Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 156 posts

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#121

Post by andyjdavis »

mysterypie wrote: post #16
cma wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The protein test was famously faked with melamine in the Chinese dog-food scandal that killed dogs and resulted in a recall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_pet_food_recalls

I was following that case closely back in 2007 because of my pet (thankfully not affected). An astonishing thing I learned was that practically every brand of cat food and dog food in North America is/was manufactured by a single company called Menu Foods in Streetsville, Ontario, Canada. The pet food "brands" don't have their own factories. They all contract it out to the same place. A few journalists remarked on th…

Out curiosity, is (relatively) unprocessed meat for pets available in supermarkets in north america?

In Australia you can buy packets of kangaroo meat for consumption by pets as kangaroos are essentially pests in many areas. This results in a large supply of meat that has limited commercial value so most supermarkets will stock frozen packets of what is (I believe) 100% kangaroo mince for people to feed to their pets.

Curious if there is an equivalent option elsewhere.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#122

Post by greendestiny_re »

mikekchar wrote: post #110
jasonjei wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. 500 calories from chicken or a lean protein like crab is very different from 500 calories from a pastry. What should be highlighted is amount of sugar and carbohydrates, not total calories. Not every calorie is created equally. In fact, you could almost remove carbohydrates from your diet and be unaffected, but the same isn't true of protein and good fats.

It is of course different. Carbohydrates, protein and fat all undergo different metabolic pathways. Further down you are wondering why you might not have a high karma on this post. I think it's because what you have written conflates 2 issues (I suspect, though, that you aren't actually conflating them... just your writing is unclear). 500 calories from whatever source is 500 calories, when we are talking about energ…

Mikekchar, "500 calories is 500 calories" is a tautology and neither a clever writing device nor a serious argument.

I've cut carbs out of my diet a few months ago, after I chewed through the 200-pound mark. I noticed I had trouble running, walking and even standing. I dropped bread, pasta and refined sugar, though I still eat fruits without restriction.

The result is that I've been steadily losing weight and shedding fat, primarily the nasty layers found in the pubic area.

My research has thoroughly convinced me that carbless diet makes the body burn fat and serves as a protective factor against neurodegenerative diseases.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#123

Post by greendestiny_re »

jasonjei wrote: post #79
snewk wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i don't understand why your comment scores so low. It's pretty clear that our bodies will absorb 500 sugar/carbohydrate calories much more quickly than 500 protein/fat calories. You will get a much greater insulin response when eating a pastry than a chicken breast.

I suspect I'm being down voted because I said I don't believe carbohydrates are required for survival. While glucose is essential for life since the brain cells die quickly without it, glucose does not have to be obtained from carbohydrates. It can be obtained from protein or fat by breaking down the protein or fat into glucose. In fact, a good percentage of protein (~50%) becomes glucose when it enters the body. Pro…

I can't add anything constructive to your glucose conclusions, though I can say that eating 2 medium chicken drumsticks with skin has made me satiated to a degree I never thought possible.

I too experienced a certain effortless growth of muscle mass after eating enough protein for my daily needs, too.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#124

Post by industriousthou »

thinkloop wrote: post #97
thinkloop wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"not fit for human consumption" is not a synonym for "unfancy". It describes the processes involved to arrive at the final food. Filet mignon can be unfit for human consumption, while pigs' feet can be processed correctly and be fit for consumption.

Check this out: http://www.alive.com/health/fit-for-human-consumption/ Animals that are sick or unhealthy are separated from the herd and slaughtered independently, then sold for pet food and livestock feed. This was partly what fostered the mad cow issue. There is higher risk for illness with non-human grade food. If you don't want higher risk for your pet than child, you shouldn't feed the off-the-shelf non-human g…

Are dogs able to safely digest some foods that humans aren't? I mean, does it really need to be pointed out that dogs have different nutritional and hygiene requirements than human children?

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#125

Post by hueving »

thinkloop wrote: post #111
lsc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you care about your pet like you do your child, you shouldn't feed the off-the-shelf non-human grade food. This is... an interesting generational thing, I think. To most older people, the idea of caring as much for your pet as you would for a child seems viscerally wrong. They even economize on pet healthcare. but... among those younger than me, your view, as far as I can tell, seems to be the norm. The very ide…

Great point, I have definitely noticed this in my own family. The elders are not only against "wasting" money above the minimum required for sustenance, but they get openly and visibly angry about it when someone else does. For some reason, this particular issue crosses over from "well I wouldn't do it, but to each his own", to seeing it as a fundamentally immoral act. It surprised me in the beginning. Personally I c…

>A dog is pretty much a 2 yr old child.

So is a pig, so this logic really only applies to vegetarians. There is still something else that motivates meat eating people to care more for their pets.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#126

Post by [deleted] »

thinkloop wrote: post #111
lsc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you care about your pet like you do your child, you shouldn't feed the off-the-shelf non-human grade food. This is... an interesting generational thing, I think. To most older people, the idea of caring as much for your pet as you would for a child seems viscerally wrong. They even economize on pet healthcare. but... among those younger than me, your view, as far as I can tell, seems to be the norm. The very ide…

Great point, I have definitely noticed this in my own family. The elders are not only against "wasting" money above the minimum required for sustenance, but they get openly and visibly angry about it when someone else does. For some reason, this particular issue crosses over from "well I wouldn't do it, but to each his own", to seeing it as a fundamentally immoral act. It surprised me in the beginning. Personally I c…

[deleted]

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#127

Post by thinkloop »

hueving wrote: post #125
thinkloop wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great point, I have definitely noticed this in my own family. The elders are not only against "wasting" money above the minimum required for sustenance, but they get openly and visibly angry about it when someone else does. For some reason, this particular issue crosses over from "well I wouldn't do it, but to each his own", to seeing it as a fundamentally immoral act. It surprised me in the beginning. Personally I c…

>A dog is pretty much a 2 yr old child. So is a pig, so this logic really only applies to vegetarians. There is still something else that motivates meat eating people to care more for their pets.

> So is a pig, so this logic really only applies to vegetarians.

The quality of life of farm animals should also be respected. If they live their lives in suffering, that shouldn't be taken lightly.

At the same time all animals will die at some point, with or without human intervention. If that death happens at a slightly different time for the reality of the way nature works, that's not inconsistent.

Keep in mind that wild animals don't generally die of old age gracefully on a golf course. More often than not they're ripped apart by some other animal, or starve to death from injury, or are consumed by disease, etc. Death by human hands is probably one of the less cruel fates.

A free-range animal on a cruelty-free farm (if that really exists), with the benefits of human medicine, and a precisely implemented death, is probably one of the happier existences an animal can have.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#128

Post by FooBarWidget »

eru wrote: post #112
germanier wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hong Kong even restricts export of baby formula (and smugglers are regularly arrested on the border to mainland).

I always wonder why they don't just order more from the factory and sell to the Chinese? (Or raise prices.) Why don't they want to make more money?

From what I know, it is because of export control and regulation.

Nutricia, the Dutch milk powder company, cannot easily sell Dutch milk powder to China because import/export regulations don't easily allow them to do so. So they opened a store in China. But because of Chinese food regulations they cannot use the original formula. But consumers distrust the Chinese store because the formula has been altered. So people keep buying "real" Dutch milk powder fron smugglers.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#129

Post by thinkloop »

industriousthou wrote: post #124
thinkloop wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check this out: http://www.alive.com/health/fit-for-human-consumption/ Animals that are sick or unhealthy are separated from the herd and slaughtered independently, then sold for pet food and livestock feed. This was partly what fostered the mad cow issue. There is higher risk for illness with non-human grade food. If you don't want higher risk for your pet than child, you shouldn't feed the off-the-shelf non-human g…

Are dogs able to safely digest some foods that humans aren't? I mean, does it really need to be pointed out that dogs have different nutritional and hygiene requirements than human children?

> does it really need to be pointed out that dogs have different nutritional and hygiene requirements than human children

The most common dangers are onions (or things cooked in onions) and chocolate. They contain chemicals that are toxic to dogs and should always be avoided.

Similarly, many humans are allergic to many foods, and not every human can eat all "human-grade" food.

"human-grade" is only a measure of risk of unexpected contents (disease) in the food - not a recommendation that all humans should always eat it.

Re: How do food manufacturers calculate the calorie count of packaged foods? (2003)

#130

Post by dreamfactory2 »

mikekchar wrote: post #110
jasonjei wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. 500 calories from chicken or a lean protein like crab is very different from 500 calories from a pastry. What should be highlighted is amount of sugar and carbohydrates, not total calories. Not every calorie is created equally. In fact, you could almost remove carbohydrates from your diet and be unaffected, but the same isn't true of protein and good fats.

It is of course different. Carbohydrates, protein and fat all undergo different metabolic pathways. Further down you are wondering why you might not have a high karma on this post. I think it's because what you have written conflates 2 issues (I suspect, though, that you aren't actually conflating them... just your writing is unclear). 500 calories from whatever source is 500 calories, when we are talking about energ…

We've evolved as omnivores with unfussy requirements and highly efficient metabolism
Post reply on HN