Who thinks all calories do the same things for use?
Replies
-
It doesn't matter. You're attacking a strawman.
Metabolic pathways notwithstanding, if I'm losing a pound a week, I know I have tilted the energy equation in the direction I want if I'm trying to lose weight.0 -
Do we really need another post like this?
We need this like we need another "what counts as water" thread . . .
Then why read and then add to this thread.
You need it because deep down in places you don't like to talk about - you love it
'tis true, you amuse me . . .:
like a drunken fool stumbling across a parking lot and putting his key in the ignition with a cop watching
Your the cat - I'm the string! ????????????
:indifferent:0 -
That's broscience.0
-
Side Steel FTW, ladies and gentlemen.Do we really need another post like this?
Food has many properties and "calorie" is one of those properties describing the energy value of that particular food. That variable is the same across different food groups but the other properties that a food has, are NOT the same across different food groups.
So for example, 100 calories of cake compared to 100 calories of chicken, will provide the same energy to the diet. But it will provide a whole bunch of things in addition to energy value that will differ between the two, such as micronutrition, differences in amino acids, fatty acids, differing effects on satiety, palatability/preference. Those additional properties can have an effect on weight loss in that they can effect energy output (one side of the energy balance equation) and quite clearly food selection can effect satiety/adherence which can effect calorie intake.
None of this means a calorie is not a calorie. Calorie deficits are still a fundamental requirement of weight loss and the opposite is true for weight gain. It is still fundamentally the energy balance equation.0 -
It doesn't matter. You're attacking a strawman.
Metabolic pathways notwithstanding, if I'm losing a pound a week, I know I have tilted the energy equation in the direction I want if I'm trying to lose weight.
Okay so maybe I'm the odd one out then - personally I want to know how things work so I can make informed decisions.
That answers most of the questions I had about a lot (not all because some of the members seem really knowledgeable) of the posters on the forums I've entered.
Thanks you've cleared that one up for me.0 -
Oh crap another one of these0
-
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?0 -
0 -
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.0 -
Do we really need another post like this?
Food has many properties and "calorie" is one of those properties describing the energy value of that particular food. That variable is the same across different food groups but the other properties that a food has, are NOT the same across different food groups.
So for example, 100 calories of cake compared to 100 calories of chicken, will provide the same energy to the diet. But it will provide a whole bunch of things in addition to energy value that will differ between the two, such as micronutrition, differences in amino acids, fatty acids, differing effects on satiety, palatability/preference. Those additional properties can have an effect on weight loss in that they can effect energy output (one side of the energy balance equation) and quite clearly food selection can effect satiety/adherence which can effect calorie intake.
None of this means a calorie is not a calorie. Calorie deficits are still a fundamental requirement of weight loss and the opposite is true for weight gain. It is still fundamentally the energy balance equation.
QFT
No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
No what won't?0 -
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).0 -
Not in anything related to this.Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Got a link to an explanation and an example in answer to my question, while you're at it?0 -
0 -
The point being that the energy you get from calories coming from different macronutrients aren't all absorbed by the body the same. For example some carbs use up about 20% of energy just to digest them.
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).
Which means all that energy is escaping through the back door before having a chance to be absorbed by the body.
Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficency.0 -
Yes of course they do, it's called TEF....why not just ask the question up front....it's not a mystery.
The point being that the energy you get from calories coming from different macronutrients are all absorbed by the body the same. For example some carbs use up about 20% of energy just to digest them.
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).
Which means all that energy is escaping through the back door before having a chance to be absorbed by the body.
Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficency.0 -
Yes of course they do, it's called TEF....why not just ask the question up front....it's not a mystery.
The point being that the energy you get from calories coming from different macronutrients are all absorbed by the body the same. For example some carbs use up about 20% of energy just to digest them.
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).
Which means all that energy is escaping through the back door before having a chance to be absorbed by the body.
Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficency.
^ additionally this is part of energy-out.0 -
Sure; and that's part of a deficit and 'calories in vs calories out'.Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficiency.
That doesn't explain why you believe that if you're in a deficit you may not lose weight.0 -
Also energy escaping, as you put out the back door it is not the same thing as your example of a 20% cost for digestion for carbs, two totally different things....maybe you should do a little science......
Yes of course they do, it's called TEF....why not just ask the question up front....it's not a mystery.
The point being that the energy you get from calories coming from different macronutrients are all absorbed by the body the same. For example some carbs use up about 20% of energy just to digest them.
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).
Which means all that energy is escaping through the back door before having a chance to be absorbed by the body.
Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficency.
^ additionally this is part of energy-out.0 -
And away we go!
0 -
Yes of course they do, it's called TEF....why not just ask the question up front....it's not a mystery.
The point being that the energy you get from calories coming from different macronutrients are all absorbed by the body the same. For example some carbs use up about 20% of energy just to digest them.
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).
Which means all that energy is escaping through the back door before having a chance to be absorbed by the body.
Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficency.
Yes but the tef value of macro nutrients aren't static and neither is the energy balance equation so what's your point?0 -
So, I don't mean to encourage this kind of pot stirring, but FWIW...
A calorie is a calorie as a unit of energy, BUT we do have evidence, at this point primarily in dogs and cats, that certain nutrients/foods impact genetic expression to alter weight. This is called nutrigenomics.
To simplify it - all dogs have basically the same genes - in this case we're focusing on weight-related ones like metabolic rate, fat-burning ability, fat-storage hormones, appetite control, etc. Each of these hundreds of genes codes to make a specific protein that in turn goes on to perform some function. But in some dogs, the activity level (think of it as a volume knob) of those genes is turned up or turned down. This is sort of like how my dad can eat pints of Ben and Jerry's, rarely exercise, but just doesn't put on weight. I can LOOK at that pint and gain weight. We have different genetic expression, even though we share the same genes.
In dogs and cats, we've found that nutrients like myristic acid (found in coconut oil), tomatoes, carrots, pyruvate, L-carnitine, etc actually significantly change the activity of those already-present genes to favor a healthier, more active metabolism. Pets eating the same amount of calories they were eating before (and in some cases more), with no change in exercise, lost significantly more body fat and weight eating a diet containing these nutrients. They also built significantly more lean muscle mass (measured by DEXA scans). Aside from the studies, I have seen several cases firsthand, including my ex's cat. He's gone from 22lb to 14 lb in about 9 months with no change to his caloric intake (which I personally calculated), on the nutrigenomic diet.
There is no reason to think this isn't also true of people, but people are terrible at complying with a test diet for a significant period of time, so the studies have been slower to finish, so we don't know what the specific nutrients would be to have this impact in people.
http://www.petmd.com/dog/centers/nutrition/evr_multi_nutrigenomics_research_pet_food_nutrition
http://www.hillsvet.com/HillsVetUS/v1/portal/en/us/content/research/nutrition/conf-pro-genomic-intro.pdf0 -
And away we go!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :flowerforyou: :flowerforyou: :flowerforyou:
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: 0 -
Also energy escaping, as you put out the back door it is not the same thing as your example of a 20% cost for digestion for carbs, two totally different things....maybe you should do a little science......
Yes of course they do, it's called TEF....why not just ask the question up front....it's not a mystery.
The point being that the energy you get from calories coming from different macronutrients are all absorbed by the body the same. For example some carbs use up about 20% of energy just to digest them.
If you are maintaining weight, you need to alter one or both sides of the equation.
Could you give an example where you're in a deficit but the body keeps the same weight (apart from water weight.)?No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
When 'calories' out is more than 'calories in' but the body retains the same total number of calories in the body, could you explain where the extra 'calories out' come from?
Have you heard of the energy equation calculation?
If yes then surely that explains what I mean.
Either reduce your energy input or increase the energy output (for a net loss).
Which means all that energy is escaping through the back door before having a chance to be absorbed by the body.
Thererfore calories coming in from different sources dont have the same efficency.
^ additionally this is part of energy-out.
Okay what I meant was not all the food is digested with the same efficiency therefore a percentage of that food ( with its energy) is not digested and leaves our body through our pooh never to be absorbed by our bodies.0 -
If you really want to learn, I'd suggest you start here, then continue to explore his other articles:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/nutrient-intake-nutrient-storage-and-nutrient-oxidation.html0 -
0 -
If you really want to learn, I'd suggest you start here, then continue to explore his other articles:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/nutrient-intake-nutrient-storage-and-nutrient-oxidation.html
Do you rate this guy?0 -
hm0
-
Do we really need another post like this?
We need this like we need another "what counts as water" thread . . .
HA! I have not seen the "what counts as water" thread, but I'd love to. Sounds like hours of endless reading entertainment
0 -
0 -
Do we really need another post like this?
Food has many properties and "calorie" is one of those properties describing the energy value of that particular food. That variable is the same across different food groups but the other properties that a food has, are NOT the same across different food groups.
So for example, 100 calories of cake compared to 100 calories of chicken, will provide the same energy to the diet. But it will provide a whole bunch of things in addition to energy value that will differ between the two, such as micronutrition, differences in amino acids, fatty acids, differing effects on satiety, palatability/preference. Those additional properties can have an effect on weight loss in that they can effect energy output (one side of the energy balance equation) and quite clearly food selection can effect satiety/adherence which can effect calorie intake.
None of this means a calorie is not a calorie. Calorie deficits are still a fundamental requirement of weight loss and the opposite is true for weight gain. It is still fundamentally the energy balance equation.
QFT
No it won't and that's the point. This it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you're in a deficit is wrong. Not all energy from calories are absorbed by the body at the same quantity.
No what won't?
Oomph. In to watch SS school someone. *takes notes*0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions