Calories

[miles]

I was struggling to word my question so...

Raw Beef: 200cal  ;   Wheatabix: 200cal

Do these two items, both measured to contain '200calories' actually provide us with an equal amount of energy?

N.B. It's not because I eat by counting calories.

[Raw Kyle]

I don't think so. Caloric measurement isn't the amount of energy food gives a human body, it's a measurement of how much energy can be derived from the food by burning. Variances in the way different animals or even different people metabolize food would probably lead to different energy amounts gathered from those same caloric amounts.

[kurite]

I don't think so. Caloric measurement isn't the amount of energy food gives a human body, it's a measurement of how much energy can be derived from the food by burning. Variances in the way different animals or even different people metabolize food would probably lead to different energy amounts gathered from those same caloric amounts.

Agreed. For instance when raw, whole grains starch digestibility is very low. However when cooked your body can extract about 70% of the starch in them.

[tammy123]

I think in comparison to raw food, cooked food contains more calories as, it is prepared in whole some of stuffs like, oil and other ingredients that will make it very fatty so it is better to have raw food cooked in very less oil without any other ingredients on it.

 

[TylerDurden]

(Paleo) raw foods contain more calories than cooked per gram as raw foods also have additional water-content and nutrients that are wiped out after cooking. Grains and legumes, though, have more usable calories after cooking, though they are in themselves very harmful.

[tammy123]

(Paleo) raw foods contain more calories than cooked per gram as raw foods also have additional water-content and nutrients that are wiped out after cooking. Grains and legumes, though, have more usable calories after cooking, though they are in themselves very harmful.

Oh really very thanks for letting this know as, I was got little confused but, the food that we cooked in spices and oil do contains a lot of calories.

Thanks

[NEUROSPORT]

I don't think so. Caloric measurement isn't the amount of energy food gives a human body, it's a measurement of how much energy can be derived from the food by burning. Variances in the way different animals or even different people metabolize food would probably lead to different energy amounts gathered from those same caloric amounts.

damn !

that was like way too smart.

i agree.

the body is not 100% efficient.  if it was our bodies would be at room temperature.  the heat our bodies produce are the inefficiency of our body's metabolism.  some processes are more inefficient than others.  i would guess that if your food goes directly to use it would be more efficient than if it had to first be converted for storage, stored, and then converted back for use or something like that.

since protein cannot be either used for energy directly or stored directly i would assume that calories from protein don't go as far as say calories from glucose which can be burned directly or calories form fat that can be stored directly.