"cheesegator" wrote in message
...
Why is this such a controversy? Whether or not there truly exists a
"Metabolic Advantage" as Dr. Atkins used the term, there is another
very
simple explanation.

For some people, if not all people, it MUST be true that:

Consuming 1,000 Kcal of Fructose is NOT metabolically equivalent to
consuming 1,000 Kcal of Bacon grease.


Why not???? I'll tell you why:

1. Not all foods have EXACTLY the same absorption in the gut. Most
of the
fructose calories will be used by the body, while a greater
percentage of
the bacon grease calories will end up in the toilet.

2. The energy USED by the body in metabolizing & processing is not
EXACTLY
the same for all foods. Again, my hypothesis is that sugary/starchy
foods
are much more easily processed by the body.

Well, yeah. Consider that we introduce rice cereal as the first solid
food in a baby's diet. Why? Because it is easily digestible. Then
fruit. Protien is last on the list. Now think about the implications
in that.


Even a 1% difference in NET ABSORBED CALORIES (between a low-carb
and a
high-carb diet of equivalent GROSS calories) would be significant.
I would
bet it's much greater than 1%.

I doubt it is so high, myself, for 'average' folks, and I have heard
that sort of differential factoring is accounted for in the
calculations of caloric loads of different foods (for average folks).
Of course, for us overweight people, we have visual evidence that our
bodies react differently to food than 'average' folks.

revek




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 10/16/2003