Not all calories are equal
Options
asiandoll77
Posts: 1 Member
I usually drink my coffee with Nestle's chocolate syrup (1/2 T) and real cream (2tsp). I only have one cup in the morning with breakfast. I had a coupon for International Delights creamer so decided to try it. Checked it for high fructose corn syrup and there wasn't any. I measure EVERYTHING, only added enough to come about even with the calorie count of my coffee with the chocolate syrup and cream. For 2 weeks, my weight gradually crept up and up again. I went back to my old way and the weight is dropping off again. Anyone else have a similar problem with this or other products?
1
Replies
-
Two weeks isn't really long enough to draw any concrete conclusion. Could be the ID, could be something else. My weight can swing 5 lbs in any direction on any given day. Most people are only losing 1-2lbs a week so that's a max 4lbs which is well within that.
That being said, I always prefer real ingredients to processed products. Not even from a calorie perspective, I just think real food us better.1 -
It's not the creamer. Can you conclusively say that nothing else was different for the entire two weeks? You ate the same foods every single day?10
-
So the argument is that replacing some small number of calories daily of cream and Nestle's chocolate syrup with some equal number of calories of International delights creamer makes the difference between weight gain or loss? That makes no sense.
Out of curiosity, what's the alleged mechanism?
We are comparing, what? 17 calories of half and half (or is it heavy cream) plus 25 calories of syrup (made up of sugar and cocoa) with about 42 calories of creamer (made up of sugar and palm oil).
So the argument seems to be that the palm oil in a bit more of a tablespoon of the creamer causes weight gain vs. the fat in cream? Hmm.
Obviously, neither addition to the coffee is "unprocessed" of course.13 -
This might be the most ridiculous post I've read in quite a while.23
-
17 -
This might be the most ridiculous post I've read in quite a while.
It makes just as much sense as every other "all calories are not equal" thread (which is to say, not much).
OP, there's another cause. Monthly hormonal fluctuations, sodium content in your food, water balance in the body, etc. It has nothing to do with your coffee creamer.12 -
Unless you're swimming in this stuff, it's not causing actual fat gains. There's all sorts of things that can cause the scale to bump up, without it being fat gains. Sodium intake, water retention, pms/time of month/menopause/hormones, digestion timing, constipation, batteries on scale going bad, water retention due to exercise etc etc. I can fluctuate up to 5lbs in a single day, and it has nothing to do with gaining actual fat.6
-
It's really not the coffee creamer. Really not.
As lemurcat asked, please explain the mechanism of action.
The macro breakdown for your Nestle/Light Cream coffee (without the coffee) is 8g C/6g F/ and about 80 calories.
The macro breakdown for a similar amount of International Delights in French vanilla is around 11g C/4g F for 80 calories.
Are you seriously claiming a weight gain over so small a macro distribution? Please explain the mechanism here, since I'm unaware how there'd even be a thermic effect happening from more fat and less carbs.
Laughable.9 -
You 'measure' everything.
There's your problem. Seriously. It's not 'calories' fault, it's the inaccuracy of measuring cups and spoons and eyeballing/guessing postions that's doing you in.
Open your diary.
Weight loss is NOT about the food that you eat or don't eat. HFCS does not cause obesity. Coffee creamer does not cause obesity. No foods cause obesity. Eating more calories than you need to maintain your current weight causes weight gain. End of story. I have chocolate regularly, coffee creamer every day, and eat 'junk' alongside nutritious foods and a losing fine. I weigh all my food though. If I stop weighing my food, I end up maintaining my current weight.
Calories are created equal. Calories are a unit to measure energy. A calorie is a calorie, just like and inch is an inch, or a pound is a pound. Calories are NOT nutrition.
Listen to those who have lost all they weight and maintained it. They KNOW.13 -
*portions. Ugh...headache typing sucks.1
-
You used a coupon and put weight on, stopped using the coupon and started losing again. I see where the blame lies!23
-
CurlyCockney wrote: »You used a coupon and put weight on, stopped using the coupon and started losing again. I see where the blame lies!
Damn - throwing out all my coupons right now!8 -
CurlyCockney wrote: »You used a coupon and put weight on, stopped using the coupon and started losing again. I see where the blame lies!
Excellent, insightful point.
Plus, vindication for my own failure to ever use coupons. I love it.7 -
You'd have to use an extra 600 calories of creamer a day or something for that to make a difference in your weight (assuming a 500 calorie deficit). And even then, it would take more than 2 weeks to show up on the scale.
Just saying.
15 -
Not all inches are equal either. Oh wait, they are. There are way to many confounding factors to say it was just the creamer.6
-
I think the overall sentiment of OP's post was intended to be extrapolated to a generalization along the lines of "Some people have experienced that WHAT your diet is comprised of may make a difference towards health and fat loss."1
-
geneticexpectations wrote: »I think the overall sentiment of OP's post was intended to be extrapolated to a generalization along the lines of "Some people have experienced that WHAT your diet is comprised of may make a difference towards health and fat loss."
Definitely not which kind of 10 ml creamer you use in your morning coffee.5 -
stevencloser wrote: »geneticexpectations wrote: »I think the overall sentiment of OP's post was intended to be extrapolated to a generalization along the lines of "Some people have experienced that WHAT your diet is comprised of may make a difference towards health and fat loss."
Definitely not which kind of 10 ml creamer you use in your morning coffee.
Haha, yeah definitely not. But to be constructive, the ensuing discussion probably should have gone broader0 -
geneticexpectations wrote: »I think the overall sentiment of OP's post was intended to be extrapolated to a generalization along the lines of "Some people have experienced that WHAT your diet is comprised of may make a difference towards health and fat loss."
No, it was based on an alleged difference between 42 calories per day of Nestle syrup+cream vs. 42 calories of creamer.
I'm still curious about the mechanism, or how that difference has any real effect on "what your diet is comprised of." In fact, this is one of many reasons posts like this get the reaction they do: OP is claiming that she lost weight or gained with the same calories based on using different stuff in her coffee. That is her evidence that "calories aren't equal." To extrapolate to a bigger point, the argument seems to be that consuming creamer (because "not real food" or what, I dunno) makes you gain, even if at a deficit, which I see no reason at all to believe. Moreover, it suggests that eating a good diet (a separate topic from weight loss, but one I am interested in) is not about consuming the majority of your calories from nutrient dense foods, getting adequate protein, healthy fats, plenty of fiber, and lots of vegetables, stuff like that, but about completely avoiding creamer. That approach to nutrition is, IMO, not particularly well-informed. (And certainly has nothing to do with calories not being equal, which they are, even though foods, of course, differ.)
But hey, I never eat creamer (like my coffee black), so maybe that's why I lost weight.
Then again, I never eat Nestle chocolate syrup. Maybe if I added it I'd magically start losing again, even without a deficit? Cool!8 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »geneticexpectations wrote: »I think the overall sentiment of OP's post was intended to be extrapolated to a generalization along the lines of "Some people have experienced that WHAT your diet is comprised of may make a difference towards health and fat loss."
No, it was based on an alleged difference between 42 calories per day of Nestle syrup+cream vs. 42 calories of creamer.
I'm still curious about the mechanism, or how that difference has any real effect on "what your diet is comprised of." In fact, this is one of many reasons posts like this get the reaction they do: OP is claiming that she lost weight or gained with the same calories based on using different stuff in her coffee. That is her evidence that "calories aren't equal." To extrapolate to a bigger point, the argument seems to be that consuming creamer (because "not real food" or what, I dunno) makes you gain, even if at a deficit, which I see no reason at all to believe. Moreover, it suggests that eating a good diet (a separate topic from weight loss, but one I am interested in) is not about consuming the majority of your calories from nutrient dense foods, getting adequate protein, healthy fats, plenty of fiber, and lots of vegetables, stuff like that, but about completely avoiding creamer. That approach to nutrition is, IMO, not particularly well-informed. (And certainly has nothing to do with calories not being equal, which they are, even though foods, of course, differ.)
But hey, I never eat creamer (like my coffee black), so maybe that's why I lost weight.
Then again, I never eat Nestle chocolate syrup. Maybe if I added it I'd magically start losing again, even without a deficit? Cool!
I guess I'm trying to steer the discussion away from that godforesaken creamer. Hard to believe such an infantesmal portion of one's diet can have any significant effects with other variables kept constant. I think we all agree on that.
How you are addressing the topic is more useful I think.
Language can often be inflammatory and incite frustation. I think a calorie from x food and a calorie from y food is of course equal or else they would be called something else if they weren't equal. A unit of whatever measurement is just what it is. And I think attacking that fact can really piss off a lot of people.
I guess on a more practical level, I wanted to take the discussion to a different place. Do some people find that changing what they eat affects weight loss? I admit, I don't really count calories, but I found that I have had a sustained dramatic fat loss for about 4 years by changing what I ate (200 lbs at >35% body fat to 150 lbs at <15% body fat). I'm not denying CICO, nor am I denying that it's more complex than CICO. I'm just stating the action and consequence - that changing what I ate without any sort of calorie awareness whatsoever seemed to work well for me. And I guess I enjoyed it b/c I don't really like counting and measuring. I know that may be weird to some, but I dunno, it is what it is. Anyone else?2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions