The forever mirerepresented first law of thermodynamics in d
KavemanKarg
Posts: 266
On my blog:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/KavemanKarg/view/first-law-of-thermodynamics-as-it-applies-to-the-body-158848
The first law of thermodynamics is an expression of the principle of conservation of energy.
The law states that energy can be transformed, i.e. changed from one form to another, but cannot be created nor destroyed. It is usually formulated by stating that the change in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work performed by the system on its surroundings.
The law, as applied by those who adhere to the calorie is a calorie theory is as follows:
Energy stored = energy in - energy utilized
What is often forgotten, OFTEN, is that this application of the law applies ONLY to closed loop systems. In other words, the system is complete in and of itself and does not share anything on the right hand side of the = with other systems
Unfortunately, the fat storage and muscle creation systems in our bodies are not closed loop systems. They interact with the digestive system, the endocrine system, then blood stream, and thousands of other biological processes from the cellular level on up to the entire body as one level, known as homeostasis.
To state a calorie is a calorie is to incorrectly apply this law, for the reason given above.
Let me give you an example of a closed loop, and an open loop system.
Assume your fat cells are a bath tub.
Water stored = Water in - water drained
In a closed loop bath tub, nothing else would interfere with the water level. THAT is a closed loop system.
In an open loop system, other factors and systems interchange. The weather system may greatly lower humidity and raise heat, evaporation. A child may come along and pour in a tonne of salt, changing water density and interfering with how much water the tub can hold, something may come along and pull the plug on the tub.
I realise this is not a perfect comparison, but it illustrates the point. Fat cells are not closed loop systems.
Another fault with calorie is a calorie is that it assumes all food is used for energy instead of other processes
Protein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), fiber is not burned for energy at all, and in fact does not have to be even listed as calories on food labels, which is why the carb count and calorie counts do not always jibe.
Protein can be shunted off to be used to build muscle instead, and its calories remain intact and unused as energy, just as fiber is used for something wholey different then energy production. Sugar alcohols like erythritol have calories but the body does not utilize them as calories even though it digests sugar alcohols well enough.
This is actually a trick, it is a repeat of my first point. Storing fat is not a closed loop system. If we feed the body, different macronutrients take different roles and only one of those possible roles is energy production.
Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)
Calorie for a calorie ignores the fact that the body has other ways to eliminate food and calories that does not involve burning at all.
We use the bathroom. I urinate ketones, and when I do, that is energy that is simply urinated away. As such, it cannot be recooped and stored as fat if unused. A wondeful example that illustrates fat storage is not a closed loop system.
We also urinate sugar. Thats right. Even healthy people do it sometimes. This is another example of calories going down the drain instead of to fat cells.
How does calorie is a calorie explain this? The first law of thermodynamics has not been broken, because that law applies to closed loop systems. At no time in these examples is energy destroyed without being used. However, other systems in an open system environment carried the energy away locked in, looked in other substances. Which is perfectly allowable by physics.
What about the effects of synergists and catalysts and antagnosists?
Lets look at Mad Max's car, Mr. Road Warrior. His car runs on gas, we run on calories. When he wants to go faster, he kicks in the supercharger and nitrogen, which acts as a catalyst for the gas, making it more explosive (he uses MORE GAS FASTER but on average his mileage drops!). If he added a bit of oil to the gas instead of nitrus, it would become less explosive or possibly useless. This is an antagonistic affect.
The body is full of catalysts, antagonists and synergists. Calorie is a calorie would have us deny these exists.
The ability of the body to expel calories without burning them
Covered above in excretion, this is further affected by insulin, leptin, etc... basically our insulin system, which is another OPEN loop system that interacts with the OPEN LOOP system of fat storage.
If insulin is very low, fat cells can only take in fat and carbs at a finite rate, however, your urinary system and bowels, fueled with ample water, can eliminate the extra. Bile is secreted by the liver into the bowels. Bile is created from lipids (fats). And is often just dropped in the bowl behind us after it fulfills its job.
"Calorie is a calorie" ignores this happens. It also ignores positive results in urine sugar tests where we simply urinate out sugar as our fat cells and muscles are not primed to uptake it fast enough due to limits set by the amount of present hormones.
I hope I have illustrated the following points to your satisfaction
At no time does the first law of thermodynmics break, ever
The law of energy stored=energy in - energy utilized applies to closed loop systems ONLY
That the above law of conservation and the simple calories in>calories spent = fat gain does not apply as fat gain is an OPEN looped system
That the body can eliminate calorie containing substances, even pure sugar, without burning it, due to built in self regulation systems such as your endocrine system
That catalysts, synergists and antagnosists can greatly influence energy utilization in the body
That calorie regulation on intake (caloric restriction goals) is only one of many factors that affect how much storing of nutrients your fat cells pull off
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/KavemanKarg/view/first-law-of-thermodynamics-as-it-applies-to-the-body-158848
The first law of thermodynamics is an expression of the principle of conservation of energy.
The law states that energy can be transformed, i.e. changed from one form to another, but cannot be created nor destroyed. It is usually formulated by stating that the change in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work performed by the system on its surroundings.
The law, as applied by those who adhere to the calorie is a calorie theory is as follows:
Energy stored = energy in - energy utilized
What is often forgotten, OFTEN, is that this application of the law applies ONLY to closed loop systems. In other words, the system is complete in and of itself and does not share anything on the right hand side of the = with other systems
Unfortunately, the fat storage and muscle creation systems in our bodies are not closed loop systems. They interact with the digestive system, the endocrine system, then blood stream, and thousands of other biological processes from the cellular level on up to the entire body as one level, known as homeostasis.
To state a calorie is a calorie is to incorrectly apply this law, for the reason given above.
Let me give you an example of a closed loop, and an open loop system.
Assume your fat cells are a bath tub.
Water stored = Water in - water drained
In a closed loop bath tub, nothing else would interfere with the water level. THAT is a closed loop system.
In an open loop system, other factors and systems interchange. The weather system may greatly lower humidity and raise heat, evaporation. A child may come along and pour in a tonne of salt, changing water density and interfering with how much water the tub can hold, something may come along and pull the plug on the tub.
I realise this is not a perfect comparison, but it illustrates the point. Fat cells are not closed loop systems.
Another fault with calorie is a calorie is that it assumes all food is used for energy instead of other processes
Protein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), fiber is not burned for energy at all, and in fact does not have to be even listed as calories on food labels, which is why the carb count and calorie counts do not always jibe.
Protein can be shunted off to be used to build muscle instead, and its calories remain intact and unused as energy, just as fiber is used for something wholey different then energy production. Sugar alcohols like erythritol have calories but the body does not utilize them as calories even though it digests sugar alcohols well enough.
This is actually a trick, it is a repeat of my first point. Storing fat is not a closed loop system. If we feed the body, different macronutrients take different roles and only one of those possible roles is energy production.
Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)
Calorie for a calorie ignores the fact that the body has other ways to eliminate food and calories that does not involve burning at all.
We use the bathroom. I urinate ketones, and when I do, that is energy that is simply urinated away. As such, it cannot be recooped and stored as fat if unused. A wondeful example that illustrates fat storage is not a closed loop system.
We also urinate sugar. Thats right. Even healthy people do it sometimes. This is another example of calories going down the drain instead of to fat cells.
How does calorie is a calorie explain this? The first law of thermodynamics has not been broken, because that law applies to closed loop systems. At no time in these examples is energy destroyed without being used. However, other systems in an open system environment carried the energy away locked in, looked in other substances. Which is perfectly allowable by physics.
What about the effects of synergists and catalysts and antagnosists?
Lets look at Mad Max's car, Mr. Road Warrior. His car runs on gas, we run on calories. When he wants to go faster, he kicks in the supercharger and nitrogen, which acts as a catalyst for the gas, making it more explosive (he uses MORE GAS FASTER but on average his mileage drops!). If he added a bit of oil to the gas instead of nitrus, it would become less explosive or possibly useless. This is an antagonistic affect.
The body is full of catalysts, antagonists and synergists. Calorie is a calorie would have us deny these exists.
The ability of the body to expel calories without burning them
Covered above in excretion, this is further affected by insulin, leptin, etc... basically our insulin system, which is another OPEN loop system that interacts with the OPEN LOOP system of fat storage.
If insulin is very low, fat cells can only take in fat and carbs at a finite rate, however, your urinary system and bowels, fueled with ample water, can eliminate the extra. Bile is secreted by the liver into the bowels. Bile is created from lipids (fats). And is often just dropped in the bowl behind us after it fulfills its job.
"Calorie is a calorie" ignores this happens. It also ignores positive results in urine sugar tests where we simply urinate out sugar as our fat cells and muscles are not primed to uptake it fast enough due to limits set by the amount of present hormones.
I hope I have illustrated the following points to your satisfaction
At no time does the first law of thermodynmics break, ever
The law of energy stored=energy in - energy utilized applies to closed loop systems ONLY
That the above law of conservation and the simple calories in>calories spent = fat gain does not apply as fat gain is an OPEN looped system
That the body can eliminate calorie containing substances, even pure sugar, without burning it, due to built in self regulation systems such as your endocrine system
That catalysts, synergists and antagnosists can greatly influence energy utilization in the body
That calorie regulation on intake (caloric restriction goals) is only one of many factors that affect how much storing of nutrients your fat cells pull off
0
Replies
-
Thanks
0 -
This is so cool(:0
-
Overload on information >.<0
-
Sorry I dont wish to sound stupid but what is the point you are trying to get across !0
-
Sorry I don't wish to sound stupid but what is the point you are trying to get across !
That the human body is infinitely complex and we still do not understand it all and all its processes, and that to apply one simple rule against it, especially when improperly applied, is misguided at best.
It is my essay to refute the dogma, which I define as the triumph of belief over facts, that a calorie is a calorie, with easily verifiable fact that any curious reader can independently verify.
Rather then making this argument in everyone one of the hundred or so posts where the first law is completely misunderstood and incorrectly applied, I confined it to my one singular post.
As far as my points, I did summarize them at the end for anyone who read.0 -
A calorie is a calorie. A calorie is measurement of energy. Whether from a protein,fat or a carb, the ENERGY of a calorie is the same. This is not disputed by any science.
The difference is the macronutrients and how they chemically react in each and every individual.0 -
-B-U-M-P- 0
-
Very interesting. Thanks.0
-
A calorie is a calorie. A calorie is measurement of energy. Whether from a protein,fat or a carb, the ENERGY of a calorie is the same. This is not disputed by any science.
The difference it the macronutrients and how they chemically react in each and every individual.
Sorry, are you confirming what I just said or debating it? Seems we are saying the same thing.
Eating less calories may not always work, EG starvation mode is often cited.
If we are eating 3000 calories a day, and excreting 500 via other processes, and using another 500 worth of protein for tissue building blocks in muscles leaving 2000 calories for energy and storage, etc...,
And then we drop our daily caloric intake to 2000, we may still end up using 2000 for energy and storage, as the adapts by not building up new tissue and not excreting excess in other ways.
This is something we know happens in what we call "starvation mode", where food is rifled off to mission critical processes only and the rest is often hoarded in fat, and lean tissue and unessential organ maintenance takes a back seat and gets put on hold.0 -
Yeah, I've heard this arguement before, mostly from the low carb community trying to justify a metabolic advantage. The problem is the confusion on the out side of the energy balance equation, believing that some energy doesn't apply..........someone would have to prove that some metabolic dysfunction are somehow exempt from the laws of physics and prove it, which I haven't ever seen, yet. For now I'll stick with thermodynamcis applying to humans and all living creatures.0
-
Yeah, I've heard this arguement before, mostly from the low carb community trying to justify a metabolic advantage. The problem is the confusion on the out side of the energy balance equation, believing that some energy doesn't apply..........someone would have to prove that some metabolic dysfunction are somehow exempt from the laws of physics and prove it, which I haven't ever seen, yet. For now I'll stick with thermodynamcis applying to humans and all living creatures.
Like I said, I define dogma as the triumph of belief over simple facts
Urine sticks are cheap and you can see you are eliminating sugar without storing it after many types of meals. Pretty much everything stated is easily verifiable.
If your response is "I refuse to believe it, you are just spouting the company line", that's fine.
If your response is to go and further educate and find out I am wrong, I will love that. Then you can educate me on what you find. That is a process that helped bring me to low carb in the first place.
Ideology is dangerous. I have, over 3 years, changed my opinion on dieting many times and will do so again as I learn more and see more results. The more you know, the more you realize you do not know, that is why constant certitude is dangerous.0 -
Typical carbophobic nonsense trying to dismiss the energy balance equation, and filled with misinformationProtein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), .
You are not a rabbit. In HUMAN beings, Human metabolic pathways are vastly different from those found in rodents and ruminants.Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)
NEWSFLASH! This is part of the "calories out" side of the energy balance equation. (As is the rest of your verbal vomit).0 -
Typical carbophobic nonsense trying to dismiss the energy balance equation, and filled with misinformationProtein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), .
You are not a rabbit. In HUMAN beings, Human metabolic pathways are vastly different from those found in rodents and ruminants.
Rabbit starvation is a term used to describe a condition in HUMANS, not rabbits. Not sure what to say on that further.Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)NEWSFLASH! This is part of the "calories out" side of the energy balance equation. (As is the rest of your verbal vomit).
Not in the context of fat storage, and weight loss, where it is claimed this all goes to the fat cells. Please keep it in context of weight loss and fat cells to understand my point. You are basically confirming my arguement though. Other systems come into play, and take energy dogma would have us believe all gets packed into fat cells.
If you want to argue that the first law applies to open loop systems, please do. I got Einstein on my side, you have Jillian Micheals on yours. Fat storage is NOT a closed loop system, as you are confirming. Every point I made is valid.
Now for future reference:Rabbit starvation, also referred to as protein poisoning or mal de caribou, is a form of acute malnutrition caused by excess consumption of any lean meat (e.g., rabbit) coupled with a lack of other sources of nutrients usually in combination with other stressors, such as severe cold or dry environment. Symptoms include diarrhea, headache, fatigue, low blood pressure and heart rate, and a vague discomfort and hunger that can only be satisfied by consumption of fat or carbohydrates.0 -
Kaveman I consume a low carb diet, but not for some ellusive metabolic advantage that is not backed up by science. My signature says it all and I like delving into the details, but can't agree with you on this point. I've lost 65 lbs on this diet and through hard work I'm down to about 10% body fat at 6' 190lbs and I attribute it to it's satiating effects of a low carb diet and the ease of which I comply to this diet, not because sugar molecules miraculously escape through urine, or because some fat blocker allows for more undigested calories to be deposited in my dung.0
-
Kaveman I consume a low carb diet, but not for some ellusive metabolic advantage that is not backed up by science. My signature says it all and I like delving into the details, but can't agree with you on this point. I've lost 65 lbs on this diet and through hard work I'm down to about 10% body fat at 6' 190lbs and I attribute it to it's satiating effects of a low carb diet and the ease of which I comply to this diet, not because sugar molecules miraculously escape through urine, or because some fat blocker allows for more undigested calories to be deposited in my dung.
Sorry, which metabolic process mentioned is not backed up by science?
In fact, I did not even address low carb specifically, but rather the broad picture of what happens to matter (which stores caloric potential) moves through the body. This is all stuff I learned in first year nursing, so I am pretty confident to say it is indeed based in science.0 -
Typical carbophobic nonsense trying to dismiss the energy balance equation, and filled with misinformationProtein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), .
You are not a rabbit. In HUMAN beings, Human metabolic pathways are vastly different from those found in rodents and ruminants.
Rabbit starvation is a term used to describe a condition in HUMANS, not rabbits. Not sure what to say on that further.Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)NEWSFLASH! This is part of the "calories out" side of the energy balance equation. (As is the rest of your verbal vomit).
Not in the context of fat storage, and weight loss, where it is claimed this all goes to the fat cells. Please keep it in context of weight loss and fat cells to understand my point. You are basically confirming my arguement though. Other systems come into play, and take energy dogma would have us believe all gets packed into fat cells.
Nice strawman. This is only claimed by carbophobes who wish to refute the energy balance equation. This is NOT what anyone with a brain has to say.
If you actually pay attention, you'll see the law of thermodynamics invoked when carbophobes claim "I was eating 1200 calories, but I still got fat cuz of teh carbzez". You CAN'T create fat out of nothing.If you want to argue that the first law applies to open loop systems, please do. I got Einstein on my side, you have Jillian Micheals on yours. Fat storage is NOT a closed loop system, as you are confirming. Every point I made is valid.
Neither one of these are experts on diet. I have Alan Aragon, James Kreiger, Lyle McDonald, and PubMed on my side.
You have Gary Taubes and Mark Sisson.
Now for future reference:Rabbit starvation, also referred to as protein poisoning or mal de caribou, is a form of acute malnutrition caused by excess consumption of any lean meat (e.g., rabbit) coupled with a lack of other sources of nutrients usually in combination with other stressors, such as severe cold or dry environment. Symptoms include diarrhea, headache, fatigue, low blood pressure and heart rate, and a vague discomfort and hunger that can only be satisfied by consumption of fat or carbohydrates.
LOL.
If you actually read the article you were referencing you would understand that we DO use protein for energy, but that it is rate-limiting. This does NOT mean that we don't have a metabolic pathway that converts protein to fat.
Now stop talking about things you don't understand.0 -
I think what your saying is, a ketogenic diet through it's unique properies somehow bypasses the 1st law of thermodynamics, if it isn't, what are you trying to say and for what purpose.0
-
This is all stuff I learned in first year nursing, so I am pretty confident to say it is indeed based in science.
Adorable.0 -
I just saw this on your blog:Other factors, fat cannot cross into adipose tissue without carbs. It cannot happen. So if you ate ONLY fat and protein, and no carbs, you would never EVER increase your body fat stores no matter how many calories you ate.
You really are clueless.
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=3190 -
A calorie is a calorie. A calorie is measurement of energy. Whether from a protein,fat or a carb, the ENERGY of a calorie is the same. This is not disputed by any science.
The difference is the macronutrients and how they chemically react in each and every individual.
Nice summarization. Thank you.0 -
Look Kaveman I dont give a flying **** about the technical side of things, I am just here to lose weight and stop being a "fat *kitten*" so I can at the age of 50 pull loads of women, drive around in fast cars and kick sand in peoples faces on the beach..........lol.
I must be stupid, but without using all the technical jargon can you put it into laymans terms what you are talking about...
As far as I am concerned if I eat healthly, exercise 4-5 times a week and dont pig out I should lose weight shouldnt I !0 -
I'll keep listening to Lyle McDonald: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html
Thanks.
(ps: from the introductory section of the article: Recently on the Internet, a common meme is that the application of thermodynamics to the human body is incorrect. This usually comes out of people talking about something that they clearly do not understand in any way shape or form which is the energy balance equation. This is usually used as a lead in to the idea that the “Calorie theory of weight gain and weight loss” is incorrect or what have you. This leads to even more abjectly stupid ideas that I’m not getting into here."
Well, like yeah.)0 -
I just saw this on your blog:Other factors, fat cannot cross into adipose tissue without carbs. It cannot happen. So if you ate ONLY fat and protein, and no carbs, you would never EVER increase your body fat stores no matter how many calories you ate.
You really are clueless.
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=319
^ That weightology study is awesome btw. Anyone reading this, please check that thing out. Really solid info.0 -
Bump0
-
What is often forgotten, OFTEN, is that this application of the law applies ONLY to closed loop systems.
So where are the "in" and "out" coming from and going to ?
You can apply any thermodynamic concept to any system as long as you define it properly. Draw your system boundary, define the ins and outs that cross it, and calculate away.0 -
if "a calorie is not a calorie", please explain the results of the twinkie study.
On 1200 calories of only twinkies, the author lost weight, improved his health, and generally proved that the "quality" of calories is pretty irrelevant.0 -
I agree that we often oversimplify the anabolic and catabolic processes found in our bodies. However, if we were to have to factor in every detalied physiologic process down to the kreb cycle, the amount of data needed to figure out and fully represent each calorie would be too daunting. And yes, a few calories actually just travel from one end of our digestive system to the other without it ever being utilized by our bodies, but that is not the 'norm', as our bodies are very adept at utilizing the foods we provide it.
In addition, you could state that the human body is an open loop system, but then to find it a part of a closed loop system, all you'd have to do is travel far out into space and look at the solar system from a few light years away. At that point, we are a closed loop system (minus the bits of energy leaving our system from the sun), so it's all in a matter of perspective.
I did enjoy the lecture though.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