Digesting Nuts

KetoKris

Is it true that not all the calories in a serving of nuts count.I have heard from different sources that because our bodies don't completely digest nuts, you technically don't need to count all the calories.

DisneyDude85

*quietly wishes someone confirms this is true for pizza as well*

Ready2Rock206

That sounds like wishful thinking. Like all those supposedly negative calorie foods.

Alatariel75

Even if that were true, how would you work out how much to subtract from your logging? Would you... I don't know, pick through or something?

Ready2Rock206

Alatariel75 wrote: »

Even if that were true, how would you work out how much to subtract from your logging? Would you... I don't know, pick through or something?

Yes. But you have to eat a different type of nut each day until they fully pass. Weigh the nuts. Eat them. Wait for the poo. Sort out any nut pieces. Weigh and subtract from the approriate day and nut type.

Yeah, I'm just logging all the calories.

GottaBurnEmAll

Well, yes, there are less calories absorbed when you eat almonds. I believe the same is true of pistachios.

But, as Alatariel75 asked, how are you going to work out exactly how much you specifically are absorbing so you know what to log?

I eat almonds. I log the regular Atwater value. I just take whatever my body doesn't absorb as a little bonus deficit.

KetoKris

I never insinuated that I would log a fraction of the calories. I was just curious if anybody else had heard anything on this. There is no way to truly know the exact amount of calories any of us are ingesting or burning off because everybody is so different. Even the manufacturers of food have a margin when stating how many calories are in our food. So it would be pointless to take 10 or 20 cal away from a handful of nuts.

Alatariel75

I wonder this about corn. No one digests corn.

TreyTnt9

It's true. that's why elephants are so slim.

ahoy_m8

As someone who eats a lot of nuts, I have a proposal as to how I *would* do this (because I do not, at present). It would apply to corn or any food with fiber. You could multiply the grams fiber by 4cal/gram carbohydrate and subtract that amount.

Christine_72

I'd consider not digesting ALL of the calories as a little added bonus for not 100% perfect logging. I wouldn't strain my brain trying to work out/guess what the difference is though.

allaboutthecake

Ah, nuts!

ahoy_m8

There was a NYT article a while back about this...

Christine_72

ahoy_m8 wrote: »

There was a NYT article a while back about this...

Nuts have just been placed on my shopping list

goldthistime

ahoy_m8 wrote: »

There was a NYT article a while back about this...

Thank you for that link.

"Almonds are routinely listed as having about 160 calories a serving, when the real figure is about 120 calories, said Karen Lapsley, the chief scientist at the California Almond Board. Some manufacturers are considering making the change on their labels."

Nice!

arditarose

Yes. But I'd just log what the serving size/package says and remember what an amazing thing nuts are.

lemurcat12

Christine_72 wrote: »

I'd consider not digesting ALL of the calories as a little added bonus for not 100% perfect logging. I wouldn't strain my brain trying to work out/guess what the difference is though.

Pretty much this.

It does make me happier about spending the calories on nuts, though (and I love them, so win!).

amusedmonkey

It's true more or less for most foods. People absorb different amounts of different foods. I have read something about pistachios. Nothing applicable in practice though. You would need to be eating more nuts than most weight loss diets can handle to have even the slightest meaningful effect.

Need2Exerc1se

All calories will not be absorbed from any food that contains fiber. But this is sometimes accounted for in labeling.