[Idealmuse]

I have a question about caloires as pertaining to volume.

So... say my daily total was 1400.

If I ate 1400 calories in nuts would my body still be as happy as 1400 calories in real food? Given that I know I'd be very hungry if that's all I ate in a day and I know it's not enough of proper nutrtition... I realize that... I'm only using this as a wacky example. Is ANY 1400 calories spread throughout the day that are "healthy" okay by my body for not slowing metabolism? Even if it isn't okay by my empty tummy because of low volume? 1400 calories is 1400 calories period. Yes?

[settie]

No! 1400 calories of sugar is definitely not the same for your body as 1400 calories of a nutritious, well-rounded diet. Your body would soon start to work very inefficiantly and then break down.

[JayEll]

Well... there are a lot of ifs there. Spread throughout the day... and healthy calories. OK, my opinion is that yes, it would be "OK" with your body energy-wise if you were getting enough nutrition in the mix. Say you were using liquids like SlimFast, or protein shakes, for one or more meals or snacks. Your body would probably be getting enough from that. But, you might feel hungry because of lack of bulk, and you might not have enough fiber for healthy bowels.

Nuts are real food, btw! But 1400 cals of nuts wouldn't be very many... Certainly more almonds that most people would want to eat, but it would be something like 8-9 ounces.

It's good to remember that a "calorie" is a unit of measurement from physics--and what happens in the body is much more complex than what comes out of physics experiments. Different types of foods go through different chemical pathways to produce energy. Fats burn differently from sugars, and so on. So, while yes, a calorie is a calorie, not all calories are "created equal" so to speak.

How's that for round about?

Jay

[Idealmuse]

Settie - What you mean I can't eat a bowl of sugar? I did say "healthy" calories but I was babbling so I can see the confusion.

J - Thanks... I think you're probably right. While technically it should be the same because we process different types of foods differently, I guess it would "translate" differently depending on how our body used it. It always amazed me how Atkins people can have like 70% fat in their diet and sometimes higher calorie levels then some of us more traditional people... It took me awhile to talk myself into eatting more then the 10-15% I was... I can't even imagine it being that high!

Okay thanks for putting up with my silly questions. I'm not sure why it mattered... just curious I suppose. I assure you all I eat quite normally.

[JayEll]

Idealmuse, the percentages that seem to work best for me are 30/40/30 protein/carb/fat. Just for comparison. That's the "Zone" ratio.

Jay

[Idealmuse]

Thanks Jay

I've been training myself I probably went from (fat/carbs/protein) 10/70/20 to about 25/55/20 so I'm headed in that direction... I do best closer to a Zone/South Beach diet too.

Looks like someone just bumped a thread with a simiar question too. cool.