A calorie is a calorie ...
Replies
-
I love that we can all acknowledge that a kilogram is a kilogram or a pound is a pound, in the literal sense that they are each units of measurement (mass) and have civilised discussion regarding illustrative images such as this:
(not my picture, Internet image for demonstrative purposes only)
... however the same sort of exploration of the value of a calorie beyond being a unit of energy and how it applies to weight loss and health turns to chaos.
I'm confused what your point is? A calorie is a unit of measurement like a kilogram, agreed, and that's why that statement that you take such issue with "a calorie is a calorie" is accurate. A calorie is nothing more to weight loss than a unit of energy. Are you saying otherwise? How does the pic you are now posting relate to the original pic and the subsequent discussion about overall diet? I don't think this discussion is chaos, i think it has largely been civil and good points made from different perspectives.5 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
I'm confused what your point is? A calorie is a unit of measurement like a kilogram, agreed, and that's why that statement that you take such issue with "a calorie is a calorie" is accurate. A calorie is nothing more to weight loss than a unit of energy. Are you saying otherwise? How does the pic you are now posting relate to the original pic and the subsequent discussion about overall diet? I don't think this discussion is chaos, i think it has largely been civil and good points made from different perspectives.
I'm saying a calories (a unit of energy) can have different value to a body in a nutritional sense. I have never at all made reference in this conversation to this my comments on calories being just about weight loss.
Just as a kilogram lost or gained could affect a body differently depending on what is made of. Hence that analogy.
I don't 'take such issue' with anything,
0 -
I'm saying a calories (a unit of energy) can have different value to a body in a nutritional sense. I have never at all made reference in this conversation to this my comments on calories being just about weight loss.
Just as a kilogram lost or gained could affect a body differently depending on what is made of. Hence that analogy.
I don't 'take such issue' with anything,
I'm still a little lost. What do you think the pic is showing? Same woman at different weights and clearly a different physical appearance, likely due to her efforts to recomp through strength training. That's what I see.
How exactly do you think 100 calories of broccoli impacts the body differently than 100 calories of cookie? Not the nutrients in those foods, but specifically the calories.9 -
I love that we can all acknowledge that a kilogram is a kilogram or a pound is a pound, in the literal sense that they are each units of measurement (mass) and have civilised discussion regarding illustrative images such as this
A lb is a lb and those images don't have any more to do with that than a calorie is a calorie. However, when it comes to how someone looks, it's obviously not all about weight, just like when it comes to health it's not all about calories (or weight).
I'm not sure why you are trying so hard to read something in to "a calorie is a calorie" that no one means.9 -
I'm saying a calories (a unit of energy) can have different value to a body in a nutritional sense.
I really do think this is the essence of the misunderstanding, if there is one. A "calorie" is just energy. You are referring to the nutrition that comes with the food (micronutrients or macronutrients), which is why I keep saying you are using "calories" as if it were slang for "food," which people do, of course, but is not how it's meant in "a calorie is a calorie."
I bet if you asked people if they think foods are all equal for nutritional purposes they'd say "no." I certainly would.7 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
I really do think this is the essence of the misunderstanding, if there is one. A "calorie" is just energy. You are referring to the nutrition that comes with the food (micronutrients or macronutrients), which is why I keep saying you are using "calories" as if it were slang for "food," which people do, of course, but is not how it's meant in "a calorie is a calorie."
I bet if you asked people if they think foods are all equal for nutritional purposes they'd say "no." I certainly would.
It's like saying "a litre is a litre". It's true, regardless of whether one is a litre of oil and the other a litre of water.3 -
Look, I have a degree in organic produce, and have since studied a LOT about nutrition.
All calories are not equal. That's like saying, "A pound is a pound!" When you lose weight. No. You could lose a pound of fat, and that would be awesome. Or, you could lose a pound of muscle, which is horrible. It's much more complex.
Put simply, the type of calories we eat determine how well our systems function. And, primarily important to weight loss, they determine blood sugar and insulin levels, along with other hormones that basically decide how you will use a calorie.
Bottom line: A calorie from white bread or refined sugar is most efficiently stored in your body as reserve energy in the form of glucose. Guess what the organ is for energy storage? Yep. Fat cells.
However, a calorie that comes from broccoli takes nearly double the energy to convert it into glucose, and is much more efficiently broken down into usable vitamins and minerals. Therefore, 100 calories from a donut will go directly to your waist. 100 calories from a vegetable will go towards fueling your systems. Mainly your excretory system; which is what actually gets stuff out of storage in your fat cells and eliminated from the body.
So, no. A calorie is not just a calorie.2 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »Look, I have a degree in organic produce, and have since studied a LOT about nutrition.
All calories are not equal. That's like saying, "A pound is a pound!" When you lose weight. No. You could lose a pound of fat, and that would be awesome. Or, you could lose a pound of muscle, which is horrible. It's much more complex.
Put simply, the type of calories we eat determine how well our systems function. And, primarily important to weight loss, they determine blood sugar and insulin levels, along with other hormones that basically decide how you will use a calorie.
Bottom line: A calorie from white bread or refined sugar is most efficiently stored in your body Mas reserve energy in the form of glucose. Guess what the organ is for energy storage? Yep. Fat cells.
However, a calorie that comes from broccoli takes nearly double the energy to convert it into glucose, and is much more efficiently broken down into usable vitamins and minerals. Therefore, 100 calories from a donut will go directly to your waist. 100 calories from a vegetable will go towards fueling your systems. Mainly your excretory system; which is what actually gets stuff out of storage in your fat cells and eliminated from the body.
So, no. A calorie is not just a calorie.
The amount of woo in this post is epic
14 -
LifeLongFoodLvr wrote: »
I can't wait when they tear this post to shreds because you're wrong.
And your professional education on the matter is...?1 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »Look, I have a degree in organic produce, and have since studied a LOT about nutrition.
All calories are not equal. That's like saying, "A pound is a pound!" When you lose weight. No. You could lose a pound of fat, and that would be awesome. Or, you could lose a pound of muscle, which is horrible. It's much more complex.
Put simply, the type of calories we eat determine how well our systems function. And, primarily important to weight loss, they determine blood sugar and insulin levels, along with other hormones that basically decide how you will use a calorie.
Bottom line: A calorie from white bread or refined sugar is most efficiently stored in your body Mas reserve energy in the form of glucose. Guess what the organ is for energy storage? Yep. Fat cells.
However, a calorie that comes from broccoli takes nearly double the energy to convert it into glucose, and is much more efficiently broken down into usable vitamins and minerals. Therefore, 100 calories from a donut will go directly to your waist. 100 calories from a vegetable will go towards fueling your systems. Mainly your excretory system; which is what actually gets stuff out of storage in your fat cells and eliminated from the body.
So, no. A calorie is not just a calorie.
What's a "degree in organic produce"?15 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
What's a "degree in organic produce"?
I actually googled it because I've never heard of a degree in 'organic produce' and nothing legitimate popped up. Confused as to what pps credentials actually are?7 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
What's a "degree in organic produce"?WinoGelato wrote: »
What's a "degree in organic produce"?
It's a horticulture degree with an emphasis in produce production using organic and sustainable methods. But 90% of the population doesn't know what the word horticulture means.1 -
LifeLongFoodLvr wrote: »
I don't but others know more than both of us and they WILL prove you wrong.
There is no such thing as proof in this matter. There is so much evidence that can be taken in a number of ways. When you understand chemistry and the makeup of food, and how it reacts within your body, there is a lot of insight. However, there is still a great deal to learn and discover. So there will be no proof, because according to the scientific method, there is not enough information available to conclusively prove me wrong.1 -
LifeLongFoodLvr wrote: »
But you are and we all know that so that's enough for me NOT to take seriously anything you post.
To each their own. I understand science, and I've lost 11 lbs in 15 days. Because I know how hormones work. And I'm usually over my calorie goal. But nobody is forcing you to agree with me.0 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »
To each their own. I understand science, and I've lost 11 lbs in 15 days. Because I know how hormones work. And I'm usually over my calorie goal. But nobody is forcing you to agree with me.
Do you actually think you've lost 11lbs of fat in 15 days? Like, seriously?12 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »
Do you actually think you've lost 11lbs of fat in 15 days? Like, seriously?
It's obviously not all fat. I didn't say I had lost 11 lbs of fat. I said I had lost 11 lbs. But there is also no real limit to how much you lose in a certain amount of time when you understand how the fat organ works, why it stores energy, and how you can overcome that process. I'm confused as to why there is such hostility towards basic scientific principles.1 -
A calorie is a calorie only applies to dieters calorie counting and bomb calorimeters. No reputable scientist believes there's no difference between calories - if that was true it wouldn't be necessary to do things like hold protein constant or list diet quality as a possible confounder in diet studies.3
-
sydney_bosque wrote: »
It's a horticulture degree with an emphasis in produce production using organic and sustainable methods. But 90% of the population doesn't know what the word horticulture means.
Well what away to end my night realizing that I am one of the 10%!
What makes you think that 90% of the population doesn't know what the word horticulture means? It's a fairly common word.
13 -
Just do me a favor and research how blood sugar and insulin affect weight gain/loss. Then tell me I'm wrong. In strictly terms of a measurement of energy, yes calories are just a unit of measurement. But that's not what was implied. We are talking about calories compared with calories in different foods. And even with exercise. You can't just create a calorie deficit and lose weight. It's just not that simple.0
-
Well what away to end my night realizing that I am one of the 10%!
What makes you think that 90% of the population doesn't know what the word horticulture means? It's a fairly common word.
You would be amazed at the amount of people who have no clue what it means.0 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »Look, I have a degree in organic produce, and have since studied a LOT about nutrition.
All calories are not equal. That's like saying, "A pound is a pound!" When you lose weight. No. You could lose a pound of fat, and that would be awesome. Or, you could lose a pound of muscle, which is horrible. It's much more complex.
Put simply, the type of calories we eat determine how well our systems function. And, primarily important to weight loss, they determine blood sugar and insulin levels, along with other hormones that basically decide how you will use a calorie.
Bottom line: A calorie from white bread or refined sugar is most efficiently stored in your body as reserve energy in the form of glucose. Guess what the organ is for energy storage? Yep. Fat cells.
However, a calorie that comes from broccoli takes nearly double the energy to convert it into glucose, and is much more efficiently broken down into usable vitamins and minerals. Therefore, 100 calories from a donut will go directly to your waist. 100 calories from a vegetable will go towards fueling your systems. Mainly your excretory system; which is what actually gets stuff out of storage in your fat cells and eliminated from the body.
So, no. A calorie is not just a calorie.
There is a lot going on in this post, but I am particularly curious about the bolded part. Are you claiming that the excretory system is involved in lipolysis of adipose tissue?13 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »Just do me a favor and research how blood sugar and insulin affect weight gain/loss. Then tell me I'm wrong. In strictly terms of a measurement of energy, yes calories are just a unit of measurement. But that's not what was implied. We are talking about calories compared with calories in different foods. And even with exercise. You can't just create a calorie deficit and lose weight. It's just not that simple.
I've lost around 50lbs and have been in successful maintenance for several years now and yep, it really is that simple
14 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »Just do me a favor and research how blood sugar and insulin affect weight gain/loss. Then tell me I'm wrong. In strictly terms of a measurement of energy, yes calories are just a unit of measurement. But that's not what was implied. We are talking about calories compared with calories in different foods. And even with exercise. You can't just create a calorie deficit and lose weight. It's just not that simple.
It doesn't actually work like that. As a person of science, you should know that the burden of proof lies with you to provide sources to back up your claims. Peer reviewed scientific studies of course.
And actually, you can just create a calorie deficit and lose weight. That's exactly how it works.
9 -
There is a lot going on in this post, but I am particularly curious about the bolded part. Are you claiming that the excretory system is involved in lipolysis of adipose tissue?
I'm claiming it is what's responsible for elimination of elements that have been stored within a fat cell. Not the process that removes it from the fat cell, but the process that removes it from the body.0 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »
I've lost around 50lbs and have been in successful maintenance for several years now and yep, it really is that simple
Are you claiming that you can eat bread, sugar, and carbs and as long as you are still under your calorie goal then the weight will drop off?0 -
LifeLongFoodLvr wrote: »
Yes...That's what everyone is claiming...Because it's TRUE
So... You don't eat vegetables, fruit, or lean protein?0 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »
So... You don't eat vegetables, fruit, or lean protein?
What does that have to do with anything? This took a bizarre turn quickly...10 -
WinoGelato wrote: »
It doesn't actually work like that. As a person of science, you should know that the burden of proof lies with you to provide sources to back up your claims. Peer reviewed scientific studies of course.
And actually, you can just create a calorie deficit and lose weight. That's exactly how it works.
Possibly at first. However, as you maintain a deficit, your body will adjust. It will shift it's metabolic processes to adapt to lesser calories. Unless you properly nourish it. I am more than happy to provide support. I simply claimed there was no valid way to "prove" me wrong because proof doesn't exist.
And after a prolonged period of calorie deficit without compensating nutrition, your body will begin to work against you and hold on to as much energy as it can. This has been studied and supported with evidence multiple times.1 -
sydney_bosque wrote: »
So... You don't eat vegetables, fruit, or lean protein?
So you didn't read the whole thread, right?
Because we already went through how no one ever says to just eat doughnuts, we just say you can eat some doughnuts and still lose weight just fine.14 -
My diet consists mostly of processed foods (time constraints and frankly I like them). I eat plenty of carbs and sugar along with protein and fat. Over the last 6 months changing nothing but the number of calories I eat I've lost weight in almost the exact amount predicted by my deficit. Maybe I'm just a special snowflake <shrug>11
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.8K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions