The forever mirerepresented first law of thermodynamics in d

Options
On my blog:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/KavemanKarg/view/first-law-of-thermodynamics-as-it-applies-to-the-body-158848

The first law of thermodynamics is an expression of the principle of conservation of energy.

The law states that energy can be transformed, i.e. changed from one form to another, but cannot be created nor destroyed. It is usually formulated by stating that the change in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work performed by the system on its surroundings.

The law, as applied by those who adhere to the calorie is a calorie theory is as follows:

Energy stored = energy in - energy utilized

What is often forgotten, OFTEN, is that this application of the law applies ONLY to closed loop systems. In other words, the system is complete in and of itself and does not share anything on the right hand side of the = with other systems

Unfortunately, the fat storage and muscle creation systems in our bodies are not closed loop systems. They interact with the digestive system, the endocrine system, then blood stream, and thousands of other biological processes from the cellular level on up to the entire body as one level, known as homeostasis.

To state a calorie is a calorie is to incorrectly apply this law, for the reason given above.

Let me give you an example of a closed loop, and an open loop system.

Assume your fat cells are a bath tub.

Water stored = Water in - water drained

In a closed loop bath tub, nothing else would interfere with the water level. THAT is a closed loop system.

In an open loop system, other factors and systems interchange. The weather system may greatly lower humidity and raise heat, evaporation. A child may come along and pour in a tonne of salt, changing water density and interfering with how much water the tub can hold, something may come along and pull the plug on the tub.

I realise this is not a perfect comparison, but it illustrates the point. Fat cells are not closed loop systems.

Another fault with calorie is a calorie is that it assumes all food is used for energy instead of other processes

Protein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), fiber is not burned for energy at all, and in fact does not have to be even listed as calories on food labels, which is why the carb count and calorie counts do not always jibe.

Protein can be shunted off to be used to build muscle instead, and its calories remain intact and unused as energy, just as fiber is used for something wholey different then energy production. Sugar alcohols like erythritol have calories but the body does not utilize them as calories even though it digests sugar alcohols well enough.

This is actually a trick, it is a repeat of my first point. Storing fat is not a closed loop system. If we feed the body, different macronutrients take different roles and only one of those possible roles is energy production.

Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)

Calorie for a calorie ignores the fact that the body has other ways to eliminate food and calories that does not involve burning at all.

We use the bathroom. I urinate ketones, and when I do, that is energy that is simply urinated away. As such, it cannot be recooped and stored as fat if unused. A wondeful example that illustrates fat storage is not a closed loop system.

We also urinate sugar. Thats right. Even healthy people do it sometimes. This is another example of calories going down the drain instead of to fat cells.

How does calorie is a calorie explain this? The first law of thermodynamics has not been broken, because that law applies to closed loop systems. At no time in these examples is energy destroyed without being used. However, other systems in an open system environment carried the energy away locked in, looked in other substances. Which is perfectly allowable by physics.

What about the effects of synergists and catalysts and antagnosists?

Lets look at Mad Max's car, Mr. Road Warrior. His car runs on gas, we run on calories. When he wants to go faster, he kicks in the supercharger and nitrogen, which acts as a catalyst for the gas, making it more explosive (he uses MORE GAS FASTER but on average his mileage drops!). If he added a bit of oil to the gas instead of nitrus, it would become less explosive or possibly useless. This is an antagonistic affect.

The body is full of catalysts, antagonists and synergists. Calorie is a calorie would have us deny these exists.

The ability of the body to expel calories without burning them

Covered above in excretion, this is further affected by insulin, leptin, etc... basically our insulin system, which is another OPEN loop system that interacts with the OPEN LOOP system of fat storage.

If insulin is very low, fat cells can only take in fat and carbs at a finite rate, however, your urinary system and bowels, fueled with ample water, can eliminate the extra. Bile is secreted by the liver into the bowels. Bile is created from lipids (fats). And is often just dropped in the bowl behind us after it fulfills its job.

"Calorie is a calorie" ignores this happens. It also ignores positive results in urine sugar tests where we simply urinate out sugar as our fat cells and muscles are not primed to uptake it fast enough due to limits set by the amount of present hormones.

I hope I have illustrated the following points to your satisfaction

At no time does the first law of thermodynmics break, ever
The law of energy stored=energy in - energy utilized applies to closed loop systems ONLY
That the above law of conservation and the simple calories in>calories spent = fat gain does not apply as fat gain is an OPEN looped system
That the body can eliminate calorie containing substances, even pure sugar, without burning it, due to built in self regulation systems such as your endocrine system
That catalysts, synergists and antagnosists can greatly influence energy utilization in the body
That calorie regulation on intake (caloric restriction goals) is only one of many factors that affect how much storing of nutrients your fat cells pull off
«1

Replies

  • servilia
    servilia Posts: 3,452 Member
    Options
    Thanks :)
  • This is so cool(:
  • digitaldigital
    digitaldigital Posts: 73 Member
    Options
    Overload on information >.<
  • oswaldbowser
    oswaldbowser Posts: 164 Member
    Options
    Sorry I dont wish to sound stupid but what is the point you are trying to get across !
  • KavemanKarg
    Options
    Sorry I don't wish to sound stupid but what is the point you are trying to get across !

    That the human body is infinitely complex and we still do not understand it all and all its processes, and that to apply one simple rule against it, especially when improperly applied, is misguided at best.

    It is my essay to refute the dogma, which I define as the triumph of belief over facts, that a calorie is a calorie, with easily verifiable fact that any curious reader can independently verify.

    Rather then making this argument in everyone one of the hundred or so posts where the first law is completely misunderstood and incorrectly applied, I confined it to my one singular post.

    As far as my points, I did summarize them at the end for anyone who read.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,695 Member
    Options
    A calorie is a calorie. A calorie is measurement of energy. Whether from a protein,fat or a carb, the ENERGY of a calorie is the same. This is not disputed by any science.
    The difference is the macronutrients and how they chemically react in each and every individual.
  • Goal_Seeker_1988
    Goal_Seeker_1988 Posts: 1,619 Member
    Options
    :smile: -B-U-M-P-:smile:
  • Rae6503
    Rae6503 Posts: 6,294 Member
    Options
    Very interesting. Thanks.
  • KavemanKarg
    Options
    A calorie is a calorie. A calorie is measurement of energy. Whether from a protein,fat or a carb, the ENERGY of a calorie is the same. This is not disputed by any science.
    The difference it the macronutrients and how they chemically react in each and every individual.

    Sorry, are you confirming what I just said or debating it? Seems we are saying the same thing.

    Eating less calories may not always work, EG starvation mode is often cited.

    If we are eating 3000 calories a day, and excreting 500 via other processes, and using another 500 worth of protein for tissue building blocks in muscles leaving 2000 calories for energy and storage, etc...,

    And then we drop our daily caloric intake to 2000, we may still end up using 2000 for energy and storage, as the adapts by not building up new tissue and not excreting excess in other ways.

    This is something we know happens in what we call "starvation mode", where food is rifled off to mission critical processes only and the rest is often hoarded in fat, and lean tissue and unessential organ maintenance takes a back seat and gets put on hold.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,017 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I've heard this arguement before, mostly from the low carb community trying to justify a metabolic advantage. The problem is the confusion on the out side of the energy balance equation, believing that some energy doesn't apply..........someone would have to prove that some metabolic dysfunction are somehow exempt from the laws of physics and prove it, which I haven't ever seen, yet. For now I'll stick with thermodynamcis applying to humans and all living creatures.
  • KavemanKarg
    Options
    Yeah, I've heard this arguement before, mostly from the low carb community trying to justify a metabolic advantage. The problem is the confusion on the out side of the energy balance equation, believing that some energy doesn't apply..........someone would have to prove that some metabolic dysfunction are somehow exempt from the laws of physics and prove it, which I haven't ever seen, yet. For now I'll stick with thermodynamcis applying to humans and all living creatures.

    Like I said, I define dogma as the triumph of belief over simple facts

    Urine sticks are cheap and you can see you are eliminating sugar without storing it after many types of meals. Pretty much everything stated is easily verifiable.

    If your response is "I refuse to believe it, you are just spouting the company line", that's fine.

    If your response is to go and further educate and find out I am wrong, I will love that. Then you can educate me on what you find. That is a process that helped bring me to low carb in the first place.

    Ideology is dangerous. I have, over 3 years, changed my opinion on dieting many times and will do so again as I learn more and see more results. The more you know, the more you realize you do not know, that is why constant certitude is dangerous.
  • PB67
    PB67 Posts: 376
    Options
    Typical carbophobic nonsense trying to dismiss the energy balance equation, and filled with misinformation
    Protein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), .

    You are not a rabbit. In HUMAN beings, Human metabolic pathways are vastly different from those found in rodents and ruminants.
    Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)

    NEWSFLASH! This is part of the "calories out" side of the energy balance equation. (As is the rest of your verbal vomit).
  • KavemanKarg
    Options
    Typical carbophobic nonsense trying to dismiss the energy balance equation, and filled with misinformation
    Protein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), .

    You are not a rabbit. In HUMAN beings, Human metabolic pathways are vastly different from those found in rodents and ruminants.

    Rabbit starvation is a term used to describe a condition in HUMANS, not rabbits. Not sure what to say on that further.
    Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)
    NEWSFLASH! This is part of the "calories out" side of the energy balance equation. (As is the rest of your verbal vomit).

    Not in the context of fat storage, and weight loss, where it is claimed this all goes to the fat cells. Please keep it in context of weight loss and fat cells to understand my point. You are basically confirming my arguement though. Other systems come into play, and take energy dogma would have us believe all gets packed into fat cells.

    If you want to argue that the first law applies to open loop systems, please do. I got Einstein on my side, you have Jillian Micheals on yours. Fat storage is NOT a closed loop system, as you are confirming. Every point I made is valid.

    Now for future reference:
    Rabbit starvation, also referred to as protein poisoning or mal de caribou, is a form of acute malnutrition caused by excess consumption of any lean meat (e.g., rabbit) coupled with a lack of other sources of nutrients usually in combination with other stressors, such as severe cold or dry environment. Symptoms include diarrhea, headache, fatigue, low blood pressure and heart rate, and a vague discomfort and hunger that can only be satisfied by consumption of fat or carbohydrates.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,017 Member
    Options
    Kaveman I consume a low carb diet, but not for some ellusive metabolic advantage that is not backed up by science. My signature says it all and I like delving into the details, but can't agree with you on this point. I've lost 65 lbs on this diet and through hard work I'm down to about 10% body fat at 6' 190lbs and I attribute it to it's satiating effects of a low carb diet and the ease of which I comply to this diet, not because sugar molecules miraculously escape through urine, or because some fat blocker allows for more undigested calories to be deposited in my dung.
  • KavemanKarg
    Options
    Kaveman I consume a low carb diet, but not for some ellusive metabolic advantage that is not backed up by science. My signature says it all and I like delving into the details, but can't agree with you on this point. I've lost 65 lbs on this diet and through hard work I'm down to about 10% body fat at 6' 190lbs and I attribute it to it's satiating effects of a low carb diet and the ease of which I comply to this diet, not because sugar molecules miraculously escape through urine, or because some fat blocker allows for more undigested calories to be deposited in my dung.

    Sorry, which metabolic process mentioned is not backed up by science?

    In fact, I did not even address low carb specifically, but rather the broad picture of what happens to matter (which stores caloric potential) moves through the body. This is all stuff I learned in first year nursing, so I am pretty confident to say it is indeed based in science.
  • PB67
    PB67 Posts: 376
    Options
    Typical carbophobic nonsense trying to dismiss the energy balance equation, and filled with misinformation
    Protein is not burned for energy unless fat and blood glucose is unavailable (see rabbit starvation), .

    You are not a rabbit. In HUMAN beings, Human metabolic pathways are vastly different from those found in rodents and ruminants.

    Rabbit starvation is a term used to describe a condition in HUMANS, not rabbits. Not sure what to say on that further.
    Another fault in calorie is a calorie, excretion without using as energy (Just passing through!)
    NEWSFLASH! This is part of the "calories out" side of the energy balance equation. (As is the rest of your verbal vomit).

    Not in the context of fat storage, and weight loss, where it is claimed this all goes to the fat cells. Please keep it in context of weight loss and fat cells to understand my point. You are basically confirming my arguement though. Other systems come into play, and take energy dogma would have us believe all gets packed into fat cells.


    Nice strawman. This is only claimed by carbophobes who wish to refute the energy balance equation. This is NOT what anyone with a brain has to say.

    If you actually pay attention, you'll see the law of thermodynamics invoked when carbophobes claim "I was eating 1200 calories, but I still got fat cuz of teh carbzez". You CAN'T create fat out of nothing.
    If you want to argue that the first law applies to open loop systems, please do. I got Einstein on my side, you have Jillian Micheals on yours. Fat storage is NOT a closed loop system, as you are confirming. Every point I made is valid.


    Neither one of these are experts on diet. I have Alan Aragon, James Kreiger, Lyle McDonald, and PubMed on my side.

    You have Gary Taubes and Mark Sisson.

    Now for future reference:
    Rabbit starvation, also referred to as protein poisoning or mal de caribou, is a form of acute malnutrition caused by excess consumption of any lean meat (e.g., rabbit) coupled with a lack of other sources of nutrients usually in combination with other stressors, such as severe cold or dry environment. Symptoms include diarrhea, headache, fatigue, low blood pressure and heart rate, and a vague discomfort and hunger that can only be satisfied by consumption of fat or carbohydrates.

    LOL.

    If you actually read the article you were referencing you would understand that we DO use protein for energy, but that it is rate-limiting. This does NOT mean that we don't have a metabolic pathway that converts protein to fat.

    Now stop talking about things you don't understand.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,017 Member
    Options
    I think what your saying is, a ketogenic diet through it's unique properies somehow bypasses the 1st law of thermodynamics, if it isn't, what are you trying to say and for what purpose.
  • PB67
    PB67 Posts: 376
    Options
    This is all stuff I learned in first year nursing, so I am pretty confident to say it is indeed based in science.

    Adorable.
  • PB67
    PB67 Posts: 376
    Options
    I just saw this on your blog:
    Other factors, fat cannot cross into adipose tissue without carbs. It cannot happen. So if you ate ONLY fat and protein, and no carbs, you would never EVER increase your body fat stores no matter how many calories you ate.

    You really are clueless.

    http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=319
  • bluebird321
    bluebird321 Posts: 733 Member
    Options
    A calorie is a calorie. A calorie is measurement of energy. Whether from a protein,fat or a carb, the ENERGY of a calorie is the same. This is not disputed by any science.
    The difference is the macronutrients and how they chemically react in each and every individual.

    Nice summarization. Thank you.