[kaytlin90]

Is calorie negative food simply a myth or is this true ?

[kaplods]

Yes, it pretty much is a myth. There are alot of low calorie foods, but the idea that any burn more than they contain, just isn't true.

[PhotoChick]

Total myth.

The numbers can be manipulated to make it sound true, but it's not true. Everything you eat has calories. Everything you eat requires *some* calorie expenditure to digest. If you start playing with the numbers, you can make anything look like it has less calories and even make some things sound like they're "calorie free". Don't be fooled by faux-science and faux-math.

.

[Iconised Ghost]

not even celery?

[kaplods]

not even celery.

Often part of the way the "math" is deceptively worked out is using calories for the math of "burning," and counting kilocalories for the food.

See the calorie we think of is, not actually a single calorie, but rather a unit of 1000 calories or a kilocalorie. Many countries actually write "kilocalories" on the nutrition label, but in the USA (and I'm not sure if anywhere else) the label usually is labeled as "calories."

So, if you talk about small calories for burning, and large calories for eating, you can make it seem like you can actually compensate for high calorie food with negative calorie food.

There are other ways to twist the math, but this is one way.

[Iconised Ghost]

aww snap, i was really hoping that one was true XD

[andreaphilip3]

although the concept is a myth--- the volumetric concept is real and proven which is how the volumetrics plan and ww core came about.