4 ms·

The "a calorie is a calorie" approach to diet and health has been thoroughly debunked. Our bodies metabolize carbs, protein, and fat, very differently. If a ca

by tbv 9y ago

The "a calorie is a calorie" approach to diet and health has been thoroughly debunked. Our bodies metabolize carbs, protein, and fat, very differently. If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes. All things equal except the composition of their diet, the person on the HF diet will stay lean and feel consistently satiated, while the LF person will put on more fat and feel hungry far more frequently than the HF. IMO, the claim that all calories are created equally is the most damaging "science" that's been put forth as common knowledge about dieting.

matwood 9y ago
> IMO, the claim that all calories are created equally is the most damaging "science" that's been put forth as common knowledge about dieting. I completely disagree. At the end of the day losing weight is about changing the amount of calories a person consumes vs. what they use. The most damaging science is trying to say it's not about calories at all when in fact that is almost all it is about in healthy person. Now, if you want to argue about satiation and the ability to keep up with a diet, then the type of food matters, but for strictly weight loss a person has to cut calories (or add activity).
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- tbv 9y ago
  > At the end of the day losing weight is about changing the amount of calories a person consumes vs. what they use. Over an extended period, yes, this bears out because the law of thermodynamics. But the question is - can people adhere to a calorie-restricted diet long enough to see meaningful results? More importantly, will they simultaneously be able to build muscle and maintain normal bodily functions (thyroids tend to stop functioning normally during extended calorie restriction, especially when fat intake is low)? You will have a much easier time achieving a healthy body composition and feeling satisfied while eating a high fat low carb diet, than you would eating the same amount of calories on a low fat high carb diet. I say that the "calories in, calories out" approach to dieting is problematic because it's simply not as effective as switching to a HFLC diet. It makes building muscle tissue difficult, it encourages miserable dieting tactics, and taken to the extreme (which many people do) is a threat to a person's health.
naasking 9y ago
> Our bodies metabolize carbs, protein, and fat, very differently. If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes. Show me those studies and we can discuss it further. Because the studies I've seen demonstrated slightly different results for each diet, but not wildly different as you're implying, so calorie counting works just fine.
eyeball 9y ago
" If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes." Is there any evidence of that actually happening? Starkly different outcomes? Everything I've seen shows weight change to be pretty damn close on matched calorie diets with the macro mix not mattering much.
irahul 9y ago
> If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, A calorie is a calorie, period. "Sawdust has calories. Try eating that". Doesn't matter. Whether the body can extract calories out of it doesn't change the definition of calorie and a calorie is still a calorie. "But some foods are more filling and satiating than others despite the calories being the same" Still doesn't matter. How does how long the body takes to process calories out of food affect "a calorie is a calorie". You must already know this. I might have been a bit pedagogical but that's because "a calorie is a calorie" is false is one of my pet peeves. More to the point: > then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes. Studies please. Especially for "starkly different outcomes". I can copy pasta the famous /r/fitness link dump which is posted every time keto comes up but I will wait for you to find me some studies supporting your argument first. > All things equal except the composition of their diet, the person on the HF diet will stay lean and feel consistently satiated, while the LF person will put on more fat and feel hungry far more frequently than the HF. So I can feed 5000 kcal/day to a 5 feet girl and she will stay lean as long as it's olive oil shots? > IMO, the claim that all calories are created equally is the most damaging "science" that's been put forth as common knowledge about dieting. But all calories are equal, by definition. Some people do well on a high fat/high protein diet, some don't. You want to lose weight, burn calories(eat less, move more) above your tdee. You want to gain weight, give your body more calories than it burns. As annoying as hearing this may sound(it isn't annoying to me but for argument's sake), that's all there is to it. People have lost weight and maintained lean mass on all sorts of shitty diets. If high fat diet works for you, superb. But it's not a panacea and the science is no where as clear cut as you make it out to be. In fact, keeping protein constant, a high fat and high carb diet had the same results.
- thedz 9y ago
  Yes! To reiterate: the backlash against calorie counting into not taking calories into account at all is just as damaging. Certain foods help satiate better than others at lesser calories -- which is why some people find that eating 1500 calories of high fat and protein foods to be much easier to live with than eating 1500 carb heavy calories. IMO, that's one of the big draw of keto. It's not that you can magically eat 5000 calories of cheese and meat and lose weight. It's that you can eat a caloric amount at a deficit and still feel energetic and full and like you didn't miss out on anything.

by tbv 9y ago

matwood 9y ago

> IMO, the claim that all calories are created equally is the most damaging "science" that's been put forth as common knowledge about dieting. I completely disagree. At the end of the day losing weight is about changing the amount of calories a person consumes vs. what they use. The most damaging science is trying to say it's not about calories at all when in fact that is almost all it is about in healthy person. Now, if you want to argue about satiation and the ability to keep up with a diet, then the type of food matters, but for strictly weight loss a person has to cut calories (or add activity).

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
tbv 9y ago
> At the end of the day losing weight is about changing the amount of calories a person consumes vs. what they use. Over an extended period, yes, this bears out because the law of thermodynamics. But the question is - can people adhere to a calorie-restricted diet long enough to see meaningful results? More importantly, will they simultaneously be able to build muscle and maintain normal bodily functions (thyroids tend to stop functioning normally during extended calorie restriction, especially when fat intake is low)? You will have a much easier time achieving a healthy body composition and feeling satisfied while eating a high fat low carb diet, than you would eating the same amount of calories on a low fat high carb diet. I say that the "calories in, calories out" approach to dieting is problematic because it's simply not as effective as switching to a HFLC diet. It makes building muscle tissue difficult, it encourages miserable dieting tactics, and taken to the extreme (which many people do) is a threat to a person's health.

naasking 9y ago

> Our bodies metabolize carbs, protein, and fat, very differently. If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes. Show me those studies and we can discuss it further. Because the studies I've seen demonstrated slightly different results for each diet, but not wildly different as you're implying, so calorie counting works just fine.

eyeball 9y ago

" If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes." Is there any evidence of that actually happening? Starkly different outcomes? Everything I've seen shows weight change to be pretty damn close on matched calorie diets with the macro mix not mattering much.

irahul 9y ago

> If a calorie is a calorie is a calorie, A calorie is a calorie, period. "Sawdust has calories. Try eating that". Doesn't matter. Whether the body can extract calories out of it doesn't change the definition of calorie and a calorie is still a calorie. "But some foods are more filling and satiating than others despite the calories being the same" Still doesn't matter. How does how long the body takes to process calories out of food affect "a calorie is a calorie". You must already know this. I might have been a bit pedagogical but that's because "a calorie is a calorie" is false is one of my pet peeves. More to the point: > then we need to be able to explain why two people eating the same amount of calories per day, but one eating a high fat, low carb diet, and the other a low fat high carb diet see starkly different outcomes. Studies please. Especially for "starkly different outcomes". I can copy pasta the famous /r/fitness link dump which is posted every time keto comes up but I will wait for you to find me some studies supporting your argument first. > All things equal except the composition of their diet, the person on the HF diet will stay lean and feel consistently satiated, while the LF person will put on more fat and feel hungry far more frequently than the HF. So I can feed 5000 kcal/day to a 5 feet girl and she will stay lean as long as it's olive oil shots? > IMO, the claim that all calories are created equally is the most damaging "science" that's been put forth as common knowledge about dieting. But all calories are equal, by definition. Some people do well on a high fat/high protein diet, some don't. You want to lose weight, burn calories(eat less, move more) above your tdee. You want to gain weight, give your body more calories than it burns. As annoying as hearing this may sound(it isn't annoying to me but for argument's sake), that's all there is to it. People have lost weight and maintained lean mass on all sorts of shitty diets. If high fat diet works for you, superb. But it's not a panacea and the science is no where as clear cut as you make it out to be. In fact, keeping protein constant, a high fat and high carb diet had the same results.

thedz 9y ago
Yes! To reiterate: the backlash against calorie counting into not taking calories into account at all is just as damaging. Certain foods help satiate better than others at lesser calories -- which is why some people find that eating 1500 calories of high fat and protein foods to be much easier to live with than eating 1500 carb heavy calories. IMO, that's one of the big draw of keto. It's not that you can magically eat 5000 calories of cheese and meat and lose weight. It's that you can eat a caloric amount at a deficit and still feel energetic and full and like you didn't miss out on anything.