The office debate

Muddy_Yogi
Muddy_Yogi Posts: 1,459 Member
in Chit-Chat
Ok it is really just me and my co-worker and I think I know the answer but since he is debating with me...I wanted to ask the forums and he promised to go with the result we are given. LOL

He says that if you survive mainly on a diet of soda.....2000 calories a day (Lets say this is below your maintenance just for this debate) You will lose weight because it is a liquid.

I said if you ate 2000 calories of Peanut butter every day and nothing else you will lose as long as it is under your maintenance calories as well.

He disagreed. Is there a difference between 2000 calories of PB and 2000 calories of Mountain Dew (only in regards to weight loss not health benefit...)
«1

Replies

  • Mac_X
    Mac_X Posts: 110 Member
    This debate does ignore the joy factor, as in I'd love 2000 calories of PB right now but the thought of drinking 2000 calories worth of Mt. Dew or any soft drink in THAT amount......just...I mean...I think I'm gonna throw up....
  • djeffreys10
    djeffreys10 Posts: 2,312 Member
    Calories in vs calories out. You are correct, your coworker is incorrect. If you are in a calorie deficit, your body will lose mass. And as such, you will lose weight.
  • JenAndSome
    JenAndSome Posts: 1,893 Member
    My diet soda has 0 calories.

    It doesn't matter if you are getting your calories from a liquid or not. Calories are calories.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    I also drink diet soda, but I can tell the question is regarding regular soda.

    Basically, the question is: If one consumes at a deficit, can one gain weight with some types of food/drink and lose weight with other types of food/drink?

    Answer: I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that a deficit is a deficit regardless of where it comes from... thus if 2,000 calories is a deficit, then that person will lose weight drinking soda, or will lose weight eating PB... doesn't matter, s/he will lose weight.

    *As instructed, I'm ignoring the macronutrient and micronutrient issue and don't actually expect anyone to eat like this.

    Edited to be more clear.
  • LeonCX
    LeonCX Posts: 862 Member
    I'm on the Mountain Dew and peanut butter diet. I haven't lost any weight, but I poop a lot.
  • wjstoj
    wjstoj Posts: 884 Member
    Mt Dew has caffeine and gives you diarrhea = greater weight loss in the short term
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
  • MomTo3Lovez
    MomTo3Lovez Posts: 800 Member
    diet soda has zero calories so how would he be getting 2000 calories exactly?

    Calories are calories no matter the source
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    In for the peanut butter diet.
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    diet soda has zero calories so how would he be getting 2000 calories exactly?

    Calories are calories no matter the source

    diet OF soda, not diet soda.
    I had to read that again too.
  • MaddyT122
    MaddyT122 Posts: 152 Member
    The person only drinking the Mountain Dew will die from malnutrition. The person only eating peanut butter will die from dehydration.

    Lose / lose. :tongue:
  • donyellemoniquex3
    donyellemoniquex3 Posts: 2,384 Member
    I'm on the Mountain Dew and peanut butter diet. I haven't lost any weight, but I poop a lot.

    Sign me up. Is it a beachbody thing ?
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    I'm on the Mountain Dew and peanut butter diet. I haven't lost any weight, but I poop a lot.

    Sign me up. Is it a beachbody thing ?
    Uh oh. You uttered the magic words. Expect your in-box to be flooded shortly :laugh:
  • Guns_N_Buns
    Guns_N_Buns Posts: 1,899 Member
    diet soda has zero calories so how would he be getting 2000 calories exactly?

    Calories are calories no matter the source

    edit: Binky beat me to it.
  • BattleTaxi
    BattleTaxi Posts: 752 Member
    This debate does ignore the joy factor, as in I'd love 2000 calories of PB right now but the thought of drinking 2000 calories worth of Mt. Dew or any soft drink in THAT amount......just...I mean...I think I'm gonna throw up....

    This!
  • Go_Mizzou99
    Go_Mizzou99 Posts: 2,628 Member
    The bacon and bourbon diet worked for me
    Mt. Dew and peanut butter must be for minors.
  • Muddy_Yogi
    Muddy_Yogi Posts: 1,459 Member
    The person only drinking the Mountain Dew will die from malnutrition. The person only eating peanut butter will die from dehydration.

    Lose / lose. :tongue:

    LOL well yes, and no one said they couldn't have water. So possibly the pb person is the winner for at least a little while!
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.
  • Muddy_Yogi
    Muddy_Yogi Posts: 1,459 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.

    I agree...I'm curious as well!
  • ryanwood935
    ryanwood935 Posts: 245 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.
    I agree. I would imagine stomach acids are going to more or less take care of the solid food vs liquid without much or any expenditure. Though I would think the spread of macronutrients in peanut butter would help to maintain relaitvely normal BMR, whereas nothing but sugar from soda might cause a temporary slight drop in metabolism over time. The difference would be incredibly small though.
  • GorillaNJ
    GorillaNJ Posts: 4,024 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.

    I agree...I'm curious as well!

    If the mountain dew is cold it will cause the persons body to burn more calories warming it self...
  • SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage
    SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage Posts: 2,668 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.

    I agree...I'm curious as well!

    If the mountain dew is cold it will cause the persons body to burn more calories warming it self...
    If it's cold, doesn't that make it a negative calorie food? :laugh:
  • pixelatedsun
    pixelatedsun Posts: 165 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.

    I agree...I'm curious as well!

    If the mountain dew is cold it will cause the persons body to burn more calories warming it self...
    If it's cold, doesn't that make it a negative calorie food? :laugh:

    Clearly we need a celery diet to round this out.
  • JulieGirl58
    JulieGirl58 Posts: 158 Member
    OH, MAN!!!! NOW I WANT SOME PEANUT BUTTER!!!!
  • MizTerry
    MizTerry Posts: 3,763 Member
    Peanut butter offers more nutrients. Sure, you'd lose on both, but you'd look just awful living on the carbonated drink as compared to peanut butter.
  • headofphat
    headofphat Posts: 1,597 Member
    I :heart: peanut butter.
  • Shalaurise
    Shalaurise Posts: 707 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.

    I agree...I'm curious as well!

    If the mountain dew is cold it will cause the persons body to burn more calories warming it self...
    If it's cold, doesn't that make it a negative calorie food? :laugh:

    So about this theory... let's talk about ice cream. :D
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    You would probably lose more with the peanut butter as your body requires more energy (will burn more calories) digesting that then it would a liquid that is already in a very simple format (sugar).

    So in this case if 2000 cals put you in a deficit of say 250 cals/day with the pop (meaning your maintenance would be 2250), then the peanut butter would put you in a deficit of closer to 300 cals/day as the increase energy from digestion may increase maintenance to 2300.

    So if you ate about 2050 of peanut butter you would lose the same as 2000 of pop, as both would give you a deficit of 250 cals below maintenance. It is the deficit that matters, not necessarily a fixed input, and macros and format of food, will affect the total cals burned for the day.

    I would go further and say because it is liquid it takes less energy to break it down and be absorbed much easier and faster than a solid or semi solid.
    IF this is the case (and from what I've read on here, it's not), wouldn't the difference be negligible? So minute in fact to not even make a difference? 50 cals seems like a lot for your body to expend on digesting the difference between soda and PB. Genuinely curious.

    I agree...I'm curious as well!

    I would assume the digestion of 2000 cals of peanut butter would be much more than 50 cals, whereas the soda would burn very little. since the soda is liquid and has 0 protein I would venture to guess a greater than 50 cal difference. the below is an escert showing about a 41cal/day if protein is increased :

    "...although substituting carbohydrate for fat in the diet does not appear to alter total energy expenditure, increasing protein intake to 30–35% of energy does increase energy expenditure. The increase, however, is only ≈70 kcal/d"
    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/79/5/899S.full

    that said the peanut butter would not be that high in protein, but the soda diet would be lower than the base amount so I would say 50 cals in dif would probably be pretty close.
  • funchords
    funchords Posts: 413 Member
    You and your co-worker need to find some work to do... :drinker:

    I'd vote for the peanut butter diet. Your body will try to survive on the sugar, but it will find that it cannot.

    Your body needs certain essential amino acids (proteins) and certain essential fatty acids (fats) -- only some of which your body can create out of carbs. Without proteins and fats, your body will lack linolenic and linoleic acid (Omega-3 and Omega-6). Amino acids humans cannot synthesize are phenylalanine, valine, threonine, tryptophan, methionine, leucine, isoleucine, lysine, and histidine. You must get these from your food and drink. At a glance: Peanuts have them, Mtn. Dew does not.

Categories