When someone talks about nutrition and diet, the most common word is "Calories" - if you want to lose weight, "cut down your calorie intake" or "follow a low calorie diet" etc.
Experts relate the energy needed for our body to operate with the amount of energy (in the form of calories) that gets from food. What a great misconception! Human body DOES NOT need the energy coming from oxidized foods in order to sustain life! The only thing that needs is the proper nutrients, in the proper quantities, and within the proper conditions, to perform specific tasks. When this happens, then human body can move, run, jump, think, go to work
But where does the energy for all these come from?
The answer is: Cosmic Energy. It is everywhere and expressed with many forms like radiation, electromagnetism, temperature, etc.
Take electricity for example. It is available in your house but you can experience it only when you plug in an electric device. If that device has all it's pieces together, then you get the max power that device can provide - if some piece is not good, then you get less power or not at all. So the performance of that device depends on the condition of it's parts when uses the, always present, energy of electricity.
The same happens to human body - when all of it's organs or cells are in good shape then it can produce max power using Cosmic Energy.
And how the organs or cells can be in good shape? The answer is, when the proper nutrients are supplied.
So my question is: Can calories describe the nutritional value of a food? - Of course not.
Then why bother taking into consideration the total amount of calories when make a diet plan? Everyone can see that 500 calories coming from French fries has not the same value as when coming, for example, from oranges
I think it is time to be more skeptical and question all the established theories that have no sense - then we can make some "progress"...
I agree looking at calories alone is wrong. You could have a 1500 calorie per day diet of chocolate. You would lose weight but you would not be healthy. You could eat 4000 calories a day as a totally balanced healthy diet and you would still put weight ON. Calories are a factor......but ONLY one factor
The other thing that needs to be looked at as fixation on weight as a measure of health.
I think you need to decide what you are speaking about. You start off talking about calories and weight loss, then end up talking about calories and nutritional value.
Weight loss and healthy eating, although connected, are not the same thing.
One could become overweight by eating too much of any 'healthy' food, just as one could be a 'healthy' weight, but nutritionally deficient and actually quite unhealthy.
For someone wishing to shed a few pounds of body fat, calories are a useful, although not the only, tool to measure daily food intake. I have never heard of any health or nutritional advisor suggest that calories are a useful way to measure the nutritional value of a food.
So I am not sure what you are saying or why you are saying it. I look forward to your elucidation 🙂
You're here, too! (Saw your post on the fitness forum.)
Calories do matter. As does the content. You can eat too much healthy food and get fat. You can eat too little junk food and lose weight. Do you see what I did? I mixed fat and weight. What do people want? To lose weight? Or to lose fat?
Too many times I see people talking about doing something to lose weight and they immediately talk about eating healthily. I know they will fail. Failure being the long term. Not after their silly 4 week diet but 5 years on when they've forgotten their goal.
http://eserv.co.uk/irl2/the-truth-about-weight-loss/
Hi darrensurrey - it's a small world isn;t it?
What i am trying to say is that calories is not an indicator of the quality nor the quantity of food that a human body needs. Individuality or better "idiosyncrasy" is a major factor on how someone assimilates food therefore the quantity needed. Emotional conditions also play a huge role on how our body utilizes the food provided therefore the quality needed. Physical activity may vary significantly from time to time so the nutritional needs vary accordingly. And to make things more complicated, weather ups and downs, wind, seasons, age, gender, fitness level, health issues etc. are also critical about human body needs.
This is why i really do not understand the meaning of calorie counting. In my opinion it is a very rough indicator for dietary plans - like measure distances based on a car's fuel consumption
My opinion is that maybe if we focus on the nutritional value of foods and train ourselves to start listen and "communicate" with our body, will gain more and with less effort in the long run. I know that may seem difficult or idealistic but i think it is worth to give a try - besides this is were all ancient health theories were based with remarkable results despite their lack in todays technology.
You're right but it's quite difficult to "listen to your body".
-stresses of modern living can affect the choices we make
-modern food contains hidden chemicals that can make us feel hungry or bloated
My personal requirement is to eat enough for the sports I enjoy but not so much that I get fat. So I cannot avoid food, but I cannot eat too much!
Hi darrensurrey - it's a small world isn;t it?
What i am trying to say is that calories is not an indicator of the quality nor the quantity of food that a human body needs. Individuality or better "idiosyncrasy" is a major factor on how someone assimilates food therefore the quantity needed. Emotional conditions also play a huge role on how our body utilizes the food provided therefore the quality needed. Physical activity may vary significantly from time to time so the nutritional needs vary accordingly. And to make things more complicated, weather ups and downs, wind, seasons, age, gender, fitness level, health issues etc. are also critical about human body needs.
This is why i really do not understand the meaning of calorie counting. In my opinion it is a very rough indicator for dietary plans - like measure distances based on a car's fuel consumption
My opinion is that maybe if we focus on the nutritional value of foods and train ourselves to start listen and "communicate" with our body, will gain more and with less effort in the long run. I know that may seem difficult or idealistic but i think it is worth to give a try - besides this is were all ancient health theories were based with remarkable results despite their lack in todays technology.
Thats the approach of groups like Beyond Chocolate and Paul McKenna. take They ban calorie counting and weigh ins.....they emphasise listening to your body t tell you what and when to eat., and when to stop eating.. Like any programme it works well for some, not well for others. Weight loss needs an approach tailored to the person and their lifestyle.
I was told by a researcher back in the 70's that they had proved that assuming your diet was in calorie balance (ie you were neither gaining nor losing weight) it was possible to lose weight without cutting down on the amount of food you ate........simply by eating 6 small meals a day instead of 3 larger ones....effectively you graze which is what the Beyond Chocolate/Paul McKenna approach encourages. Sadly grazing doesn't fir everyones lifetsyle...........
I've been told off by my dentist for eating too many meals a day. Dunno why she complains. I keep her in business. 😀