Thoughts on Calories

This feels much like a troll...

But to take the bait... Your post is, in my opinion, unhelpful and misguided.

While I don't pretend to be an expert on how any given Calorie determination is measured and assessed, anyone who has spent 2 weeks or more on MFP will know:

-That the entire process of estimating how many calories a given individual will burn in any given period is entirely an estimate based on models built for that predictive purpose, but are still just targeted estimates.

-No matter how diligently we weigh or measure food, we know that Calorie intake is always estimated (weighing helps to refine the estimate, but still...) We may be estimating volume, we know that labels are themselves estimates, and there may be slight food variance of Calorie density depending on production conditions, etc. (E.g. How much fat is in that steak versus another similar cut from a different production facility, breed, etc. etc.)?

-Calories burned in any given day through increased activity are estimates based on anticipated burn for the effort involved - often refined through the use of heart monitors to try to get better estimates, but still estimates.

- The scale is a difficult measuring gauge that has many factors impeding it's effectiveness for providing feedback to someone hoping to lose weight since it only measures what is put on it and can't determine effectively how much may be retained water... or ... sand I guess if for some reason you wanted to .. uh.. eat sand..(!?)
-
That doesn't make the process "absolutely meaningless as far as health or weight control"

In fact, it is the best process we can utilize... by learning about how these processes occur, and paying attention to changes in our bodies as we go, we can learn how to create a Calorie deficit for ourselves... it isn't about a perfect calculation, It doesn't need to be. By watching closely how our bodies react, we can discern if we are taking in more or less than we are burning... we can make modifications to our behaviour over time and we can intelligently, step-by-step be successful in removing fat off our bodies that we have stored there over our time.

Certainly nutritional value matters in terms of the calories we take in, but not so much for weight loss or gain, as for total overall health. We all have read and know that 100 Calories of Potato Chips (they need to be capitalized) is the same energy to the body as 100 calories of carrots. While there may be technical variance in the determination of actual measurement values, we honestly don't, and don't need to, care. The concept is what matters and that is that you can overeat on so-called "healthy" calories and you will gain weight. With this, of course, nobody is suggesting that people should eat only Doritos and lose weight - Volume would be so low that the stomach would struggle to provide sensory feedback of satiation and the "hunger" feelings would be a problem - but not because we don't have enough Calories - just because the density of Calories makes it so we do not trigger the body's mechanisms for saying we are "full".

Nutrition matters, yes
The Calorie counting systems we use are tremendously imprecise, yes

There are still significant benefits from using the system anyway when we add intelligence observation and knowledge to the mix.

We are empowered to understand the process, and to leave behind all the crap knowledge that gets spread about weight loss and fat and health.

Your article losses sight of the truth - the truth is that the process works and can help anyone who wants to see significant health changes in their life. You are missing the forest because of the trees - Sure the Calories in that pack of almonds may 109 and not 100... nobody needs to care - Nobody should try to make it that precise - come up 1000 feet from where you are and you will see that this is truly a beautiful thing viewed from the right perspective.

Wasn't this posted earlier? And I'm assuming deleted?

I'll bite. Of course we oxidize our food. What do you think all those metabolic enzymes are doing? Oxidation/reduction reactions are a key part of metabolism. So the blog lost me there.

And why do we use the metric system? Because science.

Well Blogger... I'm not to keen to debate physics with you. I'm certainly not a physicist (as a few friends with PHDs in Physics will quickly attest.)

However, I don't believe that is necessary. My issue is not with the potential erroneous assumptions that may be in the CICO model. Certainly as our understanding of metabolism and the processes the body uses to create, store, and consume energy and the specifics as to the energy content of food develop, we may indeed learn that much of what we believe today to be less than perfect. I have no argument with this.

However, you made a statement that I fundamentally disagree with as the conclusion of your article:

"My conclusion is this: while the measurment [SIC] of protein, carbohydrate, and lipid grams can be useful, the measurement of Calories in food is absolutely meaningless as far as health or weight control."

With the available knowledge we have today, I respectfully disagree. We may indeed be using Calories as a gross proxy for a more refined understanding yet to be determined, but the truth is, using the system does indeed work and is in fact meaningful.

I am quick to grant that it is imprecise, and certainly there are many on MFP that attempt to make something very complex far too simple and mathematical. (As if everything can be measured in absolutes if you just weigh everything properly and TDEE is a perfect methodology for identifying precise measures of daily calorie burn, etc... you get the point)

However, the CICO approach does indeed provide good guidance to most people as long as they understand that it is a general methodology and try not to treat it as a perfect precise mathematical formula. It has helped many many many many people - many on MFP and other similar on-line communities. Also the CICO education that occurs here and in similar communities has gone a great distance in helping to dispel what I see as much more harmful weight loss myths and untruths spread by many for financial gain, or just by gross ignorance.

No, I would never assert it is precise, but to say it is "meaningless" fails to give it the worth it is due. It has changed lives and helped people and continues to do so... and people are what matter.

littleknownblogger wrote: »

Protease, lipase and amylase all work through hydrolysis. It is a bit of a stretch to refer to to hydrolysis as oxidation, and it is certainly not the same reaction as combustion. But if you feel that my wording is ambivalent, simply re-read it with the word "combustion" substituted for "oxidation".

As for the metric system... There are two types of countries in the world: those that use the metric system, and those that have been to the moon.

Protease, lipase, and amylase simply break complex molecules into their subunits. Oxidation/reduction use the subunits for energy when required. Oxidation/reduction reactions are key for ATP production. We do oxidize foods, not just hydrolyze them. I'm very sorry you didn't understand that before coming in here.

And most of the world uses the metric system. And so should we (the US).