Question about all calories being equal
Replies
-
Not currently fat, perhaps. But if that have never been fat, they lack first hand experience of weight loss, which is probably worse from an advice point of view.
Though I would still take advice from a never-fat dietitian.
I would never take advice from a "nutritionist". It's not a real thing.7 -
CattOfTheGarage wrote: »Not currently fat, perhaps. But if that have never been fat, they lack first hand experience of weight loss, which is probably worse from an advice point of view.
Though I would still take advice from a never-fat dietitian.
I would never take advice from a "nutritionist". It's not a real thing.
A fat Personal Trainer or Nutritionist would get immediately ignored.4 -
So I've read on here how when it comes to weightloss, all calories are equal. A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. However, a friend of mine just told me that her nutritionist explained to her that this isn't so. She said that when you consume let's say, an apple, for 100 calories vs candy for 100 calories, the way your body is able to digest and break down each of these foods is different (using diff amounts of energy) there making the calories of these 2 foods not equal. Is there any merit to this idea?
Regardless of what many on here preach, she isn't wrong. The type of calories you take in does effect the calories out. Proteins, in particular, require more calories to digest. Sugar, on the other hand, doesn't take much at all.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says. (You also heard this "nutritionist's" opinion second hand! It's wishful thinking from your obese or overweight friend, who's hearing what she wants to hear.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
I went from 206# to 153# at age 53 by strictly counting calories. The math worked out exactly. I looked at a chart to see what a 5'10" man needed every day as a "Basal Metabolism Rate", calculated what I needed to eat to get a 3500 calorie deficit every week. And I lost exactly 1 pound a week! It didn't matter what I ate! I even had Hostess Cupcakes (360 Calories for two) several times a week for breakfast. Just count your calories. Period. There are no secrets, there are no shortcuts. Anyone who's not losing weight is lying to himself about calories.
I think the bolded part is ridiculous.
A person's physique does not validate or invalidate the words they say.
6 -
So I've read on here how when it comes to weightloss, all calories are equal. A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. However, a friend of mine just told me that her nutritionist explained to her that this isn't so. She said that when you consume let's say, an apple, for 100 calories vs candy for 100 calories, the way your body is able to digest and break down each of these foods is different (using diff amounts of energy) there making the calories of these 2 foods not equal. Is there any merit to this idea?
Regardless of what many on here preach, she isn't wrong. The type of calories you take in does effect the calories out. Proteins, in particular, require more calories to digest. Sugar, on the other hand, doesn't take much at all.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
TEF is part of calories out. Calories out = BMR + TEF + non-exercise activity + exercise.
to answer your question simply, digestion burns calories2 -
Yes different macronutrients effect energy expenditure through TEF/DIT, but unless you're making substantial changes to the macronutrient composition of the diet it's not going to amount to a significant change in energy output.
Now you might see an appreciable difference in the long term when you make large changes and add up the additional energy expenditure over months.
0 -
For all intents and purposes, speaking purely in terms of weight loss, a calorie is a calorie. There is a difference in the metabolic "cost" of processing between micronutrients (Google "TEF" or "thermic effect of feeding" if you want to geek out on the nuts and bolts of it), but for most people on diets of mixed macronutrients, it's all but completely irrelevant.
When you factor in satiety/adherence, nutrition, workout performance and overall health, micro- and macronutrients matter. We're not talking purely about calories and weight loss anymore at this point, so it's a whole different discussion.
We should just sticky this answer right here.0 -
So I've read on here how when it comes to weightloss, all calories are equal. A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. However, a friend of mine just told me that her nutritionist explained to her that this isn't so. She said that when you consume let's say, an apple, for 100 calories vs candy for 100 calories, the way your body is able to digest and break down each of these foods is different (using diff amounts of energy) there making the calories of these 2 foods not equal. Is there any merit to this idea?
The apple will have a higher TEF (Thermic Effect of Food)...it'll burn a few more calories in digestion than the candy will...it'll also provide more nutrition obviously.
I wouldn't say the difference in TEF is significant enough to really say that a calorie (as a unit of energy) isn't a calorie...don't drown in this kind of munitia. Nutrition is a whole other ball game...on that front, eat a balanced and varied diet rich in whole food nutrition...and have a piece of candy once in awhile.3 -
The subject you're alluding to is the thermic effect of digestion. To be clear, the sugars in apples and candy are slightly different, but the thermic effect of digesting all of them is very low. The calorie from an apple is the same in your body as the calorie from a candy. The apple has some fiber and phytonutrients which are probably not present in the candy, so your 100 calories of apple is better for you then your 100 calories of candy, but it's still 100 calories. There is a place for the thermic effect of digestion to matter, and that is in the digestion of protein. Protein is hard to digest and the thermic effect of digesting protein is high. Therefore 100 calories of egg whites (the most pure protein) will deliver about 70 calories to your blood after the thermic tax is paid. The 70 calories, though, are the same calories as the 70 you might find in a lesser volume of your candy.0
-
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »The subject you're alluding to is the thermic effect of digestion. To be clear, the sugars in apples and candy are slightly different, but the thermic effect of digesting all of them is very low. The calorie from an apple is the same in your body as the calorie from a candy. The apple has some fiber and phytonutrients which are probably not present in the candy, so your 100 calories of apple is better for you then your 100 calories of candy, but it's still 100 calories. There is a place for the thermic effect of digestion to matter, and that is in the digestion of protein. Protein is hard to digest and the thermic effect of digesting protein is high. Therefore 100 calories of egg whites (the most pure protein) will deliver about 70 calories to your blood after the thermic tax is paid. The 70 calories, though, are the same calories as the 70 you might find in a lesser volume of your candy.
It depends on the context. There is definitely a time and place for fast acting carbohydrates, especially if you are training for extended periods of time. So comparing foods in isolation is fairly worthless. The diet in context and the exercise requirements are what is important.
2 -
The only significant difference between calories for the purpose of weightloss in my opinion is degrees of saiety. It varies person to person but most people find some foods more satiating than others and if you choose the foods that leave you satisfied more per calorie then you'll have an easier time losing weight.
If instead you try to eat only the foods that have the "least" number of calories due to some sort of difference in metabolism or breakdown that isn't going to help nearly as much if those foods aren't satisfying for you.2 -
A calorie is a unit of energy. It doesn't matter if they come from apples or a Twinkies, a calorie is a calorie. Chemical compounds (food) is broken down, used and stored in different ways by your body (nutrition).5
-
So I've read on here how when it comes to weightloss, all calories are equal. A calorie is a calorie is a calorie. However, a friend of mine just told me that her nutritionist explained to her that this isn't so. She said that when you consume let's say, an apple, for 100 calories vs candy for 100 calories, the way your body is able to digest and break down each of these foods is different (using diff amounts of energy) there making the calories of these 2 foods not equal. Is there any merit to this idea?
Regardless of what many on here preach, she isn't wrong. The type of calories you take in does effect the calories out. Proteins, in particular, require more calories to digest. Sugar, on the other hand, doesn't take much at all.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Eric has already answered this nicely. Are you under the impression that the digestive process doesn't require energy? Everything our bodies do requires energy. Those calories count just the same as if you burned them running.2 -
The effort taken to type the above answers has wiped out any tiny advantage the apple has.
Eat candy and type more.13 -
The "nutritionist" part of this thread just really made me want to post this (relevant part at about 3:53, but honestly the whole thing is great.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRqB5-egs1s5 -
Eat the apple, it will fill you up more. Unless the candy is a delicious Reese's peanut butter cup, in that case, why not both?1
-
trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....5 -
A calorie is just a calorie when it comes to weightloss or weightgain, this is thermodynamics. Those of us who follow iifym, dont really care where our carbs come from, as long as at the end we have our micronutrients. I diet eating pizza 4-5 times per week. Thermodynamics.1
-
cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+2 -
trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
This isn't really true. Life isn't a multiple choice test. It is messy and complicated. It isn't just about knowing how. It is about being motivated and everyone has a different situation that effects that. Work 18 hour days to take care of your family and see how motivated you are to go buy groceries and fix a healthy meal vs grabbing that burrito at Taco Bell. Struggle to pay the mortgage and keep a roof over your kids' heads and see how important that gym membership is. You are also overlooking the power of denial. The weight creeps up slowly and people don't want to admit how much fat they have actually gained. Years ago, when I gained weight, I lost it, got back in great shape, and kept it off for years. Once I got married and had kids, everything changed. Instead of a healthy dinner and then playing ball with my buddies, it was work long hours and come home late to my family where "how about chicken breast " was met with, "I want nachos" or "I want pizza". Over time, some of weight crept back up. Then plantar fasciitis sidelined me for about a year. I gained more weight. Then I had to switch jobs and take an oilfield job working out of town away from my family. The company provided food, so that is what I ate and that led to even more weight. None of that had anything to do with knowing how to lose weight. It had everything to do with priorities and motivation and denial. Finally, I got to a point where I was sickened by how far I had let myself go. Now, getting healthy is a priority and I am motivated. I sat down and had a discussion with my wife about the way we eat and I no longer entertain unhealthy dinner options. I fix an appropriate meal in appropriate portions. Since then, the weight has been coming right off and that was without MFP.
Anyone beyond a first grade education should understand what causes you to gain and lose weight. It isn't at all complicated. What is complicated is life and the emotions people deal with.7 -
trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
That's daft.
We are talking about "knowing what you are doing" in terms of losing weight, not in terms of never gaining it. People who have never gained weight in the first place have no personal experience of losing it. If you have never had to consistently eat less than your appetite tells you to and learn all the techniques to modify that appetite in order to lose weight, you do not have the relevant experience to advise someone else who is in that situation. Never having had a problematic appetite in the first place makes you less qualified to advise, not more.
If I want advice on how to get back on a horse, I'm not going to ask someone who's never fallen off.8 -
trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
knowledge != actions
I got fat. I knew a lot about weight, even before MFP MLM scams and arbitrary diet rules did not fly with me, but I was simply fine with the way I was and didn't feel taking action was worth the hassle, until my priorities changed.
Are you implying the hollywood thin types are nutrition experts? With their cleanses, blood type diets, lemon water and spot reduction exercises?10 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
knowledge != actions
I got fat. I knew a lot about weight, even before MFP MLM scams and arbitrary diet rules did not fly with me, but I was simply fine with the way I was and didn't feel taking action was worth the hassle, until my priorities changed.
Are you implying the hollywood thin types are nutrition experts? With their cleanses, blood type diets, lemon water and spot reduction exercises?
Not only that, but inferring people can't learn? What an utterly insipid response that was. Because no one ever learns and changes their life and no one whose ever been overweight could possibly know anything about losing it.8 -
cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
I think he is saying if this person has been using this advice and hasn't lost weight then it probably doesn't hold water. Great job on losing 90+ pounds
1 -
trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
I think that's ridiculous.12 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »The only significant difference between calories for the purpose of weightloss in my opinion is degrees of satiety.
And in my experience, this should NOT be underestimated. This is an incredibly important part of anyone's dieting plan, and I think it is given way too little consideration.
Figuring out what to eat so you aren't hungry, while maintaining a deficit, is so important... it prevents all those bad things from happening (overeating, binge eating, snacking on bad food choices... )
2 -
trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
I think that's ridiculous.
I never said that people couldn't learn. You mean that people gain fat on purpose? What I said was that at the point (many years?) when people gain 100+ lbs they obviously have no idea about CICO.0 -
colors_fade wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »The only significant difference between calories for the purpose of weightloss in my opinion is degrees of satiety.
And in my experience, this should NOT be underestimated. This is an incredibly important part of anyone's dieting plan, and I think it is given way too little consideration.
Figuring out what to eat so you aren't hungry, while maintaining a deficit, is so important... it prevents all those bad things from happening (overeating, binge eating, snacking on bad food choices... )
It is important. And everyone has to find out themselves what makes them satiated, despite some people asserting a certain way will always make you satiated or hungry.3 -
trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
I think that's ridiculous.
I never said that people couldn't learn. You mean that people gain fat on purpose? What I said was that at the point (many years?) when people gain 100+ lbs they obviously have no idea about CICO.
I mean that someone's individual progress or physique is not a reflection on their knowledge.3 -
trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »moishepipik wrote: »Is your friend overweight? (Or her "nutritionist?") If so, I wouldn't listen to a word she says.
If you're obese or overweight, count your calories and assume a calorie is a calorie.
Don't listen to fat people? lol - that's your advice. Note we can't see a picture of you so how do we know to trust what you say? (Your post made me chuckle mate)
If people know what they're doing they wouldn't be fat. That would be my take on it.
I've lost 90+lbs. I am still fat. I guess I don't know what am doing or talking about when it comes to weight loss....
If you knew what you were doing, you wouldn't have gained 90lbs+
I think that's ridiculous.
I never said that people couldn't learn. You mean that people gain fat on purpose? What I said was that at the point (many years?) when people gain 100+ lbs they obviously have no idea about CICO.
They can know but simply not care enough.6
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions