If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting article
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting article
Another great Atkins article from them. This part was the most interesting to
me: What they are saying is that it takes 4,700 to 8,470 excess calories of fat to add a kilogram of weight, yet it takes only 2,500 to 3,300 calories of carbohydrate to add the same amount. So ‘a calorie is a calorie is a calorie' is not so meaningful after all: a carbohydrate calorie is obviously much more fattening than a fat calorie LCing since 12/01/03- Me- 265/226/140 & hubby- 310/248/180 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting article
What they are saying is that it takes 4,700 to 8,470 excess calories of fat to add a kilogram of weight, yet it takes only 2,500 to 3,300 calories of carbohydrate to add the same amount. So 'a calorie is a calorie is a calorie' is not so meaningful after all: a carbohydrate calorie is obviously much more fattening than a fat calorie Hmmm, wonder if that is really true? It would make sense. I mean, I am not very hungry on low carb and still lose wieght because I can eat more. Curt -- Started low carb May '03 211/184/185 . . 6'2" 15.78% BF Highest weight 250 5+ years ago |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting article
Mirek Fidler wrote:
http://www.redflagsweekly.com/confer...004_feb23.html Great article, but I take issue with his bottom line: "Therefore, calorie-counting, which is the foundation of practically every modern slimming diet, is a complete waste of time. " I think "waste of time" is an overstatement. He makes a great argument that calories are not all the same, but it doesn't follow that calories no longer matter. They may matter less in the intake equation, but still matter when figuring how the body converts food to energy. What is needed, if this article is true, is not to reject calories per se, but to figure a better means of computing the energy value of foods....or did I miss something? Thanks for the good post Tom |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting article
"Mirek Fidler" wrote:
http://www.redflagsweekly.com/confer...004_feb23.html "The figure often used is that one kilogram of body fat represents about 3500 calories." I thought it was 1 pound = 3500, so 1 kilogram would = 7700. Have I lost my mind? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Interesting article about therapeutic uses of ketones | JumboJim | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | January 14th, 2004 07:25 PM |
Interesting article about HDL | Bob M | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 1 | November 5th, 2003 06:15 AM |
Interesting article on sugar alcohols | Qilt Kitty | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | November 5th, 2003 02:57 AM |
Interesting article on lifespans | Debbie Cusick | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | October 20th, 2003 12:51 AM |
Interesting article on ab exercises | Jayjay | General Discussion | 3 | October 9th, 2003 02:45 AM |