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 / General Topics / May 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Metabolic efficiency

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Christoph Loew - 30 May 2005 04:50 GMT
Hi,

I've been successfully using "The Hacker's Diet" (calorie counting
with some engineer-friendly software tools) as an inspiration
to getting back to a (for me) acceptable weight, losing about 25 kg
over the last 10 months.

I've assumed that a kaloric intake deficit of 7700 kcal results in
the loss of about 1 kg of body fat and have calculated my BMR and
target intake accordingly.

However, lately I've wondered : how accurate is that ?
Assuming that 7700 kcal of food can be metabolised by the body to
a certain amount of usable energy (exactly those 32.24 MJ), then
metabolizing this energy ino fat can't be 100 % efficient. On the
other hand, metabolizing 1 kg of fat into usable energy can't be
100 % efficient either, so the assumptions
 'eating 7700 kcal above needed energy over a period of time
  results in a weight gain of 1 kg'
and
 'eating 7700 kcal below needed energy over a period of time
  results in a weight loss of 1 kg'
can't be accurate - even if they worked very nicely for me.

Can someone point me to an online document clarifying this ?

Thanks in advance,

Chris

1.86 m
113 kg -> 87.6 kg
GaryG - 30 May 2005 07:27 GMT
> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>    results in a weight loss of 1 kg'
> can't be accurate - even if they worked very nicely for me.

http://www.hhp.ufl.edu/keepingfit/ARTICLE/fatcalories.HTM

Signature

GG
http://www.WeightWare.com
Computer-Assisted Weight Management

> Can someone point me to an online document clarifying this ?
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Patricia  Heil - 30 May 2005 13:35 GMT
> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

No.  The point is whatever amount of calories you're eating, you have to use
that energy up by exercising.  Chemicals won't do it.
Lee Harris - 31 May 2005 09:34 GMT
> No.  The point is whatever amount of calories you're eating, you have to use
> that energy up by exercising.

thats not strictly true is it. It's how many calories your body burns up,
surely. If you stuff yourself silly and some of it comes out undigested,
that's calories "eaten" but not contributing to your body's thermodynamics.
 
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.