"Negative Calorie Foods".... Too Good To Be True?

cem2168
cem2168 Posts: 205 Member
edited September 28 in Food and Nutrition
SO... I have been reading lists of "negative calorie foods" such as strawberries, beets, blueberries, carrots...etc... But is this concept true or just another weightloss theory fad?

Replies

  • kennie2
    kennie2 Posts: 1,170 Member
    I've heard that you burn more calories chewing celery than the calories in it. I wouldn't rely on it tho.
  • SoldierDad
    SoldierDad Posts: 1,602
    It's not true. All food has calories. Sorry. :-(
  • Andythefitfamilyman
    Andythefitfamilyman Posts: 420
    Bump
  • Lyadeia
    Lyadeia Posts: 4,603 Member
    SO... I have been reading lists of "negative calorie foods" such as strawberries, beets, blueberries, carrots...etc... But is this concept true or just another weightloss theory fad?

    Yes, it is a weightloss theory fad.

    What if I ate a truck load of those foods...like 2500 calories worth (whoa, that's a lot of veggies for one day...). According to the people that believe in negative calorie foods, I would still lose weight even though I am about 500 over maintenance everyday.

    Those foods are good for you, don't get me wrong, but all the calories must be counted just like any other food.
  • Lily0013
    Lily0013 Posts: 28
    As I understand it, and I am no nutritionist, they are normally water-filled/nutritionally lax vegetables such as iceberg lettuce and celery. Named "negative calorie" because they take more energy to process than your body is able to eke out of them.
  • afarmboy
    afarmboy Posts: 1
    Hey there,
    Thinking back to my nutrition class, the energy required to digest food is 10% of that foods total energy (Calories). Its called the thermic effect of food. Foods with lower energy density that are often said to be "negative calorie" foods still use just 10 % of their total calories for digestion, but total calories are way lower to start with, so you're talk really just dealing with very low calorie foods. These foods usually are very high in fiber and water. Water has no energy to give you, yet you burn calories moving it through your body, so it caould be called negative calorie, but what nutrient or energy do you gain? And non-soluble fiber doesn't break down into glucose before excretion, so no calorie gain there either. Negative calories is a great thought though!
    My two cents... not worth much. Other thoughts anyone?...
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Hey there,
    Thinking back to my nutrition class, the energy required to digest food is 10% of that foods total energy (Calories). Its called the thermic effect of food. Foods with lower energy density that are often said to be "negative calorie" foods still use just 10 % of their total calories for digestion, but total calories are way lower to start with, so you're talk really just dealing with very low calorie foods. These foods usually are very high in fiber and water. Water has no energy to give you, yet you burn calories moving it through your body, so it caould be called negative calorie, but what nutrient or energy do you gain? And non-soluble fiber doesn't break down into glucose before excretion, so no calorie gain there either. Negative calories is a great thought though!
    My two cents... not worth much. Other thoughts anyone?...
    TEF differs among macronutrients. Fat is around 2%, carbs 3%, protein around 20% but some studies have calculated it as high as 30%.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories