Carb and Fat Calories Count Differently?

It's so wrong I don't even know where to start. I don't even feel like attacking this one because it's too much to type out.

He's wrong. That's all you need to know.

you should watch a doc. on netflix called fathead. its pretty interesting.

Also completely wrong in regards to its synopsis of insulin, which is arguably the main point it tries to make. It's good when it shows you can eat McDonald's and not get fat so long as calories are moderated, but then it turns to an insulin-phobic tone, and that's when it becomes wrong.

People without any clinical issues like insulin resistance get fat because they eat too many calories.

Why do you believe they get fat?

I was reading "Eat Fat, Get thin" by Barry Groves, in it he says-


The second Golden Rule of orthodoxy is: ‘A calorie is a calorie is
a calorie’ – no matter where it comes from. This rule says that no
matter what you eat, if you eat more calories than you use, you will
gain weight.
The figure often used is that one kilogram of body fat represents
about 3500 calories. But according to the United States Department of
Health, Education and Welfare: ‘On a high-fat diet, 4703 to 8471
excess calories were required for each kilogram of added weight.
However, a study of a low fat VLCD [very low calorie diet],
replacing fat calories with 8g/day of equivalent carbohydrate calories
reduced weight loss by 1.68kg. This corresponds to 3300 calories of
carbohydrate/kilogram, possibly 2500 calories per kilogram for carbohydrate
alone.’
Hey, wait a minute, read that again! What they are saying is that
it takes 4,700 to 8,470 excess calories from fat to add a kilogram of
weight, yet it takes only 2,500 to 3,300 calories from carbohydrate to add
the same amount. So ‘a calorie is a calorie is a calorie’ is not so meaningful
after all: a carbohydrate calorie is obviously much more fattening than
a fat calorie. So do calories count? Of course they do – but some don’t
count half as much as others.


First off he's from the UK and I think when he says kilograms he means pounds (just because of the "3500= a kilogram"). But my question is- does anyone know if this could be true? I haven't seen these statistics/study before. It doesn't really make sense to me, but I've been thrown for a nutritional loop recently regarding fats and carbohydrates and my beliefs about them. Any info on this?

Okay, let me try to tackle this. First of all it is 3500 calories = 1 pound of body fat = 0.45 kilograms of body fat. So the 4703 to 8471 excess calories for a kilogram of added weight is actually equal to 2.2 pounds of fat. 3500 calories x 2.2 pounds = 7700 excess calories. So, if you take into account the fact that the amount of exercise being done to burn some of those calories isn't listed, nor is the BMR of the people being tested, and it isn't listed that the "weight" gained was indeed body fat, then it is entirely possible that less then or more then 7700 excess calories can cause that gain but it may or may not be body fat.

Second of all, carbohydrates are typically stored in the muscle or liver first as glycogen, especially in people who are exercising. I haven't seen any specifics on the number of calories per pound of glycogen stored in the body, but I have seen that it is only 600 calories per pound of muscle and since glycogen is stored in muscles, I would assume that it is similar. I also know that the average amount of glycogen stored in the body is about 200 grams, but it is also stored in about 600 grams of water. 200 grams of carbohydrates would be about 800 calories (multiply grams of carbs by 4 to get calories from carbs) and 800 grams extra storage from storing glycogen is approximately 0.8 kilograms or 1.76 pounds. So, it takes a lot fewer calories from carbs to gain a pound IF it is stored as glycogen. After the glycogen stores are full then we switch to storing carbs as fat which takes more calories. Again, you will see the difference on the scale but it may or may not be body fat.

That's the biggest problem with these studies. Too many places take one or two snippets of information without looking at the whole picture and try to spin it to fit their perspective or the current popular trend in dieting. You have to look at the whole picture of what was gained (body fat, muscle, glycogen storage increases from adding weight training, etc), what exercise was done, how this person normally responds to various levels of intake, metabolic conditions (diabetes, celiac disease, etc. will effect how things are used in the body too), their normal BMR, the amount of muscle mass they have, etc.