Loosing weight with cold stuff. . . * what is wrong with this reasoning *?

episodic

Lifer
Feb 7, 2004
11,088
2
81
I read this - and it makes sense to me - but I know their has to be something faulty?

It takes 1 calorie to heat 1 gram of water 1 degree centigrade.


If you eat a desert that is 0 degree C (32 deg F) - the body will work to raise the food to body tempature which is 37 degrees celcius (98.6 deg. F).

So if you eat a gram of food at 0 degrees, then your body would need to burn 37 calories to heat that gram of food. So if you had a 100 gram desert that is at 0 degrees centigrade, the energy expended to warm it to body temp and normalize it would seem to be 3700 calories.

If the desert had 1000 calories in it - it would seem you'd have a net loss of 2700 calories.


What is wrong with my reasoning if anything. . . ?


Would eating LOTS of cold stuff accelerate your weight loss?

 

Mrvile

Lifer
Oct 16, 2004
14,066
1
0
Well you burn more calories doing something in cold weather, say jogging, than you do in warm weather. I don't know about food though.
 

mundane

Diamond Member
Jun 7, 2002
5,603
8
81
I was under the impression that the calories we consume were actually kilo-calories.

Wikipedia:
Colloquially, and in nutrition and food labelling, the term "calorie" almost always refers to the kilogram calorie

Edit: So our nutritional calories are actually the amount of energy required to heat one kilogram of water one degree celsius.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
I was under the impression that the calories we consume were actually kilo-calories.

Wikipedia:
Colloquially, and in nutrition and food labelling, the term "calorie" almost always refers to the kilogram calorie

Edit: So our nutritional calories are actually the amount of energy required to heat one kilogram of water one degree celsius.

exactly.

You do indeed burn 3700 calories to heat a 100 gram dessert from 0 to 37 degrees C. But, most desserts have a WHOLE lot more than 3.7 kcal in them.
 

episodic

Lifer
Feb 7, 2004
11,088
2
81
Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
I was under the impression that the calories we consume were actually kilo-calories.

Wikipedia:
Colloquially, and in nutrition and food labelling, the term "calorie" almost always refers to the kilogram calorie

Edit: So our nutritional calories are actually the amount of energy required to heat one kilogram of water one degree celsius.

That must be the catch. I was thinkin. . . "As much iced tea that I drink - I should be skinny. . ."


 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
26,066
4,712
126
Two problems.

1) Capitalization. And no, I'm not a grammar nazi. A food item may have 100 Calories. Rasing 100 grams of water 1°C uses 100 calories. Notice the difference? One has a 'C' and the other has a 'c'. There is a big difference though. 1 Calorie = 1000 calories.

2) Energy is NOT mass. If 2 pounds of food/water enters you and 1 pound of waste leaves, then you gained 1 pound. That is true. That is a scientific fact. The number of calories in that 2 pounds of food is not important. Don't worry, everyone fails this part of chemistry 101.
 

isekii

Lifer
Mar 16, 2001
28,578
3
81
Originally posted by: episodic
Originally posted by: diegoalcatraz
I was under the impression that the calories we consume were actually kilo-calories.

Wikipedia:
Colloquially, and in nutrition and food labelling, the term "calorie" almost always refers to the kilogram calorie

Edit: So our nutritional calories are actually the amount of energy required to heat one kilogram of water one degree celsius.

That must be the catch. I was thinkin. . . "As much iced tea that I drink - I should be skinny. . ."


Your iced tea isn't at 0 degree's C