Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers
WeightAdviser.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / November 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Nutritionists Don't Know "Calorie vs calorie" ?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Jbuch - 18 Nov 2006 12:37 GMT
I have always had this queasy feeling when I read newspaper columns
written by nutritionists.  Now, maybe, I can understand why....

> James L. Hargrove, associate professor of foods and nutrition in the
University of Georgia’s College of Family and Consumer Sciences, said
many nutritionists aren’t even sure of the true origin of the Calorie
(or why it’s supposed to be capitalized).

> “We all teach this unit, and nobody knows where it came from,
not even the historians of nutrition,” he said.

Often, I get the sensation that nutritionists parrot things, rather than
understand things.

Anybody else had this feeling?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.uga.edu/news/artman/publish/061117_Calories.shtml

UGA professor finds that confusion about Calories is nothing new
[UGA = University of Georgia, Athens]
Nov 17, 2006, 15:26

Athens, Ga. – While enjoying a Thanksgiving dinner with friends and
family, most try to avoid thinking about the seemingly unending number
of Calories they’re consuming.

It probably never crosses their minds, however, to think about why food
is measured in Calories.

James L. Hargrove, associate professor of foods and nutrition in the
University of Georgia’s College of Family and Consumer Sciences, said
many nutritionists aren’t even sure of the true origin of the Calorie
(or why it’s supposed to be capitalized).

“We all teach this unit, and nobody knows where it came from, not even
the historians of nutrition,” he said.

After this realization, Hargrove began studying the origins of the
Calorie. He details his findings in a study to be published in the
December issue of the Journal of Nutrition.

Formally, a Calorie is a measure of the amount of energy required to
heat one kilogram of water one degree Celsius. It was first used in
engineering and physics, but eventually found its niche in nutrition,
where it is used to measure the amount of energy food contains.

Hargrove found that there’s some controversy about who “invented” the
Calorie. Some references show that two Frenchmen, P.A. Favre and J.T.
Silbermann, invented the Calorie in 1852. Other texts state that a
German physician, Julius Mayer, effectively invented the Calorie in a
study he published in 1848.

Hargrove credits the French chemist Nicholas Clement with the invention,
however, citing lecture notes from Clement that define the term as early
as 1819.

He credits Mayer with beginning a dialogue about food as an energy
source. Before Mayer’s time, people thought that energy was God-given;
they made no concrete connections between food they ate and the energy
on which their bodies ran.

Despite the confusion over who invented the unit, Hargrove notes that
the Calorie as a nutritional unit came to the U.S. by way of a man named
Wilbur Atwater in 1887. Shortly afterward, the science of nutrition
began to take hold in the U.S.

A popular early nutrition text published in 1918 by Lulu Hunt Peters
outlined the first methods of counting Calories. In her bestseller, Diet
and Health, with the Key to the Calories, Peters outlined 100-Calorie
portions of many foodstuffs and preached counting Calories as a way to
regulate weight.

Hargrove notes that one common misunderstanding about the Calorie is why
it is spelled with an uppercase “C” rather than a lowercase “c.” Owing
to the obscure origins of the measure, there was confusion about whether
or not a calorie was defined as the amount of heat required to raise one
kilogram of water one degree Celsius or one gram of water one degree
Celsius. As the Calorie became popular in nutrition, it became more
practical to measure the amount of kilograms. To denote this, a capital
“C” refers to a kilogram calorie, while a lowercase “c” refers to a gram
calorie.

"In food and daily energy, we use so much energy that if you measure in
gram calories, you're talking about two million calories a day," he
said. "And who wants to think about that?"

Signature

1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book
2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book
3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins
book
4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)

Roger Zoul - 18 Nov 2006 13:31 GMT
:: I have always had this queasy feeling when I read
:: newspaper columns written by nutritionists.  Now, maybe,
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
::
:: Anybody else had this feeling?

Yes, but I wouldn't stop with just nutritionists....

I *think* most who study nutrition are more inclined toward the "softer"
fields of endeavor. If so, it's quite understandable that this:

:: Formally, a Calorie is a measure of the amount of energy
:: required to heat one kilogram of water one degree
:: Celsius. It was first used in engineering and physics,
:: but eventually found its niche in nutrition, where it is
:: used to measure the amount of energy food contains.

would have little meaning.

:: -----------------------------------------------------------------------
::
[quoted text clipped - 77 lines]
:: million calories a day," he said. "And who wants to
:: think about that?"
Jbuch - 18 Nov 2006 14:15 GMT
> :: I have always had this queasy feeling when I read
> :: newspaper columns written by nutritionists.  Now, maybe,
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> would have little meaning.

Yes, and actually today with most people, they might attach little
meaning to the sentence.

I have heard people "trump" a diet debate by declaring "To me, a calorie
is a calorie is a calorie!" and then marching off in triumph.

The few nutritionists have met have all been female, none were obese,
and they all appeared "people oriented".

But, this Midwest small sample (maybe 5 nutritionists) can't be
generalized to the whole country.

> :: -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ::
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> :: nothing new [UGA = University of Georgia, Athens]
> :: Nov 17, 2006, 15:26

<SNIP>

Signature

1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book
2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book
3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins
book
4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)

Tom G - 18 Nov 2006 15:33 GMT
> I have always had this queasy feeling when I read newspaper columns
> written by nutritionists.  Now, maybe, I can understand why....
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Anybody else had this feeling?

 Not me. I've never been the suspicious type.  :o)
BlueBrooke - 18 Nov 2006 16:59 GMT
>Often, I get the sensation that nutritionists parrot things, rather than
>understand things.
>
>Anybody else had this feeling?

Unfortunately, get this impression about most people in most
situations.  I find I meet very few true "teachers."  
--

BlueBrooke
T2/D&E/June 2005

The things that come to those who wait will
be the things left by those who got there first.
Cubit - 22 Nov 2006 17:59 GMT
So, what is the difference?  Was there someone named Calorie?

Could one be the value in a food, and the other the physical measurement in
a volume of water?  Maybe?

>I have always had this queasy feeling when I read newspaper columns written
>by nutritionists.  Now, maybe, I can understand why....
[quoted text clipped - 83 lines]
> gram calories, you're talking about two million calories a day," he said.
> "And who wants to think about that?"
Brigid Nelson - 22 Nov 2006 22:17 GMT
> So, what is the difference?  Was there someone named Calorie?

This is decent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie
Cubit - 29 Nov 2006 22:12 GMT
Thanks.

"A convention of capitalizing "Calorie" to refer to the kilogram calorie,
with uncapitalized "calorie" referring to the gram calorie, is sometimes
proposed, but neither recognized in any official standards, nor commonly
followed."

It would seem Jbuch is nit picking.

>> So, what is the difference?  Was there someone named Calorie?
>
> This is decent:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie
Jbuch - 29 Nov 2006 23:18 GMT
> Thanks.
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calorie

If you read the article, you would know it wasn't my nitpicking.

It was "nitpicking" by an educator of nutritionists who discussed more
than that as failures to really educate nutritionists.

Sorry you missed the actual point of the article.

Signature

1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book
2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book
3) Don't Diet Without Supplemental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins
book
4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)

Brigid Nelson - 30 Nov 2006 20:24 GMT
> Thanks.
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> It would seem Jbuch is nit picking.

It's the kind of "nit" that can cause you to lose serious pointage on a
chemistry test.

just sayin,
brigid
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.