Is McDonalds and Fast Food Poison?

[doozejooze]

A calorie is not a calorie from all different sources because it is an imperfect measurement. It is unlike an inch or pound or liter. In our bodies (closed system) there are many factors that influence how we derive energy from a calorie 'source'. I will look for the articles you mention but if you have a quick reference, please post it. A calorie as defined by the energy required to raise 1 gram of water 1 degree celsius has many factors that influence it. In a lab at atmospheric pressure one can predictably measure a calorie as a calorie but not in our bodies. Just look at a salad with tomatoes, hearts of palm, onions, maybe some red beans and feta cheese and tell me that eating 600 calories of that salad is the same as eating 600 calories of chili cheese fries. Its counterintuitive and feels thusly for a reson.

[doozejooze]

Mow how (gas or push) define small and then consider me aware. Also, I tried to (tongue in cheek) qualify the statement by saying physical activity would be a factor, the meth was a poor attempt at humor.

[King Shizzo]

A calorie is not a calorie from all different sources because it is an imperfect measurement. It is unlike an inch or pound or liter. In our bodies (closed system) there are many factors that influence how we derive energy from a calorie 'source'. I will look for the articles you mention but if you have a quick reference, please post it. A calorie as defined by the energy required to raise 1 gram of water 1 degree celsius has many factors that influence it. In a lab at atmospheric pressure one can predictably measure a calorie as a calorie but not in our bodies. Just look at a salad with tomatoes, hearts of palm, onions, maybe some red beans and feta cheese and tell me that eating 600 calories of that salad is the same as eating 600 calories of chili cheese fries. Its counterintuitive and feels thusly for a reson.

It is exactly the same. 600 calories is 600 calories. Is the salad healthier than the chili fries? Of course, but you will still lose weight eating anything.

[doozejooze]

Sorry, your premise is flawed because healthier denotes different. Is it possible to eat anything and lose weight if a caloric deficit is produced through consumption reduction, drug use, or physical activity? Yes, of course! But there is a healthier (you admitted) way yo do it.

[King Shizzo]

Sorry, your premise is flawed because healthier denotes different. Is it possible to eat anything and lose weight if a caloric deficit is produced through consumption reduction, drug use, or physical activity? Yes, of course! But there is a healthier (you admitted) way yo do it.

I agree then. McDonalds isn't healthy (per se) but, you can easily lose weight by eating McDonalds.

[doozejooze]

Yes you can lose weight eating McDonalds (food is nasty tasting BTW) but its hard to fathom the counterintuitive nature of some of these posts and posts from other threads. Saying a calorie is a calorie outside the body is fine but once inside a closed system that functions on the premise of enthalpy, entropy, and (supply and demand) an ever evolving dynamic, e.g. retraining taste buds, creating more adipocytes, losing mitochondria, glucose insensitivity et al is ludicrous. Perform an experiment. Eat the exact same amount of each food source for the exact same time frame whilst  performing the same activities. The source of calories will influence their measurability in a closed system as will other internal factors and any aberrated external factors.

[dr.chimps]

McDonald's is great at 3:00 am

Agreed. Not so great when you're carrying a few beers and a McD's lunch in the outfield. Talk about praying you don't get hit to.     

[King Shizzo]

Its hard to fathom the counterintuitive nature of some of these posts. Saying a calorie is a calorie outside the body is fine but once inside a closed system that functions on the premise of enthalpy, entropy, and (supply and demand) an ever evolving dynamic, e.g. retraining taste buds, creating more adipocytes, losing mitochondria, glucose insensitivity et al is ludicrous (not hysterical since it comes from the root word 'hystera' which means womb or uterus.....dumb trivia). I don't have to convince someone of this. Eat the exact same amount of each food source for the exact same time  performing the same activities. The source of calories will influence their measurability in a closed system.

All you have to do is get your basic daily nutrient requirements. How you meet those is entirely up to the individual. Each bodytype will react differently (hence bodytype) to different foods. It is up to the individual to asses bodytype.

[doozejooze]

Yes, we do have daily nutrient needs that different body types can arrive at differently. I do want to make a clear point. Recommendations for optimal eating will be generalized when speaking to groups and specific when speaking to an individual, so its important to realize that specificity is almost impossible when speaking to disparate persons. So, the rules that govern the dynamics of our metabolism have different parameters in different bodytypes but are inherent in all and must be taken into account when suggesting macronutrients that deliver micronutrients.

[The True Adonis]

Sorry, your premise is flawed because healthier denotes different. Is it possible to eat anything and lose weight if a caloric deficit is produced through consumption reduction, drug use, or physical activity? Yes, of course! But there is a healthier (you admitted) way yo do it.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html

For 10 weeks, Mark Haub, a professor of human nutrition at Kansas State University, ate one of these sugary cakelets every three hours, instead of meals. To add variety in his steady stream of Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Haub munched on Doritos chips, sugary cereals and Oreos, too.
His premise: That in weight loss, pure calorie counting is what matters most -- not the nutritional value of the food.

Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

[doozejooze]

Let me read this and get right back. BTW, triglycerides or triacylglycerol (TAG) is not a form of fat but the storage configuration of fatty acids found in nature and our bodies (about 95% of fatty acids are found in this energy saving configuration instead of free form). It is usually a pitch fork configuration wherein 3 fatty acids are attached to a glycerol backbone.

[The True Adonis]

Let me read this and get right back. BTW, triglycerides or triacylglycerol (TAC) is not a form of fat but the storage configuration of fatty acids found in nature and our bodies (about 95% of fatty acids are found in this energy saving configuration instead of free form). It is usually a pitch fork configuration wherein 3 fatty acids are attached to a glycerol backbone.

You oughta contact Professor of Nutrition Mark Haub.  He will sent your ramblings straight. 

[The True Adonis]

I have been in contact with Mark and gave him all my information, including diet and uses it in his classroom.

[King Shizzo]

Remember, even Adonis's principles cannot teach discipline and willpower. Most humans in a caloric deficit, will feel hungry at some point throughout the day. That is where anabolics/cutting agents and diet pills come in. Hunger is a bitch.

[doozejooze]

I just wrote a whole bunch (on my phone) and it went dead. Just plugged it back in. Let me rewrite it.

[The True Adonis]

I just wrote a whole bunch (on my phone) and it went dead. Just plugged it back in. Let me rewrite it.

No need to write anything.  It won`t matter because it probably isn`t correct anyways. 

[doozejooze]

Firstly, I need to correct the author on TAG. One person's jaunt into a 30% caloric deficit for 10 weeks while still eating veggies, protein shakes, and multivitamins. The gist is, eating too much healthy food is not necessarily healthy and eating crap, just a lot less, can improve health parameters but the longterm is iffy. I posit that most Americans should lose 10% bodweight ASAP to improve health parameters and I fully agree with Shizzo that discipline, willpower, whatever you want to call it is at the heart of the matter. How is that taught or expanded or gifted or bequeathed? As to the study, it raises great questions and I would if liked to see a quality of life pre/post test questionnaire performed by the professor. Also, if he used TA's stuff in the class then that is cool.

[doozejooze]

Isn't correct anyway, hahahhahaha, on some stuff thats true, the more I learn the more I think there will never be enough time to learn all I want. Drugs and knowledge are the real slippery slopes in life.

[The True Adonis]

Isn't correct anyway, hahahhahaha, on some stuff thats true, the more I learn the more I think there will never be enough time to learn all I want. Drugs and knowledge are the real slippery slopes in life.

I was just kidding with you my friend.  I always enjoy a debate.    

[doozejooze]

Hahaha, as do I my east coast raconteur

[dr.chimps]

No need to write anything.  It won`t matter because it probably isn`t correct anyways. 

I'm sure there's a slavery subtext I'm not getting, either.   

[Mr Nobody]

I'm sure there's a slavery subtext I'm not getting, either.   

Tom Glavine approved.

[Disgusted]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html

For 10 weeks, Mark Haub, a professor of human nutrition at Kansas State University, ate one of these sugary cakelets every three hours, instead of meals. To add variety in his steady stream of Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Haub munched on Doritos chips, sugary cereals and Oreos, too.
His premise: That in weight loss, pure calorie counting is what matters most -- not the nutritional value of the food.

Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

Your professor buddy needs to go back to school. As discovered a few years ago, artery wall inflammation is the real cause of heart disease which leads to plaque build up not in the cholesterol numbers themselves. Arterial inflammation in caused from too much sugar consumption. Even the Cleveland Clinic recognizes this. Cholesterol attaches itself to injured and inflamed areas of the arteries as part of the body's natural repair system. Without inflammation, there would be no arterial plaque. This guy is a complete idiot that has no real working knowledge of how the human body works and even worse he knows nothing about the long term negative health effects of sugar.  

http://preventdisease.com/news/12/030112_World-Renown-Heart-Surgeon-Speaks-Out-On-What-Really-Causes-Heart-Disease.shtml

[doozejooze]

Sugar has replaced Yersinia Pestis as the plague in the modern world. We seem to know so much about its deleterious effects and the more we learn about long term abuse co-morbidities the harsher it gets.

[The True Adonis]

Your professor buddy needs to go back to school. As discovered a few years ago, artery wall inflammation is the real cause of heart disease which leads to plaque build up not in the cholesterol numbers themselves. Arterial inflammation in caused from too much sugar consumption. Even the Cleveland Clinic recognizes this. Cholesterol attaches itself to injured and inflamed areas of the arteries as part of the body's natural repair system. Without inflammation, there would be no arterial plaque. This guy is a complete idiot that has no real working knowledge of how the human body works and even worse he knows nothing about the long term negative health effects of sugar.  

http://preventdisease.com/news/12/030112_World-Renown-Heart-Surgeon-Speaks-Out-On-What-Really-Causes-Heart-Disease.shtml

You seem to hate everything!