Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
 |
|
 |
|
Thermodynamics and Metabolic Advantage of Weight Loss Diets - WeightLossBanter
Links to the actual published full articles involved are given below.
Caution, actually uses equations and large tables of data.
Thermodynamics and Metabolic Advantage of Weight Loss Diets
Richard D.
Feinman, PhD, Eugene J.
Fine, MD
Metabolic Syndrome and Related Disorders
September 2003, Vol.
1, No. 3, Pages 209-219
Posted online on July 8, 2004.
(doi:10.1089/154041903322716688)
http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs...88?cookieSet=1
"A calorie is a calorie" violates the second law of thermodynamics
Richard D Feinman1 and Eugene J Fine1,
Department of Biochemistry, State University of New York Downstate
Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY 11203 USA
2Department of Nuclear Medicine, Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx, NY 10461 USA
Nutrition Journal 2004, 3:9 doi:10.1186/1475-2891-3-9
AbstractThe principle of "a calorie is a calorie," that weight change in
hypocaloric diets is independent of macronutrient composition, is widely
held in the popular and technical literature, and is frequently
justified by appeal to the laws of thermodynamics.
We review here some
aspects of thermodynamics that bear on weight loss and the effect of
macronutrient composition.
The focus is the so-called metabolic
advantage in low-carbohydrate diets greater weight loss compared to
isocaloric diets of different composition.
Two laws of thermodynamics
are relevant to the systems considered in nutrition and, whereas the
first law is a conservation (of energy) law, the second is a dissipation
law: something (negative entropy) is lost and therefore balance is not
to be expected in diet interventions.
Here, we propose that a
misunderstanding of the second law accounts for the controversy about
the role of macronutrient effect on weight loss and we review some
aspects of elementary thermodynamics.
We use data in the literature to
show that thermogenesis is sufficient to predict metabolic advantage.
Whereas homeostasis ensures balance under many conditions, as a general
principle, "a calorie is a calorie" violates the second law of
thermodynamics.
http://www.nutritionj.com/content/3/1/9
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Quote: :
Links to the actual published full articles involved are given below.
Caution, actually uses equations and large tables of data.
Thermodynamics and Metabolic Advantage of Weight Loss Diets
Richard D.
Feinman, PhD, Eugene J.
Fine, MD
Metabolic Syndrome and Related Disorders
September 2003, Vol.
1, No. 3, Pages 209-219
Posted online on July 8, 2004.
(doi:10.1089/154041903322716688)
http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs...88?cookieSet=1
Very interesting.
Everyone seems to know about "calories consumed", but how
about "calorires excreted".
You could define, say:
calories burned = calories consumed - calories excreted
eating "octane ratio" = calories burned/calories consumed * 100
I looks like, given diets with identical total calories, the body readily
absorbs carbs more than protein.
gtoomey
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 04:59:24 +1000, Quote: :
Very interesting.
Everyone seems to know about "calories consumed", but how
about "calorires excreted".
You could define, say:
calories burned = calories consumed - calories excreted
eating "octane ratio" = calories burned/calories consumed * 100
Rarely mentioned in this whole "counting cals" lunacy is that what goes in
your mouth is not necessarily even close to what is "pulled" into (use) in
your system.
Think corn kernels and your poop.
So, you start with a cal counting "handbook", you mix in the fact that the
handbook is a guesstimate, then you don't weigh your food to know whether
that steak is 4 or 5.1 ounces, much less the veggies and deserts, add food
that passes through the gut relatively untouched (and never subtracted from
the cals intake) and you have about as useless a system as one can imagine.
Of course, you get the "privilege" of wasting your time writing down this
mess of inaccuracies to boot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:39:12 -0500, Quote: :
On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 04:59:24 +1000, Quote: :
Very interesting.
Everyone seems to know about "calories consumed", but how
about "calorires excreted".
You could define, say:
calories burned = calories consumed - calories excreted
eating "octane ratio" = calories burned/calories consumed * 100
Rarely mentioned in this whole "counting cals" lunacy is that what goes in
your mouth is not necessarily even close to what is "pulled" into (use) in
your system.
Think corn kernels and your poop.
So, you start with a cal counting "handbook", you mix in the fact that the
handbook is a guesstimate, then you don't weigh your food to know whether
that steak is 4 or 5.1 ounces, much less the veggies and deserts, add food
that passes through the gut relatively untouched (and never subtracted from
the cals intake) and you have about as useless a system as one can imagine.
Of course, you get the "privilege" of wasting your time writing down this
mess of inaccuracies to boot.
Who the hell knows, I mean really?
What seems to hold true for one
person doesn't work at all for another.
I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who
essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their
exercise level.
For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the
same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who
experience the same thing with calorie restriction.
Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the
world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works.
Em
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Auntie Quote: :
I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who
essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their
exercise level.
For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the
same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who
experience the same thing with calorie restriction.
There was a very good medical study published in the past couple months
that proved that while many people do, in fact, lose weight with
exercise, there are quite a few others, who have some kind of genetic
difference in how their muscle metabolisms work, do not.
I know I'm one of those in the latter category and always have been.
Exercise will make my muscles look nicer but does not make me lose weight.
--Jenny Type 2 diabetes since 1998.
Hba1c 5.7%
Low Carbing for 5 years.
140 lbs (goal)
Cut the "carbs" to respond to my email address.
What they Don't Tell You About Diabetes Web Site
http://www.geocities.com/lottadata4u/
Jenny's Low Carb Diet Facts & Figures site
http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/
Looking for help controlling your blood sugar?
Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/...0Diagnosed.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mu:
"Rarely mentioned in this whole "counting cals" lunacy is that what
goes in
your mouth is not necessarily even close to what is "pulled" into (use)
in
your system.
Think corn kernels and your poop."
It's not mentioned in counting cals, but it is indeed focused on in
Atkins, where fiber gets subtracted
from the carb count.
Seems Atkins was right!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"There was a very good medical study published in the past couple
months
that proved that while many people do, in fact, lose weight with
exercise, there are quite a few others, who have some kind of genetic
difference in how their muscle metabolisms work, do not."
I can see how this could be true for modest amounts of excercise.
But
if you increase excercise a
lot and maintain the same diet, it's hard to see how this is possible.
The extra energy burned
has to come from somewhere.
Some of the weight will be converted to
muscle, but it's hard to
figure out how they could not lose some weight in the process.
Do you have a link to the study?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who
essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their
exercise level.
For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the
same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who
experience the same thing with calorie restriction.
Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the
world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works."
Calories work.
Exercise uses fairly few calories per sey if one consults
the charts showing activity and calories per hour.
Exercise primes the
body for more weight loss because the effect which is using calories
during exercise continues up to 48 hours after the exercise stops,ie.
The
body is in a greater calorie using mode.
Calories work, there were no
obese people to survive the camps in europe.
The way each of our bodies
is set up to react to fewer calories differes and most people lose weight
when a few hundred calories less per day are eaten over time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Ignoramus31471" wrote in message
...
On 31 Dec 2004 16:35:54 GMT,
wrote:
"I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who
essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their
exercise level.
For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the
same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who
experience the same thing with calorie restriction.
Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the
world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works."
Calories work.
Exercise uses fairly few calories per sey if one
consults
the charts showing activity and calories per hour.
Exercise primes the
body for more weight loss because the effect which is using calories
during exercise continues up to 48 hours after the exercise stops,ie.
the
body is in a greater calorie using mode
"up to 48 hours" is not true for many forms of exercise, namely those that
don't drive HR up.
..
Calories work, there were no
obese people to survive the camps in europe.
The way each of our bodies
is set up to react to fewer calories differes and most people lose
weight
when a few hundred calories less per day are eaten over time.
You are forgetting that a person who exercises may conceivably be
hungrier and eat more.
Again.
Exercise helps some people to lose weight and it does not help
other people.
Also, some people's fitness is not improved by exercise,
as strange as it sounds.
the number of people who don't benefit from exericse are far and few
between.
And below you only list one article...there is great risk in
assuming it is the last word on whether exercise is not beneficial for even
a small number of people.
There could be many issue at play that produced
those results.
Exercise is not a cure all and it is not always helpful for
everyone.
Perhaps.
If you are one of the lucky people who do benefit from
exercise, count your blessings.
The vast majority fall into this group, even according to that article.
I am also one of those lucky people.
I
am slim and fit, and exercise, so please do not construe my message as
though i am making some sort of an excuse for not exercising or
staying fat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Roger Zoul" wrote in message
...
"Ignoramus31471" wrote in message
...
On 31 Dec 2004 16:35:54 GMT,
wrote:
"I have read on this ng (alt.support.diet), reports of people who
essentially eat the same diet and yet lose weight by increasing their
exercise level.
For me, I can kill myself exercising and eating the
same diet and *nothing* happens, I'm sure that there are people who
experience the same thing with calorie restriction.
Judging from this group, of the umteem jillion obese people in the
world, there are a relative few who have figured out what works."
Calories work.
Exercise uses fairly few calories per sey if one
consults
the charts showing activity and calories per hour.
Exercise primes
the
body for more weight loss because the effect which is using calories
during exercise continues up to 48 hours after the exercise stops,ie.
the
body is in a greater calorie using mode
"up to 48 hours" is not true for many forms of exercise, namely those that
don't drive HR up.
.
Calories work, there were no
obese people to survive the camps in europe.
The way each of our
bodies
is set up to react to fewer calories differes and most people lose
weight
when a few hundred calories less per day are eaten over time.
You are forgetting that a person who exercises may conceivably be
hungrier and eat more.
Again.
Exercise helps some people to lose weight and it does not help
other people.
Also, some people's fitness is not improved by exercise,
as strange as it sounds.
the number of people who don't benefit from exericse are far and few
between.
And below you only list one article...there is great risk in
assuming it is the last word on whether exercise is not beneficial for
even
a small number of people.
There could be many issue at play that produced
those results.
I have noticed that some people's perception of effort seems to be
warped, which would cause them to believe that exercise does not help them.
I saw a woman in the gym once that was arm curling with small pink 2lb
weights and leg pressing with 20lbs on the machine.
She appeared to be
getting a serious workout by looking at her facial expressions.
In reality,
an average grocery shopping trip would be more strenuous.
10 bags weighing
5lbs each, carried up a flight of stairs would be more of an effort than the
weights she was using.
In order to build muscle, a person has to stress them
by lifting more than they normally do.
Genetic factors would of course limit
the amount of muscle that could be obtained.
Exercise is not a cure all and it is not always helpful for
everyone.
Perhaps.
If you are one of the lucky people who do benefit from
exercise, count your blessings.
The vast majority fall into this group, even according to that article.
I am also one of those lucky people.
I
am slim and fit, and exercise, so please do not construe my message as
though i am making some sort of an excuse for not exercising or
staying fat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|