All calories are not the same
Options
Replies
-
In volume of food. In nutrients. No but in calories yes. I am diabetic and the better I eat the betteri feel. But food is food. Somes better for you than others. That's why you need a balanced diet. I agree I much rather eat the healthy. I feel full longer. The amount of food not calories is what causes this. For me I have a genetic reason to eat a certain way. So yes foods very high in carbs aren't as good for me as other items. But all protein isn't good either. Each person has to do what's right for them.0
-
This is my first. But, I did save my descriptions of processes for wheat, chicken, and Camas cakes (which is all true and I'm pretty proud of) for future use when it's a real discussion. So, there's that.
The Camas cake thing was very cool. :drinker:
Thanks! We have some amazing local archeologists (some associated with our local Universities) and they keep finding evidence of the process that goes back further and further. Now they know that it was done over 10,000 years ago. I think that we can tend to underestimate the ingenuity and technology of ancient cultures and assume that humans were strictly cave dwelling "use what ever you can find" communities. The truth is much more complex. There was elaborate trade, they carved canoes for fishing and travel, there was art, there were stories being told in the winter. Unfortunately, because fiber breaks down, the amazingly intricate ropes, ladders, structures, and furniture didn't last. What we are left with are rocks.
I have Camas flowers in my garden, and hope to plant them in my meadow. You can cook them for a day or two in a crock pot, I guess they come out much like a sweet potato, but even yummier. The bulbs look like lily bulbs.
That's awesome. If you would like to trade the cakes with a neighboring clan, perhaps I could interest you in some alligator jerky in exchange...0 -
250 calories is 250 calories.
At that point it's the macros you are looking at.
You are not eating all of your food groups with pizza, per example.
You are also consuming a lot of fat and carbs with pizza... rather than protein(if it's plain pizza even worse) or fibre or any of your good vitamins.0 -
FFS a calorie is a calorie, end of story! Start a thread with a more relevant title like 'nutrient dense food vs low nutrient food'
This! I admit I have a hard time with IIFIYM type dieting for ME because when I eat a lot of processed foods I feel more sluggish than when I eat cleaner. And the closer I get to my goal weight the less "junk food" I can eat and see results. BUT that doesn't mean I think the same thing applies for every one. Calories are calories, I have a lot of friends who eat take out, cookies, and ice cream all day while staying under calories and they lose weight. I can't comment on how the FEEL with this diet but maybe they're better able to handle it? I agree with the sentiment of the OP if you eat more fruits and veggies than chips and cookie you will feel better but that's just been from my personal experience.
BTW eating less junk food means you get to eat more quantity wise, my husband surprised me with Taco Bell today (for the first time in months) and after logging what I ate I pretty much doubled my sodium intake that means that no matter what I do I am going over sodium and its only 1pm for me. If I had eaten like I usually do I would have had way more protein and nearly half the salt and i would have been able to eat at least two more meals.
I am not sure I agree with your description of IIFYM. I am an IIFYM eater, and I wouldn't say processed foods are a very large part of my diet. It's hard to hit macro and micronutrient goals eating takeout, cookies, and ice cream all day. What you're talking about is calories in versus calories out. That has nothing to do with IIFYM. For most, eating IIFYM requires actually paying careful attention to everything that goes into the body because many are doing IIFYM in conjunction with body recomposition and building lean mass. Most IIFYMers have a relatively high protein macro requirement that would be hard to meet by eating a bunch of carbs, regardless of the source of those carbs.
There's way too much misinformation about IIFYM and what it really is on these boards by people who just presume it's a bunch of people living on pop tarts and ice cream.
As to the original post, there's already ample schooling going on so there's very little reason to interject and repeat what several others are saying.
Ok. :-). I just kinda mentioned it in passing, I don't personally feel like I said it was one thing or the other, nor did i claim it wasn't a viable way to watch your intake. If it makes you feel better I can go back and edit out "IIFIYM" from my original post so as not to make people obsess over it or offend.0 -
This is my first. But, I did save my descriptions of processes for wheat, chicken, and Camas cakes (which is all true and I'm pretty proud of) for future use when it's a real discussion. So, there's that.
The Camas cake thing was very cool. :drinker:
Thanks! We have some amazing local archeologists (some associated with our local Universities) and they keep finding evidence of the process that goes back further and further. Now they know that it was done over 10,000 years ago. I think that we can tend to underestimate the ingenuity and technology of ancient cultures and assume that humans were strictly cave dwelling "use what ever you can find" communities. The truth is much more complex. There was elaborate trade, they carved canoes for fishing and travel, there was art, there were stories being told in the winter. Unfortunately, because fiber breaks down, the amazingly intricate ropes, ladders, structures, and furniture didn't last. What we are left with are rocks.
I have Camas flowers in my garden, and hope to plant them in my meadow. You can cook them for a day or two in a crock pot, I guess they come out much like a sweet potato, but even yummier. The bulbs look like lily bulbs.
That's awesome. If you would like to trade the cakes with a neighboring clan, perhaps I could interest you in some alligator jerky in exchange...
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:0 -
Very awesome study.0 -
not true, a calorie is not a calorie. So if i ate 2400 calories of french fries all day vs eating 2400 calories of mixed fruit all day, what do you think will digest in your body better? Which one will have you store more fat?0
-
Very awesome study.
VERY interesting study. Thank you. But this is really a clean vs. not as clean study. The macros are almost identical - so I would expect the metabolic response to be similar also. This is hardly ice cream vs. a chicken breast or pizza vs eating lean meat and whole vegetables. Very eye-opening though. I still eat turkey burgers because I like them.0 -
This doesn't surprise me, majority of you use chemical substances such as aspartame ad sucralose as an alternative to sugar, because someone, somewhere told you it's completely healthy and natural.
Anyways, I dare any of you to consume 1200 calories of pizza a day for a month and monitor your results.
Now the next month eat 1200 calories of whole natural foods, preferably raw, organic fruits and vegetables. including raw nuts. and no, peanuts are not nuts. Now if you yield the same results with both diets I would be amazed, and it's simply would not happen. The fact is, at the end of the day, your body stores away fat in a means of protecting you. It's not going to store away the vegetables because it doesn't contain any fat, your body wants to store fat in case you suddenly don't have food anymore.
Pizza is a completely man made food, your body wasn't even designed to even digest man made foods . The body thrives on natural foods.
but I eat more than 1200 calories..what do I do?
LOL
but i dont think anyone would suggest eating one food item (i.e. pizza) all day every day, of course your going to get sick. i think thats making a comparison to an extreme, and so its not scientific nor appropriate.0 -
I think it's cool to cite research, and this shows that insulin responses are the same.
As has been addressed a bit in the replies on the board, not all calories have the same nutritional content. Our body certainly needs more than just energy, and not just macros either. Take a look at Scooby's breakdown of this (on his website) for instance. Fiber is an important component of nutrition, for instance, vitamins another. Unless of course, you only care about your weight, and not colon health, or a myriad number of other health related conditions. Here on the site, weight is the primary concern it seems, and many will say a calorie is a calorie. Sure, it's true, it is with respect to energy in.
I would also note, related to the cited research, that the researcher did the study with an admitted bias. Not the strongest science, even as the researcher notes, small sample size, only one meal controlled. Generally speaking, particularly on a short term basis, a calorie is a calorie for anyone's purpose. But basing a lifestyle on that, and for instance, only eat wonder bread with white sugar all day long, and protein bars with high sugar alcohols. Some movie maker should do a super-size me variant, except with calories controlled.
I also look at what I'd call the Real World effect. That eating certain foods, and in certain ways, makes one prone to overeating. The article cited also notes this. So, while literally a calorie is a calorie, and yes literally you can walk across a busy highway with lots of traffic at night, I believe it's myopic to not consider the wider ramifications of a food related decision.
So, OP, I agree: all calories are not the same.
To everyone else, sure, OP hasn't really bitten off a huge argument there. Enjoy your day!0 -
It is NOTbutter it is some kind of buttery chemical concoction, that is the point!most pizza unless homemade is not just toamtoes and cheese lol. If you think so you are deluded. Pizza chains use hfcs and all kinds of chemicals to keep the ingredients stable. Pizza hut dough is premade and spread with all kinds of butter oil, especially the pan pizza, ever see the grease film (yellow) on your hands? Do not try to say frankenfood is just innocent tomatoes and hey what's wrong with that? LOL
What's wrong with butter now?0 -
Calories are different...well at least they come from different sources. I thought they directly measured calories in foods, but that's no longer true. They use the formula:
4 Kcal/g for protein, 4 Kcal/g for carbohydrate, and 9 Kcal/g for fat. Alcohol is calculated at 7 Kcal/g
(source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-do-food-manufacturers)
It seems that protein versus carbohydrates vs fat vs alcohol are processed by your body differently. So, how sure can you be that 100% of the calories from each source are absorbed the same?...and absorbed by different people the same way?
Not sure the answer, but I don't think its a given that a calorie is a calorie when "applied" to your body.0 -
I think it's cool to cite research, and this shows that insulin responses are the same.
As has been addressed a bit in the replies on the board, not all calories have the same nutritional content. Our body certainly needs more than just energy, and not just macros either. Take a look at Scooby's breakdown of this (on his website) for instance. Fiber is an important component of nutrition, for instance, vitamins another. Unless of course, you only care about your weight, and not colon health, or a myriad number of other health related conditions. Here on the site, weight is the primary concern it seems, and many will say a calorie is a calorie. Sure, it's true, it is with respect to energy in.
I would also note, related to the cited research, that the researcher did the study with an admitted bias. Not the strongest science, even as the researcher notes, small sample size, only one meal controlled. Generally speaking, particularly on a short term basis, a calorie is a calorie for anyone's purpose. But basing a lifestyle on that, and for instance, only eat wonder bread with white sugar all day long, and protein bars with high sugar alcohols. Some movie maker should do a super-size me variant, except with calories controlled.
I also look at what I'd call the Real World effect. That eating certain foods, and in certain ways, makes one prone to overeating. The article cited also notes this. So, while literally a calorie is a calorie, and yes literally you can walk across a busy highway with lots of traffic at night, I believe it's myopic to not consider the wider ramifications of a food related decision.
So, OP, I agree: all calories are not the same.
To everyone else, sure, OP hasn't really bitten off a huge argument there. Enjoy your day!
blah blah blah
a calorie is a unit of measurement for energy.
1 centimeter will always be a centimeter
Please do not use scooby as a reference. That guy is a joke0 -
I cant be arsed to read through this whole thread but
a calorie is simply a unit of energy. Full stop. Continue0 -
I hate this argument because it comes down to pedantic definitions.
YES YOU GUYS ARE RIGHT, a calorie is a unit of energy, therefore by definition is always the same. Congratulations, you remembered something from 7th grade science. A ton of feathers is the same as a ton of lead, astounding.
But the body does not process all food equally. Therefore, in the context of 'food I'm putting into my body' it does matter where your calories come from.0 -
Then talk about nutritional density of food not calories. Get the language right and your arguement holds more sway.
Because some of us continued on with science beyond 7th grade0 -
But the body does not process all food equally. Therefore, in the context of 'food I'm putting into my body' it does matter where your calories come from.
to what regard?0 -
Then talk about nutritional density of food not calories. Get the language right and your arguement holds more sway.
Because some of us continued on with science beyond 7th grade
Too bad you dropped English though, hey?:ohwell:
People talk in calories all the time because it is an easily measurable unit. Perhaps it would be easier to accept that by 'calories' people on a weight-loss forum generally mean 'food' rather than 'heat energy'. Then we can get past the definition issue.
250 calories of white sugar will be processed by the body in a different way to 250 calories of chicken breast. Yes? Agreed?
Its more complicated than 'nutritional density' - take the GI factor for an example. I'm sure you can find food with similar nutritional density but at opposite ends of the GI scale. So I find your adoption of that phrase as inadequate as you find the use of the word 'calories'0 -
Then talk about nutritional density of food not calories. Get the language right and your arguement holds more sway.
Because some of us continued on with science beyond 7th grade
Too bad you dropped English though, hey?:ohwell:
People talk in calories all the time because it is an easily measurable unit. Perhaps it would be easier to accept that by 'calories' people on a weight-loss forum generally mean 'food' rather than 'heat energy'. Then we can get past the definition issue.
250 calories of white sugar will be processed by the body in a different way to 250 calories of chicken breast. Yes? Agreed?
Its more complicated than 'nutritional density' - take the GI factor for an example. I'm sure you can find food with similar nutritional density but at opposite ends of the GI scale. So I find your adoption of that phrase as inadequate as you find the use of the word 'calories'
Of course 250 calories of white sugar will be processed differently That is straight carbs and will be stored as glycogen for the body to use as a preferred source of energy.
chicken breast is mainly composed of different amino acids which functions are long and extensive.
What does the outdated Glycemic index have anything to do with this?0 -
Of course 250 calories of white sugar will be processed differently That is straight carbs and will be stored as glycogen for the body to use as a preferred source of energy.
chicken breast is mainly composed of different amino acids which functions are long and extensive.
What does the outdated Glycemic index have anything to do with this?
good, we agree. The two SOURCES of calories are vastly different, therefore the calories themselves are used in different ways in the body. Is it so much of a stretch for someone to then say that these two lots of calories are different?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions