Calories

[Deleted member 16779]

 

[Deleted member 16779]

That's why I said the human body was not not an enclosed system. Dieting organisations never take take into account the calories that exit down south. The amount of calories lost will vary from person to person and depends on their state of health. Drugs like Orlistat will alter that amount as well. The figure I saw mentioned was about 10% so maybe as much as 200 calories, although as I say, not taken into account when calorie counting.

As for dung beetles, seems many dung beetles, known as rollers, roll dung into round balls, which are used as a food source or breeding chambers. Others, known as tunnelers, bury the dung wherever they find it. A third group, the dwellers, neither roll nor burrow: they simply live in manure. They are often attracted by the dung collected by the burrowing owl. Trivia over, for now. LOL

I bow to your clearly superior wikipedia look-up skills.

 

[SadhbhFiadh]

I have read recently (but can't find where it was, now) that if counting Carbs, you reduce carbs gram for gram of NON SOLUBLE fibre. Is that right? I think it may have been on an American or Australian Diabetes website. I wonder if that would apply to Calories as well.
S.

 

[trophywench]

It automatically is - here in the UK Sadhbh ! All our carbohydrate values are shown without the fibre since it isn't digestible and doesn't therefore turn to glucose. In USA they include it and then tell you underneath what the fibre is, which you have to deduct from the first number to get the nett carbs. You have to do this sum all the while if you use insulin - so I'm jolly glad our food industry makes it easier for us!

 

[Deleted member 16779]

It automatically is - here in the UK Sadhbh ! All our carbohydrate values are shown without the fibre since it isn't digestible and doesn't therefore turn to glucose. In USA they include it and then tell you underneath what the fibre is, which you have to deduct from the first number to get the nett carbs. You have to do this sum all the while if you use insulin - so I'm jolly glad our food industry makes it easier for us!

That's the same across the EU in fact.

 

[trophywench]

True - French 'Glucides' are shown nett as well !

 

[SadhbhFiadh]

True - French 'Glucides' are shown nett as well !

Good, it's simplified for my small intellect. 😉
Thank you.

 

[trophywench]

It's not that it's difficult, it's just that it makes something tedious even more tedious - that I object to.

 

[Martin Canty]

You get used to subtracting the fiber, it's an automatic process these days after 18 months of practice. I do like the idea of a standard weight though which we don't have

 

[SadhbhFiadh]

You get used to subtracting the fiber, it's an automatic process these days after 18 months of practice. I do like the idea of a standard weight though which we don't have

Where? In America?

 

[Martin Canty]

Where? In America?

Yes, I live in Southern California though originally from the UK

 

[Deleted member 16779]

Yes, I live in Southern California though originally from the UK

I've heard that it never rains there, but it pours, man it pours.

 

[Martin Canty]

I've heard that it never rains there, but it pours, man it pours.

Strangely enough it is raining here for the second time in a month😱😱.... It should turn to snow in a few hours

 

[graj0]

. . . . . one can't correctly count the calorie intake and the calorie consumption.

I had my Resting Metabolic Rate (Substate utilisation and energy expenditure) measured at Westminster University, London. In theory this technique allows their exercise physiologists to measure the maximal rate of fat utilisation and total energy expenditure that could target a more individual and efficient weight management strategy. In theory! Interestingly the number it came up with for me was exactly what the Harris Benedict calculation came to. Sadly, way more than I can actually eat without gaining yet more weight, especially if I was to use the multiplier to cater for my activity level.