PT thinks these are -ve calorie foods...

pennydreadful270

I'm on a PT-run weight loss class. Just got this list in my email from them -

1. Cruciferous Vegetables (Broccoli, Cauliflower, Cabbage)
2. Asparagus
3. Leafy Greens (lettuce, spinach, kale)
4. Celery
5. Mushrooms - Most mushrooms have no calories at all, so all the calories burned processing them
6. Chilli peppers - In addition to being negative calorie foods, hot peppers contain capsaicin, which speeds the metabolic rate
7. Apples
8. Berries
9. Apricots / Peaches
10. Pears


Am I right to think this is nonsense?

TavistockToad

yes, you are right. there is no such thing as a no or negative calorie food.

RunHardBeStrong

Yes. It's nonsense! They still have calories may not be much but it adds up.

freelancejouster

They may be considered negative because digesting them uses up as many calories as are in them, but it's still something that has to be burnt - therefore the calories are definitely not negative.

cmeiron

Totally nonsense.

Mokey41

Especially the last 4, fruits are high in sugars and calories. Total garbage.

Loulady

Yup, that's some BS right there.

stewartcarden

They may be considered negative because digesting them uses up as many calories as are in them, but it's still something that has to be burnt - therefore the calories are definitely not negative.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21723312


Have a wee read of that (:

CoachReddy

I'm on a PT-run weight loss class. Just got this list in my email from them -

1. Cruciferous Vegetables (Broccoli, Cauliflower, Cabbage)
2. Asparagus
3. Leafy Greens (lettuce, spinach, kale)
4. Celery
5. Mushrooms - Most mushrooms have no calories at all, so all the calories burned processing them
6. Chilli peppers - In addition to being negative calorie foods, hot peppers contain capsaicin, which speeds the metabolic rate
7. Apples
8. Berries
9. Apricots / Peaches
10. Pears


Am I right to think this is nonsense?

it's not that they're "negative calories" just that your body burns more energy digesting them than it receives from them. it's actually a real thing. not convinced about the fruit though. I'd have to look further into it.

EDIT: I also read that BBC article, and while he's right that the body doesn't use much energy digesting, we also don't often GET every calorie from the food that it theoretically has in it. We don't assimilate all 10 calories from that celery stick even though we like to think we do. I dunno, jury's out for me. I'll need to do more research. it's interesting though...

fattyfoodie

I can probably eat my way to a 5lb weight gain on fruit alone...no such thing as negative cals!

Same here.

I am currently doing Weight Watchers where most fruits and veg are 0 points, but the leader tells us that we can only count them as 0 when we are eating 5-7 servings a day.

I actually got fat on apples, swear to God. Was eating like 10 a day.

Turtle003

I agree about the fruit...1 piece of fruit like a banana or apple is roughly 100 calories...I used to eat about 700-900 cals extra a day in just fruit! Way too much! I always thought it was healthy but in moderation is the key!!!

Confuzzled4ever

haha.. have they looked up how many calories and apple contains???

Def not negative!!!

mfrkorey

They may be considered negative because digesting them uses up as many calories as are in them, but it's still something that has to be burnt - therefore the calories are definitely not negative.

this

chels0722

That list may be nonsense, but those are all fantastic food choices and should be eaten as part of your diet anyway.

SideSteel

Total nonsense.

Cr01502

Absolute bull.

barrattandrew

when did we assimilate food? have we suddenly become part of the borg?

concordancia

I would ask for my money back.

Tanja_CHH

Calories burned digesting food will already be counted in your daily calorie burn.

cwolfman13

Total BS...that said, those are good, nutrient dense foods to eat...but they do have calories. I eat quite a bit of fruit and veg, and I could easily go over my calorie goals and gain weight with my fruit and veg.

Lisah8969

I would ask for my money back.

This definitely! Unless your class is run by Dr. Oz...he knows EVERYTHING!

marsellient

I wonder if this idea came about as a trick to encourage people to eat these things instead of the items that (more than likely) made them gain weight in the first place. If other parts of the program are working for you, why don't you just go ahead and count them anyway?

TimeForMe99

Apparently the author of this list has never seen a manatee. They get huge eating nothing but romaine lettuce. Or an elephant, giraffe, etc.

This is the same theory that WW uses, mostly to encourage people to eat good foods rather than junk that has the same "points".

determinedbutlazy

when did we assimilate food? have we suddenly become part of the borg?

Watching a borg episode of TNG right now. Brilliant.

JUDDDing

Apparently the author of this list has never seen a manatee. They get huge eating nothing but romaine lettuce.

You know last summer something was eating my lettuce. At the time, I thought perhaps it was bunnies.

But now I'm thinking that maybe it was manatee's... That would have really freaked me out.

pennydreadful270

Haha, thanks for confirming my reaction everyone! I'm paying very little for the classes as they are run through my gym, and mainly there for the motivation and proper scales.

I am a natural skeptic so I do take these things with a pinch of salt. The plan they have me on is quite strict and also demands I switch to soy or almond milk, but for a slosh of semi in my tea, I just don't see the benefit. (Don't tell on me!!!)

;-)

Cherryblosm3

Some foods have "negative calories" as it supposedly burns more calories digesting it than you gained ingesting it. BUT I thought the digesting of these calories was already factored into MFP's BMR calculations. Maybe im wrong, but your daily living calorie expenditure (walking, breathing, eating, talking, etc) was already factored into your BMR which partially calculates your daily calories allowed. So technically you need to list all of these items and NOT factor in the digesting, its already figured for you.

SideSteel

Just think of this logically for a moment.

Suppose you take two scenarios where two identical people (stay with me for this hypothetical example) eat exactly at maintenance.

So they eat exactly the correct amount of calories to maintain weight.

Now lets give one of these two people (person 2) big bowl of mushrooms, a few servings of broccoli, 3 apples, 10 asparagus spears and a pear.

Person 1 just eats at maintenance.
Person 2 eats the previously mentioned items in addition to maintenance, lets say it's a big bedtime snack.

Does anyone actually believe person 2 will LOSE WEIGHT because of the addition of these foods?

If they really caused thermogenesis beyond the energy contribution of the foods then this would be the case, but hopefully we can see how ridiculous this assertion is using the above example.