"Mirek Fidler" wrote in message ...
Still don't get it. YOU are the one seeming to claim disappearing
calories...

No. That's your straw man. I never claimed that calories disappeared.
Your intellectual honesty appears to be equal to your mental capacity.
Both breathtaking examples of the microscopic world.

Calculate and post the quantity of energy available to the cells from
1000 calories of triglyceride in the blood. I have already done your
work for you in the case of glucose.

Well, uhm, energy available to the cells is one thing. But what Moosh
wants to say is that energy that is not used by cells cannot disappear.
Even if wasted, it has to go somewhere.

The most apparent forms are heat (which could probably be measured) or
energy can be bound to another chemicals and excerted (e.g. in form of
ketones).

But it cannot disappear.

Mirek

P.S.: I am doing LC, so I think I am NOT biased I still think there
might be some metabolic advantage, but even if it is not, pure calorie
in calorie out is enough for me to stay on LC. It is so simple - replace
starches and sugar by vegetables and 0cal sweetener and your calorie
intake drops by one third or even half - and you will not notice it in
form of hunger or taste - quite opposite...

Makes me think that human body simply is not build to live from
hi-glycemic food. There is only a little satiety difference between
eating a lb of bread or cauliflower, esp. if mixed with some fat or
protein.

Oddly enough, I haven't read anywhere where a single person in any of
these threads has said anything about calories disappearing, except
for Moosh-troll who has been insisting that what we are saying amounts
to calorie disappearance. Which only serves to clearly show his/her
inability to comprehend simple english.

All I've ever suggested was that maybe the calculations that insist
that one gram of protein or carb is 4 kcals and one gram of fat equals
9 kcals is wrong. Either they are wrong in the sense that food is not
always broken down to those energy values in every single case or they
are simply to rough a guess to be useful in predicting weight loss or
gain in humans. Or they are wrong in that fat storage is more a
function of hormonal balance than it is a function of the very basic
energy values of food.

No-one has suggested that the Law of Thermo is invalid. Only that it
is not directly applicable in terms of the currently used caloric
values of foods for predicting whether the body will store fat or rid
itself of fat.

The evidence is pretty over-whelming that low-calorie diets do not
work and that low-carb diets do work significantly better and are
significantly healthier than high-junk-carb diets.

TC