• rigatti@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The study seemed pretty intense, I imagine it’s hard to find participants, not to mention funding it.

  • loopy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The gut microbiome has always fascinated me. I honestly never really thought about feeding the billions of microbes that have real estate in my body.

    I wonder if caffeine would have a similar effect because it seems like things move more quickly through the GI tract.

  • loopy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The gut microbiome has always fascinated me. I honestly never really thought about feeding the billions of microbes that have real estate in my body.

    I wonder if caffeine would have a similar effect because it seems like things move more quickly through the GI tract.

  • loopy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The gut microbiome has always fascinated me. I honestly never really thought about feeding the billions of microbes that have real estate in my body.

    I wonder if caffeine would have a similar effect because it seems like things move more quickly through the GI tract.

  • forsen@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nice article but it doesn’t really prove that calories are not equal. The article discusses how the calories get absorbed differently, but that doesn’t mean the calories have changed or disappeared. Kind of misleading title.

    • jocanib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I suppose it depends on whether you’re interested in the amount of energy contained in a food or the amount of energy a human being can obtain from the food. We’re typically only interested in the latter.

      Calories are not interchangeable if you’re interested in nutrition (as opposed to burning things).

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The best example I can think of is cellulose; it’s the main source of calories for ruminants, but totally indigestible by humans.

        • jocanib@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are loads of examples, that’s a very good one (fibre burns in calorimeters so can throw calorie counts off a lot).

          Raw food delivers fewer (usable) calories than cooked food, whether it’s vegetables or steak.

          Highly processed foods, especially carbohydrates, deliver their calories fast, spiking blood sugar and stimulating insulin production to lay the excess energy down as fat. If you’re hibernating for winter, you want the fat. But if you’re running a marathon you want slow (protein and fat) and slower (complex carbohydrates) release foods.

          Chill your potatoes/rice/pasta for 24 hours and it will have more complex carbohydrates than it did when freshly cooked. Reheat them and they’ll have even more. Jury still out on whether this means frozen chips (fries) are a healthy food…

          Even the amount you chew affects the number of calories available (analogous to the amount of pre-processing being important).

          International tables of glycemic index and glycemic load values 2021: a systematic review

          How reheating pasta and other carbs can make them healthier

    • fsniper@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      In this context, calories not being same does not mean there are different kinds of calories.

      However calorie source could mean how it’s absorbed by your body may differ. So 100 calorie chocolate may provide your body 90 calories of energy, but 100 calorie lentil could provide your body 80calories worth of energy.

  • m3t00🌎 voted@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    long story. tl;dr: I had anxiety after quitting a prescription and killed my digestion with OTC meds. Fiber, enzyme supplements and protein drinks have me gaining weight again. “Cheap processed foods”? who eats this crap every day still? give me veggies raw or canned anyday. cheap

    • davidalso@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      This research didn’t seem to investigate trans fats, but rather the effect of unprocessed food that’s high in fiber vs processed food that’s low in fiber.

      The last book I read that discussed fats is a bit out of date (The Story of the Human Body: Evolution, Health, and Disease by Daniel Lieberman), but it has an interesting explanation of the differences between saturated, unsaturated, and trans fats. Then the author reveals the plot twist that well… maybe the different fats don’t actually make that much difference once they’re in the body and that current research is still unclear.

  • Arsisaria@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The headline kinda blows. All calories are equal, but if you include the calories which are used by gut flora, our current counts are inaccurate. Not as catchy, I guess.

    • hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meaningless distinction. The whole point is calories from the perspective of gut flora because we’re interested in how the body is using those calories in this context.