what the issue is but you all are really taking me wrong. I admit, I was wrong in the beginning. I should not have said that it's the only way to succeed.

So you said something wrong, people disagreed with you, and then you cried. Now you admit you were wrong and no one is arguing with you anymore.

It's time to drop it and move on.

jonnythan

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

It does look like some of the differences are statistically significant. Interesting.

The macro contents of the meals aren't the same. One had three times as much fiber and 33% more protein than the other.

That was explained because of the processing, the fiber was lost.
I imagine that's similar to a pizza with whole what crust or Dominos?

The point is that it's macronutrient content that really matters.

KatLifter

I asked already. Do you have science to show?

Saying "I lost weight, therefore what I'm saying is correct" is a logical fallacy, and antiscience.

Can find a lot of studies saying different things about thermic effects. Here's an easy one on processed food:
http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/viewArticle/5144/5755

It does look like some of the differences are statistically significant. Interesting.

The macro contents of the meals aren't the same. One had three times as much fiber and 33% more protein than the other.

That was explained because of the processing, the fiber was lost.
I imagine that's similar to a pizza with whole what crust or Dominos?

The point is that it's macronutrient content that really matters.

Okay, I think I was looking at it from a different perspective, but I understand and agree with what you're saying.

shortie_sarah

I apologize to everyone for how things played out. Please excuse my emotional lash out.. I swear this is not how I really am, I honestly don't know what came over me. Perhaps because this is as much of an emotional battle as it is physical?....Just please keep that in mind though when replying to people. Everyone is overcoming some major obstacles and we all need as much support as we can get

KatLifter

I apologize to everyone for how things played out. Please excuse my emotional lash out.. I swear this is not how I really am, I honestly don't know what came over me. Perhaps because this is as much of an emotional battle as it is physical?....Just please keep that in mind though when replying to people. Everyone is overcoming some major obstacles and we all need as much support as we can get

Best of luck in your journey, and try not to take the forums too personally if you do decide to hang around.

kingtermite

In the same way, healthy food is better calories because they are in a better form for your body to digest and get the NUTRIENTS from. Unhealthy food is processed and has the calories, but very little of the nutrients, or it has nutrients in such a form that your body isn't able to process/absorb it. This is one of the reasons juicing is so popular. It's a very efficient way of getting a lot of nutrients in your body and in a form that your body will absorb.

It doesn't mean you can't eat unhealthy food, but all things in moderation. Those foods, when eaten too much, actually deprive your body of nutrients, even though they technically have the calories. It triggers your body to think it's starving because of the lack of nutrients and will in turn trigger the "fat storage" mode.

Um, no. Processed foods are often fortified, and we can use those nutrients. And they don't trigger starvation mode or fat storage mode. We (in general) just eat too much of them: too many calories.

So you are trying to say it's better to eat processed food that has lost almost all of its nutrients then had them added back in (usually chemically) rather than just eating the foods with the right nutrients and in the right form in the first place?

Oh...and no just because it was added back does not mean it is in a form our bodies can use. It usually means that maker of the food knows there is virtually NO nutritional value, so adds a little back in so that it looks better.

Avoid processed foods like the plague if you want to be healthy (notice I said "be healthy", not "lose weight".)