Posted on 09/01/2012 1:06:03 AM PDT by neverdem
Odds are you sometimes think about calories. They are among the most often counted things in the universe. When the calorie was originally conceived it was in the context of human work. More calories meant more capacity for work, more chemical fire with which to get the job done, coal in the human stove. Fat, it has been estimated, has nine calories per gram, whereas carbohydrates and proteins have just four; fiber is sometimes counted separately and gets awarded a piddling two. Every box of every food you have ever bought is labeled based on these estimates; too bad then that they are so often wrong.
A Food is Not a Food—Estimates of the number of calories in different kinds of foods measure the average number of calories we could get from those foods based only on the proportions of fat, carbohydrates, protein and sometimes fiber they contain (In essence, calories ingested minus calories egested). A variety of standard systems exist, all of which derive from the original developed by Wilbur Atwater more than a hundred years ago. They are all systems of averages. No food is average.
Differences exist even within a given kind of food. Take, for example, cooked vegetables. Cell walls in some plants are tougher to break down than those in others; nature, of course, varies in everything. If the plant material we eat has more of its cell walls broken down we can more of the calories from the goodies inside. In some plants, cooking ruptures most cell walls; in others, such as cassava, cell walls hold strong and hoard their precious calories in such a way that many of them pass through our bodies intact.
It is not just cooked vegetables though. Nuts flagrantly do their own thing, which might be expected given that...
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.scientificamerican.com ...
|
Nuh uh. Not the races. Other than for superficial characteristics all races are the same. |
Very interesting, Weedhoppa! Very interesting.
Neat. Thanks for posting this. (As a college student, I would have volunteered to eat raw meat for a week!)
Simple fact is not all calories are the same, and two people may very well have quite different metabolic characteristics.
The same features have been mapped out in plants that switch from CAM to C2 photosynthesis depending on the conditions.
Bookmarking for reading later.
The calories have certainly increased this past week due to all the snacking during the convention that’s piled up as well as what appears to be extra padding along the waist!
Oh noes, now Michelle is going to fix this too
If anyone has trouble putting that bag of chips down, or letting go of that box of ice cream, please visit OA.org for support and help.
thank you thank you thank you! very interesting read!
some ethnic groups being more equal than others.
My problem isn’t putting the box of ice cream down it is affording it. When Kroger’s does put Blue Bell on sale I have been known to buy 3 boxes at a time. Don’t separate me from my ice cream.
bookmark
Fat has to be broken down to get any net calories out of it. For every nominal 100 calories of fat you eat, you only get about 40 calories of net energy based on the net ATP generated.
Beer has been my downfall too which has gotten worse now that all of the fall beers are out again (loving the pumpkin ales!). After a couple of beers I want to snack which makes it worse as I snack on junk. I’m now going to limit myself to one beer a night at dinner and nothing more. Easier said than done though.
dogear
Which type and what study?
Interesting. Thanks for the ping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.