Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Is a calorie equal to a calorie?

191012141517

Replies

  • PikaJoyJoy
    PikaJoyJoy Posts: 280 Member
    edited February 2018

    All I wanted to do is try and make people aware that the blanket statement that a calorie is just a calorie can cause harm.

    Actually, misinformation causes a lot more harm. And that^ is misinformation.

  • PikaJoyJoy
    PikaJoyJoy Posts: 280 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Not sure what you mean a calories is a unit of measure in energy

    If you have 300 calories in pure suger vrs 300 calories in complex carbs you will have difrent longevity of energy

    that would be like going to the Indy 500 with a beat up old car because a car is a car

    Maybe come back when you have an understanding of what 'energy' is (in the sense of 'energy balance', which is what defines how weight is lost or gained) and it will make more sense to you.

    I do now, The point is at one time I didn't, I looked for advise from those that are supposed to be experts. to say a calorie is a calorie and then say well you need to learn physics is ridiculous.

    I am not going to sell and Insurance policy without breaking it down to an understandable language that people can understand in a practical real world way

    Same way giving that advice to a person new to losing weight is harmful

    and that's the last I will say on it

    We're saying that because there are multiple types of energy. And you are confusing two of them. You are telling us we aren't correct because you aren't understanding the terms we are using. But you don't want to talk about it anymore so it is what it is I guess :drinker:

    Because I don't really want to argue or make everyone angry and I can see this is going nowhere

    All I wanted to do is try and make people aware that the blanket statement that a calorie is just a calorie can cause harm.

    I didnt get it here when I was told this it was from my heart doctor well before I seen this forum. All I am saying is that blanket advice took me from 320lbs to 360 lbs and a lot of pain struggling with binging.

    I have since went to the internet becuase I was 368 and learned how to eat right. Now I am at 305

    I know see this same blanket statement on this forum and all I want is for the next person to not be misled. I am not trying to start a fight I just know the pain I have had over it and dont want to see others do the same, That is all

    You're in the debate forum. If you're not interested in debating, this might not be the forum for you. There are plenty of other forums and other threads that need to be answered, though. But I see you aren't interested in that sort of thing.

    Point is you feel I am trying to put you down, I am not. Its not personal and I am not making any personal attacks.

    IncredibleFlawedGodwit-max-1mb.gif
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,252 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Not sure what you mean a calories is a unit of measure in energy

    If you have 300 calories in pure suger vrs 300 calories in complex carbs you will have difrent longevity of energy

    that would be like going to the Indy 500 with a beat up old car because a car is a car

    Maybe come back when you have an understanding of what 'energy' is (in the sense of 'energy balance', which is what defines how weight is lost or gained) and it will make more sense to you.

    I do now, The point is at one time I didn't, I looked for advise from those that are supposed to be experts. to say a calorie is a calorie and then say well you need to learn physics is ridiculous.

    I am not going to sell and Insurance policy without breaking it down to an understandable language that people can understand in a practical real world way

    Same way giving that advice to a person new to losing weight is harmful

    and that's the last I will say on it

    We're saying that because there are multiple types of energy. And you are confusing two of them. You are telling us we aren't correct because you aren't understanding the terms we are using. But you don't want to talk about it anymore so it is what it is I guess :drinker:

    Because I don't really want to argue or make everyone angry and I can see this is going nowhere

    All I wanted to do is try and make people aware that the blanket statement that a calorie is just a calorie can cause harm.

    I didnt get it here when I was told this it was from my heart doctor well before I seen this forum. All I am saying is that blanket advice took me from 320lbs to 360 lbs and a lot of pain struggling with binging.

    I have since went to the internet becuase I was 368 and learned how to eat right. Now I am at 305

    I know see this same blanket statement on this forum and all I want is for the next person to not be misled. I am not trying to start a fight I just know the pain I have had over it and dont want to see others do the same, That is all

    ...but...but...
    and that's the last I will say on it

    You lost weight because your caloric intake was less than your caloric output. How is this confusing?
  • Alatariel75
    Alatariel75 Posts: 18,224 Member
    TRXRocks wrote: »
    I’m just curious if anybody has any links to a scientific article or journal talking about calories in terms of if 100 calories of apples is equal to 100 calories of oreos.
    I was debating this in my head while reading some other discussions. Depending on what I eat, how hungry I am, and how active I am, I eat between 1700-3000 calories. On average it’s around 2000. My calories only come from whole fruits and vegetables. I’m just thinking...I don’t think a calorie really equals a calorie because the body uses the food differently. White bread vs Sweet Potato, PB2 vs Almond Butter, Cane sugar vs Dates, Faux Chicken vs spinach, etc etc
    No, all calories are not created equal the same way that a pound of cement is not the same as a pound of feathers. Calories from junk food are not the same as calories from clean whole foods. your body just uses them differently.

    Are you denying they're both a pound?
  • diannethegeek
    diannethegeek Posts: 14,776 Member
    PikaJoyJoy wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Not sure what you mean a calories is a unit of measure in energy

    If you have 300 calories in pure suger vrs 300 calories in complex carbs you will have difrent longevity of energy

    that would be like going to the Indy 500 with a beat up old car because a car is a car

    Maybe come back when you have an understanding of what 'energy' is (in the sense of 'energy balance', which is what defines how weight is lost or gained) and it will make more sense to you.

    I do now, The point is at one time I didn't, I looked for advise from those that are supposed to be experts. to say a calorie is a calorie and then say well you need to learn physics is ridiculous.

    I am not going to sell and Insurance policy without breaking it down to an understandable language that people can understand in a practical real world way

    Same way giving that advice to a person new to losing weight is harmful

    and that's the last I will say on it

    We're saying that because there are multiple types of energy. And you are confusing two of them. You are telling us we aren't correct because you aren't understanding the terms we are using. But you don't want to talk about it anymore so it is what it is I guess :drinker:

    Because I don't really want to argue or make everyone angry and I can see this is going nowhere

    All I wanted to do is try and make people aware that the blanket statement that a calorie is just a calorie can cause harm.

    I didnt get it here when I was told this it was from my heart doctor well before I seen this forum. All I am saying is that blanket advice took me from 320lbs to 360 lbs and a lot of pain struggling with binging.

    I have since went to the internet becuase I was 368 and learned how to eat right. Now I am at 305

    I know see this same blanket statement on this forum and all I want is for the next person to not be misled. I am not trying to start a fight I just know the pain I have had over it and dont want to see others do the same, That is all

    ...but...but...
    and that's the last I will say on it

    You lost weight because your caloric intake was less than your caloric output. How is this confusing?

    My calorie intake is less because the calories I take in work better

    To elaborate. You ate "better" (whatever "better" is to you) which more than likely means you were eating more less calorie dense foods and less of the heavy calorie dense foods than you were eating before.

    Which means *DRUM ROLL* - you were eating less calories and therefore by the powers of SCIENCE, I deem you were eating less calories (regardless of calorie origins) and therefore lost weight because you were eating less than was required to maintain your weight.

    I eat less calories over all because the calories I changed to gave me more energy that last longer and also no longer binge eat because the calories I eat now fulfill me, So I am not starving any more

    If you took the word "calories" out of this statement and replaced it with "foods" I doubt that you'd get any pushback. The foods you chose sustain you longer and help your hunger levels. That's never been in doubt. I've said that already in this thread at least a couple of times to you. Foods are different and have different effects on the body. That's true. Period. End of statement. But it's not because the calories are different. Calories are not synonymous with food. Calories are not synonymous with nutrients.

    It's like saying you switched to spinach instead of iceburg lettuce because the color green isn't always green. Green is green. But spinach comes with different nutrients than iceburg. It's the nutrients that are different not the calories.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    TRXRocks wrote: »
    I’m just curious if anybody has any links to a scientific article or journal talking about calories in terms of if 100 calories of apples is equal to 100 calories of oreos.
    I was debating this in my head while reading some other discussions. Depending on what I eat, how hungry I am, and how active I am, I eat between 1700-3000 calories. On average it’s around 2000. My calories only come from whole fruits and vegetables. I’m just thinking...I don’t think a calorie really equals a calorie because the body uses the food differently. White bread vs Sweet Potato, PB2 vs Almond Butter, Cane sugar vs Dates, Faux Chicken vs spinach, etc etc
    No, all calories are not created equal the same way that a pound of cement is not the same as a pound of feathers. Calories from junk food are not the same as calories from clean whole foods. your body just uses them differently.

    Are you denying they're both a pound?

    Oh god, please don't. Was hoping this comment would fly under the radar.
  • PikaJoyJoy
    PikaJoyJoy Posts: 280 Member
    PikaJoyJoy wrote: »
    PikaJoyJoy wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Not sure what you mean a calories is a unit of measure in energy

    If you have 300 calories in pure suger vrs 300 calories in complex carbs you will have difrent longevity of energy

    that would be like going to the Indy 500 with a beat up old car because a car is a car

    Maybe come back when you have an understanding of what 'energy' is (in the sense of 'energy balance', which is what defines how weight is lost or gained) and it will make more sense to you.

    I do now, The point is at one time I didn't, I looked for advise from those that are supposed to be experts. to say a calorie is a calorie and then say well you need to learn physics is ridiculous.

    I am not going to sell and Insurance policy without breaking it down to an understandable language that people can understand in a practical real world way

    Same way giving that advice to a person new to losing weight is harmful

    and that's the last I will say on it

    We're saying that because there are multiple types of energy. And you are confusing two of them. You are telling us we aren't correct because you aren't understanding the terms we are using. But you don't want to talk about it anymore so it is what it is I guess :drinker:

    Because I don't really want to argue or make everyone angry and I can see this is going nowhere

    All I wanted to do is try and make people aware that the blanket statement that a calorie is just a calorie can cause harm.

    I didnt get it here when I was told this it was from my heart doctor well before I seen this forum. All I am saying is that blanket advice took me from 320lbs to 360 lbs and a lot of pain struggling with binging.

    I have since went to the internet becuase I was 368 and learned how to eat right. Now I am at 305

    I know see this same blanket statement on this forum and all I want is for the next person to not be misled. I am not trying to start a fight I just know the pain I have had over it and dont want to see others do the same, That is all

    ...but...but...
    and that's the last I will say on it

    You lost weight because your caloric intake was less than your caloric output. How is this confusing?

    My calorie intake is less because the calories I take in work better

    To elaborate. You ate "better" (whatever "better" is to you) which more than likely means you were eating more less calorie dense foods and less of the heavy calorie dense foods than you were eating before.

    Which means *DRUM ROLL* - you were eating less calories and therefore by the powers of SCIENCE, I deem you were eating less calories (regardless of calorie origins) and therefore lost weight because you were eating less than was required to maintain your weight.

    I eat less calories over all because the calories I changed to gave me more energy that last longer and also no longer binge eat because the calories I eat now fulfill me, So I am not starving any more

    That's all good and well but the point is..you were/are consuming less calories, right?

    Yes because the calories I now eat work better empowering me to take in less calories overall, I cant say I eat less sometimes I eat more but the calories are now less because I don't have to binge every couple week's any more & I am not suffering with hunger anymore

    Okay, so you were eating less calories. Again, it's great you are finding better satiety with how you are eating now, but the fact of the matter is you are eating less calories. Period. Therefore it is no surprise you lost weight.

    Even if you ate "not so good" and you didn't find as good of satiety but you were eating those foods in a deficit, you would still lose weight.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Not sure what you mean a calories is a unit of measure in energy

    If you have 300 calories in pure suger vrs 300 calories in complex carbs you will have difrent longevity of energy

    that would be like going to the Indy 500 with a beat up old car because a car is a car

    Maybe come back when you have an understanding of what 'energy' is (in the sense of 'energy balance', which is what defines how weight is lost or gained) and it will make more sense to you.

    I do now, The point is at one time I didn't, I looked for advise from those that are supposed to be experts. to say a calorie is a calorie and then say well you need to learn physics is ridiculous.

    I am not going to sell and Insurance policy without breaking it down to an understandable language that people can understand in a practical real world way

    Same way giving that advice to a person new to losing weight is harmful

    and that's the last I will say on it

    We're saying that because there are multiple types of energy. And you are confusing two of them. You are telling us we aren't correct because you aren't understanding the terms we are using. But you don't want to talk about it anymore so it is what it is I guess :drinker:

    Because I don't really want to argue or make everyone angry and I can see this is going nowhere

    All I wanted to do is try and make people aware that the blanket statement that a calorie is just a calorie can cause harm.

    I didnt get it here when I was told this it was from my heart doctor well before I seen this forum. All I am saying is that blanket advice took me from 320lbs to 360 lbs and a lot of pain struggling with binging.

    I have since went to the internet becuase I was 368 and learned how to eat right. Now I am at 305

    I know see this same blanket statement on this forum and all I want is for the next person to not be misled. I am not trying to start a fight I just know the pain I have had over it and dont want to see others do the same, That is all

    ...but...but...
    and that's the last I will say on it

    You lost weight because your caloric intake was less than your caloric output. How is this confusing?

    My calorie intake is less because the calories I take in work better

    You’re confusing calories with food.
    Perhaps you’re consuming fewer calories because you’re eating foods that leave you feeling more full.
    That’s not eating “different kinds of calories.”