cheesegator wrote:
:: 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.

Do you have a cite for this? I'm not saying it isn't true, but I've never
read anything convincing on this. I do know, however, that when I eat lots
of fat -- stuff floats

::
:: 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.
::
:: 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%.
::
:: If I'm wrong, then Atkins' "Metabolic Advantage" seems to be the only
:: logical explanation for these results.

I like your notions better than the metabolic advantage. I just don't know
if they are true.