PDA

View Full Version : Opinions of a blog post "myth of a calorie"



Macrya
10-25-2013, 05:56 PM
I don't believe it but I just want to hear what people have to say about it. If someone came up to me and said what she is saying I wouldn't know how to respond especially when she keeps going on about 'hormonal responses' as a reason not to count them, here it is:
http://www.eatnakednow.com/eatnaked/2013/05/01/the-myth-of-the-calorie-and-why-i-dont-count-them/

Some of it summarised in a comment "One of the key pieces you’re missing here, Chase, is how the body works with the food we ingest and the hormonal cascade that ensues. Even weight watchers has recognized that a calorie is NOT a calorie and has adjusted their point system accordingly. A non-fat cookie does a very different thing in your body than an apple, even though calorically they may be the same. Part of it is about satiety, but a bigger part is about the hormonal response to the food consumed."

Gxp23
10-25-2013, 06:00 PM
Energy balance, thats about it. (My reply)

AlwaysTryin
10-25-2013, 06:20 PM
I don't believe it but I just want to hear what people have to say about it. If someone came up to me and said what she is saying I wouldn't know how to respond especially when she keeps going on about 'hormonal responses' as a reason not to count them, here it is:
http://www.eatnakednow.com/eatnaked/2013/05/01/the-myth-of-the-calorie-and-why-i-dont-count-them/

Some of it summarised in a comment "One of the key pieces you’re missing here, Chase, is how the body works with the food we ingest and the hormonal cascade that ensues. Even weight watchers has recognized that a calorie is NOT a calorie and has adjusted their point system accordingly. A non-fat cookie does a very different thing in your body than an apple, even though calorically they may be the same. Part of it is about satiety, but a bigger part is about the hormonal response to the food consumed."

Mentioning weight watchers is retarded. They said you could eat vegetable pizzas and unlimited fruit lol

Also it's a crap article. 200 calories is 200 calories


Of course satiety etc comes into play regarding overeating after

Author also assumes that someone will just eat all their daily calories from potato chips in the last paragraph. Common sense should apply, same for when writing an article

necon76
10-25-2013, 06:22 PM
Mentioning weight watchers is retarded. They said you could eat vegetable pizzas and unlimited fruit lol


Zero points bro. ZERO!

AAOBob
10-25-2013, 06:34 PM
Weight watchers new point system is moronic. My 6 foot tall, 165 lb, father in law is on the same points as my 135lb 5'7" mother in law. Being they are not morons they don't use the new point system.

eriquee
10-25-2013, 07:04 PM
Stupid article, of course less caloric dense foods will make it easier not to gain weight and lose it, and caloric dense foods will do the opposite.

But the whole point of calorie counting is being able to the those damn potatoe chips knowing that you wont get fat.

Of course you are not going to the eat the majority of your food intake of caloric dense foods because your satiety might be affected.

But using common sense there is no need to avoid highly processed foods and what not, just count the damn calorie.

She is comparing 1 carrot that has like 40 calories to a whole bag of potatoe chips that has 400 calories. I would like to see her compare how eating 400 calories worth of carrots would affect weight loss compared to someone who ate 400 calories worth of chips, the answer: no difference in weight loss, because a calorie is a calorie.

InItForFitness
10-25-2013, 07:12 PM
Well Chase.
http://i.imgur.com/4jnupvA.png (http://imgur.com/4jnupvA)