Are Calories all equal?
Replies
-
A calorie is a unit of measurement, like amperes or grams. Nothing more, nothing less. You wouldn't say, "well, that's a good inch and that's a bad inch". In terms of weightless a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Now, in terms of overall health, nutrition is a different story. If you needed to eat 1500 calories a day to have enough of a deficit to lose a pound a week you would lose weight regardless of whether or not you consumed 1500 calories worth of whole foods or 1500 calories worth of gummy bears. The issue is how would you feel? The trick is balance. There isn't anything inherently wrong with eating a calorie dense meal or treat, so long as you are eating at a deficit.9
-
A calorie is a unit of measurement, like amperes or grams. Nothing more, nothing less. You wouldn't say, "well, that's a good inch and that's a bad inch". In terms of weightless a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Now, in terms of overall health, nutrition is a different story. If you needed to eat 1500 calories a day to have enough of a deficit to lose a pound a week you would lose weight regardless of whether or not you consumed 1500 calories worth of whole foods or 1500 calories worth of gummy bears. The issue is how would you feel? The trick is balance. There isn't anything inherently wrong with eating a calorie dense meal or treat, so long as you are eating at a deficit.
I've heard of an angry inch.2 -
A calorie is a unit of measurement, like amperes or grams. Nothing more, nothing less. You wouldn't say, "well, that's a good inch and that's a bad inch". In terms of weightless a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Now, in terms of overall health, nutrition is a different story. If you needed to eat 1500 calories a day to have enough of a deficit to lose a pound a week you would lose weight regardless of whether or not you consumed 1500 calories worth of whole foods or 1500 calories worth of gummy bears. The issue is how would you feel? The trick is balance. There isn't anything inherently wrong with eating a calorie dense meal or treat, so long as you are eating at a deficit.
I've heard of an angry inch.
I had a friend they called "the angry inch." Never did find out why. :shrugs:6 -
katecarr1998 wrote: »Personally, I think we should be less concerned with the amount of calories in food and more concerned with their nutritional value. If one is solely concerned about their caloric consumption they may overlook the importance of nutrient dense foods. 200 calories is 200 calories, however, it is much more beneficial for your general wellbeing to be focusing on the nutritional content in food and not just the number of calories!
I see this sentiment posted frequently here. It's a fair point. But in my experience, nutrition took care of itself. And I bet I'm not the only one.
When I figured out that it was really all about calories for weight loss, that it was really as simple as an energy balance, I was free! I could eat whatever I wanted as long as I kept in an energy deficit.
But as I put this into practice, I figured out PDQ that eating a variety of nutritious food was a heck of a lot more likely to make me successful than just eating ice cream and candy all day. As I packed my lunches, I realized that fruits and vegetables were great ways to get plenty of food without too much of a dent in my budget. As I lost weight and got in better shape, I took more of an interest in my health. I also realized that I could have some portions of less nutritious treats as well, which relieved a huge burden in my (failed) prior weight loss attempts.
Why is there this assumption that people will automatically eat nothing but soda and cake if they understand that conservation of energy is the fundamental underlying principle? Aren't we adults? Aren't we supposed to know to eat nutritious food?13 -
katecarr1998 wrote: »Personally, I think we should be less concerned with the amount of calories in food and more concerned with their nutritional value. If one is solely concerned about their caloric consumption they may overlook the importance of nutrient dense foods. 200 calories is 200 calories, however, it is much more beneficial for your general wellbeing to be focusing on the nutritional content in food and not just the number of calories!
The simple answer to the simple questions is that a calorie is a calorie, and this is where people get confused and everyone gets blamed for saying people can eat whatever they want.
3 -
katecarr1998 wrote: »Personally, I think we should be less concerned with the amount of calories in food and more concerned with their nutritional value. If one is solely concerned about their caloric consumption they may overlook the importance of nutrient dense foods. 200 calories is 200 calories, however, it is much more beneficial for your general wellbeing to be focusing on the nutritional content in food and not just the number of calories!
I see this sentiment posted frequently here. It's a fair point. But in my experience, nutrition took care of itself. And I bet I'm not the only one.
When I figured out that it was really all about calories for weight loss, that it was really as simple as an energy balance, I was free! I could eat whatever I wanted as long as I kept in an energy deficit.
But as I put this into practice, I figured out PDQ that eating a variety of nutritious food was a heck of a lot more likely to make me successful than just eating ice cream and candy all day. As I packed my lunches, I realized that fruits and vegetables were great ways to get plenty of food without too much of a dent in my budget. As I lost wright and got in better shape, I took more of an interest in my health. I also realized that I could have some portions of less nutritious treats as well, which relieved a huge burden in my (failed) prior weight loss attempts.
Why is there this assumption that people will automatically eat nothing but soda and cake if they understand that conservation of energy is the fundamental underlying principle? Aren't we adults? Aren't we supposed to know to eat nutritious food?
So glad to hear that you are happy now and eating healthier! That's awesome!
My mom was diagnosed with breast cancer 3 times and recently passed away from stage 4 lung cancer! After she passed, I completely changed my eating habits. I only eat anti inflammatory foods and stay away from processed foods and processed sugars. After doing a lot of research on the links between cancer and food, I was shocked at what I found! According to some studies, up to 30% of cancers can be prevented just by eating a healthy diet and exercising regularly. Other studies show an even higher correlation at 70%.
I definitely agree that there is a misconception between calorie restriction and eating healthy. I think that most people are well aware that if they want to lose weight then they should eat fewer calories while eating nutritious foods! I apologize for coming across as being ignorant in that aspect! However, I do still believe that a lot of people are unaware of what is in the food we eat! I certainly was oblivious before doing a lot of research!
A lot of foods that are presumed to be healthy, due to fewer calorie content, just aren't that good for you. What I was trying to say was pay close attention to what's in food.
I definitely didn't get my point across in my previous post. I should have clearly stated why it was important to look at the nutritional value in foods. If you are trying to lose weight, then yes, you would definitely need to focus on eating fewer calories. I'm extremely passionate about nutrition now so I apologize if I came across as being ignorant in the aspects of eating fewer calories to lose weight.
My intentions were never to aggravate anyone, simply just to bring attention to the importance of a nutritious diet. I now realize I should've added a lot more information and background as to why it's important.
Hope everyone has an awesome day
4 -
katecarr1998 wrote: »katecarr1998 wrote: »Personally, I think we should be less concerned with the amount of calories in food and more concerned with their nutritional value. If one is solely concerned about their caloric consumption they may overlook the importance of nutrient dense foods. 200 calories is 200 calories, however, it is much more beneficial for your general wellbeing to be focusing on the nutritional content in food and not just the number of calories!
I see this sentiment posted frequently here. It's a fair point. But in my experience, nutrition took care of itself. And I bet I'm not the only one.
When I figured out that it was really all about calories for weight loss, that it was really as simple as an energy balance, I was free! I could eat whatever I wanted as long as I kept in an energy deficit.
But as I put this into practice, I figured out PDQ that eating a variety of nutritious food was a heck of a lot more likely to make me successful than just eating ice cream and candy all day. As I packed my lunches, I realized that fruits and vegetables were great ways to get plenty of food without too much of a dent in my budget. As I lost wright and got in better shape, I took more of an interest in my health. I also realized that I could have some portions of less nutritious treats as well, which relieved a huge burden in my (failed) prior weight loss attempts.
Why is there this assumption that people will automatically eat nothing but soda and cake if they understand that conservation of energy is the fundamental underlying principle? Aren't we adults? Aren't we supposed to know to eat nutritious food?
So glad to hear that you are happy now and eating healthier! That's awesome!
My mom was diagnosed with breast cancer 3 times and recently passed away from stage 4 lung cancer! After she passed, I completely changed my eating habits. I only eat anti inflammatory foods and stay away from processed foods and processed sugars. After doing a lot of research on the links between cancer and food, I was shocked at what I found! According to some studies, up to 30% of cancers can be prevented just by eating a healthy diet and exercising regularly. Other studies show an even higher correlation at 70%.
I definitely agree that there is a misconception between calorie restriction and eating healthy. I think that most people are well aware that if they want to lose weight then they should eat fewer calories while eating nutritious foods! I apologize for coming across as being ignorant in that aspect! However, I do still believe that a lot of people are unaware of what is in the food we eat! I certainly was oblivious before doing a lot of research!
A lot of foods that are presumed to be healthy, due to fewer calorie content, just aren't that good for you. What I was trying to say was pay close attention to what's in food.
I definitely didn't get my point across in my previous post. I should have clearly stated why it was important to look at the nutritional value in foods. If you are trying to lose weight, then yes, you would definitely need to focus on eating fewer calories. I'm extremely passionate about nutrition now so I apologize if I came across as being ignorant in the aspects of eating fewer calories to lose weight.
My intentions were never to aggravate anyone, simply just to bring attention to the importance of a nutritious diet. I now realize I should've added a lot more information and background as to why it's important.
Hope everyone has an awesome day
Mazel tov.
1 -
katecarr1998 wrote: »katecarr1998 wrote: »Personally, I think we should be less concerned with the amount of calories in food and more concerned with their nutritional value. If one is solely concerned about their caloric consumption they may overlook the importance of nutrient dense foods. 200 calories is 200 calories, however, it is much more beneficial for your general wellbeing to be focusing on the nutritional content in food and not just the number of calories!
I see this sentiment posted frequently here. It's a fair point. But in my experience, nutrition took care of itself. And I bet I'm not the only one.
When I figured out that it was really all about calories for weight loss, that it was really as simple as an energy balance, I was free! I could eat whatever I wanted as long as I kept in an energy deficit.
But as I put this into practice, I figured out PDQ that eating a variety of nutritious food was a heck of a lot more likely to make me successful than just eating ice cream and candy all day. As I packed my lunches, I realized that fruits and vegetables were great ways to get plenty of food without too much of a dent in my budget. As I lost wright and got in better shape, I took more of an interest in my health. I also realized that I could have some portions of less nutritious treats as well, which relieved a huge burden in my (failed) prior weight loss attempts.
Why is there this assumption that people will automatically eat nothing but soda and cake if they understand that conservation of energy is the fundamental underlying principle? Aren't we adults? Aren't we supposed to know to eat nutritious food?
So glad to hear that you are happy now and eating healthier! That's awesome!
My mom was diagnosed with breast cancer 3 times and recently passed away from stage 4 lung cancer! After she passed, I completely changed my eating habits. I only eat anti inflammatory foods and stay away from processed foods and processed sugars. After doing a lot of research on the links between cancer and food, I was shocked at what I found! According to some studies, up to 30% of cancers can be prevented just by eating a healthy diet and exercising regularly. Other studies show an even higher correlation at 70%.
I definitely agree that there is a misconception between calorie restriction and eating healthy. I think that most people are well aware that if they want to lose weight then they should eat fewer calories while eating nutritious foods! I apologize for coming across as being ignorant in that aspect! However, I do still believe that a lot of people are unaware of what is in the food we eat! I certainly was oblivious before doing a lot of research!
A lot of foods that are presumed to be healthy, due to fewer calorie content, just aren't that good for you. What I was trying to say was pay close attention to what's in food.
I definitely didn't get my point across in my previous post. I should have clearly stated why it was important to look at the nutritional value in foods. If you are trying to lose weight, then yes, you would definitely need to focus on eating fewer calories. I'm extremely passionate about nutrition now so I apologize if I came across as being ignorant in the aspects of eating fewer calories to lose weight.
My intentions were never to aggravate anyone, simply just to bring attention to the importance of a nutritious diet. I now realize I should've added a lot more information and background as to why it's important.
Hope everyone has an awesome day
@katecarr1998 Very good post. I hope you decide to stick around the forums
4 -
From a weight loss point or calories are equal doesn't matter where they come from you can lose weight eating snicker bars and drinking vodka. Now speaking from a nutritional point of view not the best diet program to follow.
From a nutritional point of view calories are different as far as how they affect your body. You need carbs for energy, fats for different reasons and proteins for muscle building. To put things in perspective a lot of people say to eliminate fats from your diet if you do a Google search on something called rabbit starvation it's an interesting process on what happens when your body doesn't get the fat that it needs. I know that by adding fats to my diet I actually didn't have the hunger pangs I used to have.0 -
The diff between the nutella and candy vs the potatoes cheese and tuna is, the first choice is nutrient poor, whereas the second is nutrient rich. Food has more than just calories in it! You need protein, carbs and fat plus vitamins and minerals. The nutella/candy will give you fat and carbs (nearly all sugar) with little protein and very few micronutrients (vitamins/minerals). Eat real food if you have it available. Save the candy bar for a treat when you have budgeted for the extra calories.2
-
The diff between the nutella and candy vs the potatoes cheese and tuna is, the first choice is nutrient poor, whereas the second is nutrient rich. Food has more than just calories in it! You need protein, carbs and fat plus vitamins and minerals. The nutella/candy will give you fat and carbs (nearly all sugar) with little protein and very few micronutrients (vitamins/minerals). Eat real food if you have it available. Save the candy bar for a treat when you have budgeted for the extra calories.
Nobody is disputing that all foods are not the same - or that we need protein, carbs,fat, micronutrients.
That doesnt make the calories unequal.
I am going on a journey from A to B - the distance is 2 miles.
If I walk it takes an hour, if I drive it takes 3 minutes.
But distance is still the same. A mile is a mile.
3 -
I do not believe calories are all equal. If you eat 900 calories of cake and candy, it will not have the same results as eating 900 calories of protein and healthy fats. Protein calories are less fattening than calories from carbs and fat, because protein takes more energy to metabolize. Whole foods also require more energy to digest than processed foods.
This is wrong- factually. There is 4 cals in 1g of carbs, and 4 cals in 1g of protein- The exact same amount. But protein is more satiating. You still need the carbs to produce energy (especially if you are active). 1g of Fat is 9 cals but this will keep you full and fats are very important for certain bodily functions.
When it comes to weight loss/maintenance 900 cals on bread and nutella is the exact same as 900 cals of potatoes and tuna. The only difference is the potatoes and Tuna will keep you a lot fuller for longer. The body doesn't know the difference between a calorie in a donut or a calorie in a vegetable, it is working all the time to break it down. The easier a food is digested the quicker it breaks down leading to you being hungry quicker.
You should have whatever you feel is best to have within your plan for that day. Sometimes it will be the potatoes, other times you'll want the nutella!1 -
We hold this truth to be self-evident that all calories are created equal.
They are a physical unit (amount of warmth that is required to heaten up 1g of water by 1° K) and describe the heat-value of (among many others) food.
"Heat-value", by the way, is to be taken literally as you can see if you ever hold a burning lighter to a potato chip.
Problem of the OP is that calories and nutritional value are quite often mixed up.
To stay with the example of the chips: They have almost the same heat-value (calories) as the plastic-wrap around them ... Strangely though the nutritional value of the plastic-bag is (at least for humanoid creatures) somewhere near 0.5 -
katecarr1998 wrote: »Personally, I think we should be less concerned with the amount of calories in food and more concerned with their nutritional value. If one is solely concerned about their caloric consumption they may overlook the importance of nutrient dense foods. 200 calories is 200 calories, however, it is much more beneficial for your general wellbeing to be focusing on the nutritional content in food and not just the number of calories!
I see this sentiment posted frequently here. It's a fair point. But in my experience, nutrition took care of itself. And I bet I'm not the only one.
When I figured out that it was really all about calories for weight loss, that it was really as simple as an energy balance, I was free! I could eat whatever I wanted as long as I kept in an energy deficit.
But as I put this into practice, I figured out PDQ that eating a variety of nutritious food was a heck of a lot more likely to make me successful than just eating ice cream and candy all day. As I packed my lunches, I realized that fruits and vegetables were great ways to get plenty of food without too much of a dent in my budget. As I lost weight and got in better shape, I took more of an interest in my health. I also realized that I could have some portions of less nutritious treats as well, which relieved a huge burden in my (failed) prior weight loss attempts.
Why is there this assumption that people will automatically eat nothing but soda and cake if they understand that conservation of energy is the fundamental underlying principle? Aren't we adults? Aren't we supposed to know to eat nutritious food?
My experience as well. I'm in a much different place now with what I eat, from where I was when I first started this whole process. But if I hadn't started out where I did, I know with 100% certainty that I wouldn't be where I'm at today. Understanding the actual science of weight loss/management ie CICO, gave me a good starting base and then as I got further along I felt empowered to make more changes 1 -
You can eat what you want, but personally, I'm eating the potatoes, cheese and tuna because it better fits my goals of eating more protein, less refined sugar. Plus, I'm a huge fan of cheese, and I'd take potatoes over bread any day.2
-
Not all calories are equal. They vary in macronutrients, micronutrients, satiety, taste, etc.1
-
-
@kwtilburyNot all calories are equal. They vary in macronutrients, micronutrients, satiety, taste, etc.
I didn't know calories had a taste!
Please take five seconds to Google what a calorie actually is then you may change your mind, or perhaps just change your sentence to "not all foods are equal". Which hopefully is self-evident.3 -
Not all calories are equal. They vary in macronutrients, micronutrients, satiety, taste, etc.
You're spanning the wagon in front of the horse. The calories don't vary in macronutrient and micronutrients etc., foods do, and macronutrient amounts have a fixed amount of calories per gram.4 -
Not all calories are equal. They vary in macronutrients, micronutrients, satiety, taste, etc.
No, you are mixing up "calories" and foods. The foods are not the same, they vary in calories, macronutrients, micronutrients, taste. They will also be more or less sating and satisfying to a particular person.
Note that a calorie is a calorie, but a food is not a food. The main reason for these apparent misunderstandings is that some people seem to substitute the word "food" for calories. No, 100 calories of steak and 100 calories of potatoes and 100 calories of raspberries are not the same (all could be good for you, though). They are all, however, going to add 100 calories to your total calories for the day, and if you regularly overeat eating all nutrient dense foods, all low nutrient foods, or (as is most common) a mix of the two, you will gain weight. That foods are nutrient dense doesn't negate the calories (and you wouldn't want it to!).1 -
On a very basic level all calories are equal.
My calorie Goal to lose weight at a good rate(around 1-2lbs per week) is 2000 calories per day.
In theory i can eat 3 Pizzas... or 4-5 Burgers and depending on the Pizza or Burger Size i will be within my 2000 Calorie goal and will actually lose weight. Wich is great for bad days.. because on really bad days now compared to before i tracked my Calories i am still mindfull of staying in my Calorie goal even if i eat bad stuff.. i never overeat anymore. Bad Stuff? yes from time to time.. Over my Calorie Goal? Nope.
The thing is though this will not lead to improved health and you wont feel very satiated in the long term.
In the long run i strive to cut down my carbs(still too much Pasta,White Rice etc) and add more Protein and Veggies. Its just so much more healthier and i actually do respond very well to Protein so i know my hunger and cravings will even go down.
To Summarize: You can lose weight no matter what you eat as long as you stay i your deficit. But slowly step by step its important to try to eat more healthy. We all need to indulge from time to time but 80-90% of the time it should be healthy.
0 -
A CALORIE IS ALWAYS A CALORIE. IT IS A UNIT OF ENERGY. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS.8
-
You can have a liter of water or a liter of milk. It's still a liter. Same with calories. 100 calories of cereal equals 100 calories of oatmeal. It's still 100 calories.Not all calories are equal. They vary in macronutrients, micronutrients, satiety, taste, etc.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
Yes. Calories are the same. The nutrition is different obviously but has nothing to do with the calories.
This seems right to me. The definition of "calorie" is "the amount of heat required at a pressure of one atmosphere to raise the temperature of one gram of water one degree Celsius".
The nutrient content of any particular food is another issue altogether.1 -
Yes! They are equal! Always!
What is not equal is the nutrient profile of different foods having the same number of calories.
It is important to not confuse those. The people who say that calories are not all equal are confusing these exact two things. And are refusing to educate themselves on the difference (based on the fact that I see this exact debate weekly on the forums).
Saying that not all calories are equal is like saying not all kilograms are equal or that not all miles are equal. A kilogram is a kilogram, a mile is a mile, just as a calorie is a calorie. Always.3 -
Yes! They are equal! Always!
What is not equal is the nutrient profile of different foods having the same number of calories.
It is important to not confuse those. The people who say that calories are not all equal are confusing these exact two things. And are refusing to educate themselves on the difference (based on the fact that I see this exact debate weekly on the forums).
Saying that not all calories are equal is like saying not all kilograms are equal or that not all miles are equal. A kilogram is a kilogram, a mile is a mile, just as a calorie is a calorie. Always.
That's true as far as it goes, but kilograms don't exist except as a characteristic of other things, and similarly calories are a characteristic of foods. They never exist in isolation. To some readers, it seems like a meaningless question. So I can understand people who read this question and think someone is really asking about nutrition, i.e., whether it matters what foods you get calories from.1 -
Yes! They are equal! Always!
What is not equal is the nutrient profile of different foods having the same number of calories.
It is important to not confuse those. The people who say that calories are not all equal are confusing these exact two things. And are refusing to educate themselves on the difference (based on the fact that I see this exact debate weekly on the forums).
Saying that not all calories are equal is like saying not all kilograms are equal or that not all miles are equal. A kilogram is a kilogram, a mile is a mile, just as a calorie is a calorie. Always.
That's true as far as it goes, but kilograms don't exist except as a characteristic of other things, and similarly calories are a characteristic of foods. They never exist in isolation. To some readers, it seems like a meaningless question. So I can understand people who read this question and think someone is really asking about nutrition, i.e., whether it matters what foods you get calories from.
So we should probably stop talking about things like weight, height, pressure, temperature... and kilograms, meters, inches, joules, degrees Celsius, degrees Farenheit, and ampoules - since a unit of measurement is meaningless without the context of which it is measuring? I really don't get this effort to constantly justify why people are not understanding something. People who are suggesting that a calorie is not just a calorie are wrong. They need to learn that it is a unit of measurement. Period. They also need to learn that nutrition is different than energy balance. Period. Trying to constantly justify why people are confused about something, or suggest that everyone else needs to change the way that they answer questions because some people lack basic understanding of scientific principles and reading comprehension seems like an extremely futile exercise.4 -
Yes! They are equal! Always!
What is not equal is the nutrient profile of different foods having the same number of calories.
It is important to not confuse those. The people who say that calories are not all equal are confusing these exact two things. And are refusing to educate themselves on the difference (based on the fact that I see this exact debate weekly on the forums).
Saying that not all calories are equal is like saying not all kilograms are equal or that not all miles are equal. A kilogram is a kilogram, a mile is a mile, just as a calorie is a calorie. Always.
That's true as far as it goes, but kilograms don't exist except as a characteristic of other things, and similarly calories are a characteristic of foods. They never exist in isolation. To some readers, it seems like a meaningless question. So I can understand people who read this question and think someone is really asking about nutrition, i.e., whether it matters what foods you get calories from.
I could understand this IF it weren't explained in great and exhaustive detail over and over, as this thread illustrates.
At this point, however, anyone who pretends to think that "a calorie is a calorie" means "all foods are the same for nutritional purposes" in such a discussion could not possibly be genuinely confused.
They have to be creating a strawman. I am curious why they would do that. Since you like to explain other posters, maybe you have a thought?4
Nutrition is a completely separate subject. 
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions