View Single Post
Old 11-01-08, 08:42 AM
  #15  
Wogster
Senior Member
 
Wogster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,931

Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by deraltekluge
That's nonsense. There's something else going on here. There is absolutely no way that consuming more calories and doing nothing else different would cause you to lose weight. That would violate the laws of physics.

Further, there is no such thing as a "good" calorie or a "bad" calorie. A calorie is simply a measure of the energy content of the food.
A Calorie is simply a measure of food energy, in that you can use other scales just as effectively like joules, kilowatt hours and even horsepower hours. However in weight loss the calorie is currency, so it's what you get for your calorie. If I have a calorie budget, say 2000 Calories, then I want the best value for my calories, For example I have a bottle of pop, costs say 350 Calories, and a bottle of orange juice also costs 350 Calories. The pop has a nutritional value of zero, the orange juice contains several vitamins and minerals making it a better deal, because I would need to consume something else to get those vitamins and minerals, something which may have it's own cost in calories.
Wogster is offline