# what makes up a calorie?



## bartonz20let (Aug 13, 2010)

First post, always kept fairly healthy but only just taken a more serious interest in my diet and workouts.

I train 4-5 times a week split between 2 days cardio 3 weights or vice versa but still carry a little weight and cant seem to shift it.

I'm trying to work out how to target weight loss by controlling calories, i assume this is a desent place to start?

I understand that carbs are 4kcal/g, fat 9kcal/9 & Protein 4kcal/g right? What other factors, if any, make up calories that need to be factored in?

Am i correct that 1lb of fat stores 3500kcal of energy? Wanting to set myself target kcal reductions and track weight loss.


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

bartonz20let said:


> First post, always kept fairly healthy but only just taken a more serious interest in my diet and workouts.
> 
> I train 4-5 times a week split between 2 days cardio 3 weights or vice versa but still carry a little weight and cant seem to shift it.
> 
> ...


Yes! you do need to restrict calories to promote weight loss, but IMO fcuk the calories! A calorie is not just a calorie, and screw anyone that tells you otherwise.

1. YOU DON'T WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT - You want to loose fat, loosing weight is easy, chop your legs off, Job Done!

2. Don't go on a diet, change your diet

3. Foods act very differently in the body to each other, every food you eat has a metabolic, thermogenic effect, different hormones are released in response to different foods. I promise you this, if you eat 3000 calories a day of pure refined carbs, vs 3000 calories a day balanced, you will fair much better balanced. You see, a calorie is not just a calorie. Work out your BMR (google that 1), then reduce total calories by 500, and split the macro's down to approx 40% Protein, 30% Fat, 30% Carbs in calories. Eat only low GI carbs and veg, eat the carbs in the morning, and post workout, and you will not go far wrong


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

Take a couple of days out and read through the forums as there's tons of excellent advice here. A calorie is (IMVHO) such a rough and ready guide it's almost not worth bothering about. In simple terms, the way the calorific value of a food is calculated is by burning it and measuring the energy produced. How this is meant to relate to the way in which our bodies metabolise food escapes me. Far better for you to re-educate yourself with the advice here as to what and when to eat, depending on what you're trying to achieve. Look out for insight into how much of what we've been told about keeping weight down (ie the good old low fat diet) is a load of bull.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

B|GJOE said:


> Yes! you do need to restrict calories to promote weight loss, but IMO fcuk the calories! A calorie is not just a calorie, and screw anyone that tells you otherwise.
> 
> 1. YOU DON'T WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT - You want to loose fat, loosing weight is easy, chop your legs off, Job Done!
> 
> ...


Aw Joe, I think I love you. :thumb:

Nice post.

Yes, the zone type macro's are awesome for fat loss, very effective and very good place to start.

SPot on about the low GI carbs, and vegetables.

35 grams of fiber is equal to about 250 calories in the negative.


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Ian_Montrose said:


> Take a couple of days out and read through the forums as there's tons of excellent advice here. A calorie is (IMVHO) such a rough and ready guide it's almost not worth bothering about. In simple terms, the way the calorific value of a food is calculated is by burning it and measuring the energy produced. How this is meant to relate to the way in which our bodies metabolise food escapes me. Far better for you to re-educate yourself with the advice here as to what and when to eat, depending on what you're trying to achieve. Look out for insight into how much of what we've been told about keeping weight down *(ie the good old low fat diet) is a load of bull.*


x20,000

Fat is good,

Fat is king

Fat IMVHO is the nutrient of choice for energy and health, and yes, I do include a certain amount of saturated fat in that. The only fats to avoid like poison (because they are)

1. Trans Fats (Exception CLA Congugulated Linoleic Acid, which technically is a trans fat, but is very very good for you.

2. Commercial vegetable oils (Full of inflamatory Omega 6 fatty acids, and the methods of extraction would horrify most, polyunsaturates are unstable under heat, but yet they are heat pressed, subjected to heavy metal contamination to remove odour from the rancidity induced by heating. to top it off, people then go and put the sh1t in their chip pans, and feed it to their kids, fcuking crazy!)

Oils should be cold pressed, and refridgerated when opened, and should come from

1. Extra Virgin Olive Oil

2. Hemp Oil

3. Flaxseed (linseed) Oil

Never cook with a liquid fat, always use solid saturated fats to cook with, like coconut, butter, or lard. These are stable and not poisonous when heated.

I'm ranting now.........

But don't be affraid of fat in your diet, but watch them nasty carbs


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

hackskii said:


> *Aw Joe, I think I love you.* :thumb:
> 
> Nice post.
> 
> ...


However, this does not mean that we will be swapping spit in the shower through the small hours of the night. :nono:

:wub: :wub: :wub: :wub:


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

B|GJOE said:


> However, this does not mean that we will be swapping spit in the shower through the small hours of the night. :nono:
> 
> :wub: :wub: :wub: :wub:


Well, I think I can persuade you by a few flattering comments.

Joe you look awesome, even better naked:lol:

Joe, you are so smart, I wish I had half the intilligence as you, that would make me 40 times smarter than anyone else.

Hows that? :whistling:  :innocent:


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

hackskii said:


> Well, I think I can persuade you by a few flattering comments.
> 
> Joe you look awesome, even better naked:lol:
> 
> ...


I'm sold! get naked, and get the shower on NOW! :tongue:


----------



## cellaratt (Jul 16, 2008)

bartonz20let said:


> First post, always kept fairly healthy but only just taken a more serious interest in my diet and workouts.
> 
> I train 4-5 times a week split between 2 days cardio 3 weights or vice versa but still carry a little weight and cant seem to shift it.
> 
> ...





B|GJOE said:


> Yes! you do need to restrict calories to promote weight loss, but IMO fcuk the calories! A calorie is not just a calorie, and screw anyone that tells you otherwise.
> 
> 1. YOU DON'T WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT - You want to loose fat, loosing weight is easy, chop your legs off, Job Done!
> 
> ...





Ian_Montrose said:


> Take a couple of days out and read through the forums as there's tons of excellent advice here. A calorie is (IMVHO) such a rough and ready guide it's almost not worth bothering about. In simple terms, the way the calorific value of a food is calculated is by burning it and measuring the energy produced. How this is meant to relate to the way in which our bodies metabolise food escapes me. Far better for you to re-educate yourself with the advice here as to what and when to eat, depending on what you're trying to achieve. Look out for insight into how much of what we've been told about keeping weight down (ie the good old low fat diet) is a load of bull.





B|GJOE said:


> x20,000
> 
> Fat is good,
> 
> ...


I hope that answers your question... :thumb: ...Welcome to the board bro... :beer: ...


----------



## Chub (Dec 3, 2008)

B|GJOE said:


> Never cook with a liquid fat, always use solid saturated fats to cook with, like coconut, butter, or lard. These are stable and not poisonous when heated.


so i'm going wrong by frying eggs in EVOO? :s


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

B|GJOE said:


> x20,000
> 
> Fat is good,
> 
> ...


I'm currently doing the anabolic diet and fry alot of my food to get fats in, however I fry them currently in Olive oil... are you saying this is bad? Why is it bad? What effect will it have?

Also I read a study in which it claimed olive oil helped increase natural testosterone levels, EVOO was not mentioned, what are your thoughts on this?


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

Chub said:


> so i'm going wrong by frying eggs in EVOO? :s


Yep! in fact olive oil has a very low smoke point, you really damage it under extreme heat, causing oxidative free radicals. NOT GOOD

I'd say the best fat of all to fry with is coconut oil, awesome stuff for frying, as it is very stable under extreme heat and has other health benefits.

I like to fry eggs in butter, taste awesome. Obviously make sure you keep track of the food you're eating, especially when it is calorie dense.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

FRying eggs in butter is my fav.

My granny used to cook bacon then fry the eggs in them using a spoon to toss the oil over them.

Worked very well and you could have them sunny side up.


----------



## a.notherguy (Nov 17, 2008)

B|GJOE said:


> Yep! in fact olive oil has a very low smoke point, you really damage it under extreme heat, causing oxidative free radicals. NOT GOOD
> 
> I'd say the best fat of all to fry with is coconut oil, awesome stuff for frying, as it is very stable under extreme heat and has other health benefits.
> 
> I like to fry eggs in butter, taste awesome. Obviously make sure you keep track of the food you're eating, especially when it is calorie dense.


didnt know that!

how does coconut oil affect the taste of food? (ive never tried it and im my head i imagine it makes everything taste of coconut lol)

what about cooking things like mince? is evo ok for that as it isnt fried at the same temp as other foods?

i always thought lard was the enemy when it came to fats


----------



## B-GJOE (May 7, 2009)

a.notherguy said:


> didnt know that!
> 
> how does coconut oil affect the taste of food? (ive never tried it and im my head i imagine it makes everything taste of coconut lol)
> 
> ...


Can't believe I gotta post this again

XPPYaVcXo1I[/MEDIA]]


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

WannaGetStacked said:


> Also I read a study in which it claimed olive oil helped increase natural testosterone levels, EVOO was not mentioned, what are your thoughts on this?


I've seen quite a few articles claiming this as well. However, as already covered by Joe, you need to be really careful not to damage dietry fats through excessive heating. The lighter the fat the more easily it is damaged by heat so liquid fats like olive oil should really be eaten uncooked. Use solid fats (lard, butter, coconut, ghee etc) if you fry and do so on a gentle heat.

If you haven't found it already www.ergo-log.com is a great resource for published diet/nutrition/BBing studies. Don't take all the studies purely at face value though as some are not as scientifically robust as others. Great starting point though.


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

Ian_Montrose said:


> I've seen quite a few articles claiming this as well. However, as already covered by Joe, you need to be really careful not to damage dietry fats through excessive heating. The lighter the fat the more easily it is damaged by heat so liquid fats like olive oil should really be eaten uncooked. Use solid fats (lard, butter, coconut, ghee etc) if you fry and do so on a gentle heat.
> 
> If you haven't found it already www.ergo-log.com is a great resource for published diet/nutrition/BBing studies. Don't take all the studies purely at face value though as some are not as scientifically robust as others. Great starting point though.


Interesting. Also, what was the relevance of keeping Olive oil refrigerated? I've never done that nor seen that done?


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

WannaGetStacked said:


> Interesting. Also, what was the relevance of keeping Olive oil refrigerated? I've never done that nor seen that done?


It goes rancid if exposed to too much heat or light. You don't tend to notice it if cooking with it but you will if you eat it the way it's meant to be eaten. Most EVOO is actually rancid by the time it reaches the shop as it's not stored or packed properly in the first place but you can buy relly good stuff if you shop around. Worth mentioning that you pay a price premium for extra virgin as it's the first cold pressing and thus the best quality oil. If you really must cook with olive oil you might as well just buy the cheap non-V stuff.


----------



## Heineken (Feb 6, 2009)

Great read

It's just dawned on me I don't actually need to use oil to fry my eggs, as I have a non-stick pan. I'm going to go hit myself over the head with it now :lol:


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

Ian_Montrose said:


> It goes rancid if exposed to too much heat or light. You don't tend to notice it if cooking with it but you will if you eat it the way it's meant to be eaten. Most EVOO is actually rancid by the time it reaches the shop as it's not stored or packed properly in the first place but you can buy relly good stuff if you shop around. Worth mentioning that you pay a price premium for extra virgin as it's the first cold pressing and thus the best quality oil. If you really must cook with olive oil you might as well just buy the cheap non-V stuff.


Do you mean rancid in taste? As It seems fine to me? Is there any negative effect on my cutting by using it to fry?


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

WannaGetStacked said:


> Do you mean rancid in taste? As It seems fine to me? Is there any negative effect on my cutting by using it to fry?


It will taste rancid and if you've ever tried really fresh olive oil you'll easily notice the difference. Whether it matters to you depends on why you're using it. If you're just using olive oil as a general source of dietry fat it won't really matter in the short term. If you're using it for its various longer term benefits as a healthy fat it does matter, not least because rancid oil has fewer antioxidants and higher levels of free radicals. TBH, if you're not interested in the longer term health benefits and just want to cook with it you're probably better saving your money and buying Spry Crisp'n'Dry.


----------



## SonOfZeus (Feb 15, 2009)

Well I got mum to buy some butter, going to use that for frying from now if it's better. Try and just have a tablespoon of olive oil a day or something.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

B|GJOE said:


> Can't believe I gotta post this again
> 
> XPPYaVcXo1I[/MEDIA]]


Man, I really loved this.

I just talked to a friend today that had his doctor tell him if he didnt lower his cholesterol and lose some weight he was going to die of heart disease.

He is 20 pounds overweight with a cholesterol level of 230.

doc wanted to put him on statins.

I told him 230 wasnt nothing, he was convinced he was going to die if he left it there... :lol:


----------



## bartonz20let (Aug 13, 2010)

B|GJOE said:


> Work out your BMR (google that 1), then reduce total calories by 500, and split the macro's down to approx 40% Protein, 30% Fat, 30% Carbs in calories. Eat only low GI carbs and veg, eat the carbs in the morning, and post workout, and you will not go far wrong


Not sure if this is the best way to do it but ere's how my calculations went;

Caculated fat free mass and from that calculated resting metabolic rate, factored in cost of activity and calculated cost of excersise using MET's then took a 7 day avarage.

Came up with an avarage of 3475kcal/day

so i've targeted myself for 2900kcal/day and am trying to work out the ratio of fat, carb & protein i need, the reason i've done it like this is so i can see my canges in diet on paper, like a kind of motivation to change, want my intake/expenditure calculations to be as acurate as possible.

Was thinking on ratios similar to as you have sudgested but a little lower on the fat, still in a mental state of fear about fat, been gettin alot of cals from carb rich low fat foods without considering what my body did with all that carb.

I understand the contents of a food printed on the side of a packet is not the be all and end all but if i can start to monitor my diet i can start to make a change to what is quite a poor, iregular and oversized diet.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

high fat diets are not a problem.

High carb diets are not a proble.

But high fat and high carb diet are a problem.

Suggesting you lower your fat isnt the idea here.

Fat is an energy source.

Carbohydrates are an energy source.

Fat is a more efficient energy source than carbohydrates.

If the only thing you did was lower your processed foods, eliminated sugars, lowered your high GI carbs, you are on your way in the right direction.

Ketogenic diets work super well for fat loss, even improve lipid profiles, they work well because they burn fats for fuels instead of sugar/glucose.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

bartonz20let said:


> I understand that carbs are 4kcal/g, fat 9kcal/9 & Protein 4kcal/g right? What other factors, if any, make up calories that need to be factored in?


You know what... the 4/4/9 kcal values for carbs, protein and fat that are used all the time aren't necessarily very accurate.

It's kinda complex to explain but when different carbs, fats and proteins are tested for caloric values they actually give different values between different foods within that macro...eg:

kcals per g

glucose 3.692

lactose 3.877

sucrose 3.959

starch 4.116

average meat protein 4.233

average plant protein 4.301

olive oil 9.384

animal fat 9.372

butter fat 9.179

When these figures were discovered about a hundred years ago, some further tests were done and another discovery was made that foods in different combinations also affect the percentage availability of nutrients from each macro, and that the bioavailabilty of nutrients from one food can be and often is reduced depending on what you eat along side it.

A load of averages were then worked out based on equations from the data from those experiements, an 'average mixed diet' was assumed based on what people ate back then, and the averages of 4/4/9 that we use now for all foods (and assume are correct) come from those averages.

This is all well and good for rough calculations of calories but its never accurate since those average caloric values are only really accurate to represent macros for the mixed meals diet template people ate almost 100 years ago... diets that don't replicate that (especially extrem diets heavily reliant on just one or two macros) can have significantly different 'real' caloric values than the 4/4/9 template would say.

Those averages are called A t w a t e r (as one word which I can't type in as the forum detects a rude name for lady bits in the middle of the name :laugh Values... the following link has some foods calorie calculated correctly using A t w a t e r Conversions (accurate caloric totals) and not the A t w a t e r Averages of 4/4/9. - http://www.nutribase.com/a****er.shtml

As for worrying about this stuff I wouldn't too much... but it is interesting and kinda demonstrates that there can be more at work between two diets than just the metabolic effects of changing macros, and that caloric values and bioavailabilty can both also be different between diets and within a macro itself.


----------



## cecil_sensation (Jan 26, 2009)

my god what an amazing thread.

just learnt a shed load of in fo


----------



## zelobinksy (Oct 15, 2008)

B|GJOE said:


> Yes! you do need to restrict calories to promote weight loss, but IMO fcuk the calories! A calorie is not just a calorie, and screw anyone that tells you otherwise.
> 
> 1. YOU DON'T WANT TO LOSE WEIGHT - You want to loose fat, loosing weight is easy, chop your legs off, Job Done!
> 
> ...


Good advice there bigjoe.

Calories as such aren't the issue its their source and timing (imo).

I know a lot of people who have a carb loaded meal before bed, whats it going to do during 8-9 hours of sleep...be stored as fat, might replace some muscle glycogen stores, but a meal is more than enough.

Also you could look into your good fats (i.e. EFAS from fish/nuts/seeds, they have more benefits and can help with weight loss).


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Dtlv74 said:


> You know what... the 4/4/9 kcal values for carbs, protein and fat that are used all the time aren't necessarily very accurate.
> 
> It's kinda complex to explain but when different carbs, fats and proteins are tested for caloric values they actually give different values between different foods within that macro...eg:
> 
> ...


Wow, I need to commit this one to memory.

Very nice post, reps awarded.


----------

