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

What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

wisegeek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 261 posts

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#81

Post by c1u »

TomGullen wrote: post #62
sneak wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol paleo I've been losing weight lately without any fad diet. I just cut my caloric intake by 20% and boosted my caloric output by 20-30% with regular exercise.

What part of Paleo is a fad exactly? It's trying to replicate consumption of food we evolved off. A pretty simple idea. Sugar/carbs are not something readily available in human history in the vast quantities we eat them today.

"Sugar/carbs are not something readily available in human history..." This doesn't matter at all.

"...in the vast quantities we eat them today." THIS is what matters.

Net calories are king, regardless of diet macro composition.

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#82

Post by Evbn »

iand wrote: post #48

How were the calories counted? It seems that many common foods are mislabeled since they are using older forms of calorific calculation that don't include fibre. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/18/food-retailers...

That article also links to the OP wisegeek article, and mentions protein calorie overcounting and cooked-food calorie undercounting, which other commenters here have mentioned. And it was published yesterday!

Strange loop, or filter bubble?

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#83

Post by TomGullen »

afterburner wrote: post #74
TomGullen wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of Paleo is a fad exactly? It's trying to replicate consumption of food we evolved off. A pretty simple idea. Sugar/carbs are not something readily available in human history in the vast quantities we eat them today.

Fad: An intense and widely shared enthusiasm for something, esp. one that is short-lived; a craze. Just because the idea came from the prehistoric doesn't mean it can't be a fad.

It's not an idea, it actually happened. People actually ate paleo style for millions of years from necessity.

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#84

Post by Evbn »

iand wrote: post #48

How were the calories counted? It seems that many common foods are mislabeled since they are using older forms of calorific calculation that don't include fibre. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/18/food-retailers...

Most commonly consumed foods don't have fiber, so this isn't a huge issue.

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#85

Post by Evbn »

smackfu wrote: post #2

Peanut butter, nuts, and bagels tend to be the ones that are most surprising to people who are dieting for the first time. Just way more calories than people think because they think they are "healthy" because they are natural.

When I cut carbs, I was shocked that bagels had the highest protein ratio of any carb-based food, including hippie bread like Dave's Killer.

And nuts are filling for those calories. Peanut butter (with added oil) I suspect is too easy to eat to slow down calorie intake.

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#87

Post by Evbn »

Udo wrote: post #4

There is some surprising stuff in there. I would never have guessed that onions or broccoli have about the same energy density as Coca Cola.

Which is more satiating, though? Coca cola is sugar dissolved in water. If you pureed broccoli and thinned it in water, it would be much larger than the equivalent amount of coke.

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#88

Post by analog »

c1u wrote: post #50
msluyter wrote: post #37

As someone who's successfully lost a lot of weight on a low carb / no grain diet, this chart irks me. That a handful of almonds has the same calories as a certain amount of Captain Crunch is irrelevant. The latter will quickly convert to glucose in your body, however, (unlike almonds) and that will make a huge difference in your satiety levels, insulin response (Hello, Metabolic Syndrome!), etc... [1] Some good resou…

Almonds are mostly fat, and not very satiating either. I've done the paleo/lowcarb fad diets too. They just trick you into eating fewer calories by forbidding most of the food you ate before the diet. Not to mention some versions of these diets are based on incorrect understanding of human physiology. For example, despite what the paleotards will tell you, carbs are very rarely converted into body fat. But when you e…

There's a little more to it than that. When you're in a ketonic state your body burns stored fat rather than carbs. [1]

For example for me, normally on a 2 hour bike ride (@ ~120bpm) I would need to drink ~2.5 bottles of glucose drink to keep my blood sugar levels high enough. When I'm on a keto diet I'll only need 0.5 bottles of glucose drink during the ride to stave off the knock. [2]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketosis [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hit_the_wall

Re: What Does 200 Calories Look Like?

#90

Post by maxerickson »

c1u wrote: post #52
TomGullen wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm down 14kg in 120 days on a keto based diet. Works brilliantly, sustainably and enjoyable. Carbs are also full of empty calories, better to eat more nutrients like fat! I'm healthier because of that. The chart isn't particularly useful, but it's still interesting imo Whatever works for you of course is the best. Regrettably I've been a bit preachy about keto diets before, but understand now that some people prefer…

Carbs are NOT "empty calories", there is no such thing.

The traditional definition of empty calories would be something like a spoonful of sugar.

That's an extreme example, but the idea is that the food in question provides calories without nutrients. So there is such a thing and it makes plenty of sense.

(USDA takes my side: http://www.choosemyplate.gov/weight-management-calories/calo...)

Post reply on HN