Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site azure.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!teklds!azure!eugenez
From: eugenez@azure.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.veg,net.med
Subject: Nutrition Puzzle Solved
Message-ID: <70@azure.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 6-Oct-84 05:00:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: azure.70
Posted: Sat Oct  6 05:00:16 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 8-Oct-84 02:46:46 EDT
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 74


[100% U.S. RDA for the Line Eater]

		*****************************
		*                           *
		*  Nutrition Puzzle Solved  *
		*                           *
		*****************************


Have you ever  wondered  about the  relationship  between  that 
nutritional information on the back of so many food containers?
The protein, carbohydrates, fat, and alcohol???

Try an experiment---for one  serving of the  particular food or 
drink, look on the back of some box or bottle (like catsup).  

1)  Multiply the number of grams of protein by 4
2)  Multiply the number of grams of carbohydrates by 4
3)  Multiply the number of grams of alcohol by 7
4)  Multiply the number of grams of FAT by 9
5)  Now add those numbers (1-4) together.


	This is how the number for Calories is gotten!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
	Notice  how  close  your  calculation is to what the  label
	claims (on your food container).  They round it off though.


This is because the experts claim that:

1) protein supplies 4 Calories/GRAM, 
2) carbohydrates supplies 4 Calories/GRAM, 
3) alcohol supplies 7 Calories/GRAM, and 
4) FAT supplies 9 Calories/GRAM.

Now this is all obtained by burning food in a Calorimeter.  But
it does  supply  some  insight, even though  somewhat in error.  
Notice  that  FAT  DOES  indeed   fuel  your  body  for  energy
requirements---and  that it  supplies OVER  TWICE as much  BODY
FUEL per  GRAM  than  CARBOHYDRATES DO!!   So WATCH the FAT!!!!
Looks like FAT makes FAT faster than carbohydrates!!!!

So it is somewhat inaccurate to say that Calories don't  count.
(As  those who only  count carbohydrates  believe).   But it is
also WRONG to say that they  DICTATE the WHOLE story.  

As an example, suppose  you take two different  foods that have 
the same number of  Calories per 1 ounce serving.  Now, suppose
a one ounce serving of one food contains 4 Grams of Protein and
2 grams of Carbohydrates whereas a 1 ounce serving of the other
food may contains  1.5 grams  Carbohydrates and 2 grams of FAT.
Both  foods  supply  24 Calories per  ounce, but  if you  ate a
lot of the  food with  protein and  worked out, you  would gain
muscle  mass, whereas  if you  ate a lot of the  food with FAT,
unless you really  burned  off all the calories, you would gain  
FAT  mass.   This is  a  crude  example,  but  the  point  here
is that  Calories does not tell you what form your Calories are
in.  If the major  contribution to the total  Caloric intake is
FAT, you will  have a hard time  losing weight (if that is your
goal).  You get the point.

All this information is based on burning food in a Calorimeter.
The experts could be somewhat wrong to believe the body behaves
exactly  as  a  Calorimeter.    After all, isn't protein really
meant to build and maintain the body?  

That is, when the  amino acids  pass into the  circulation they
are  used to  reconstruct  more than  1,600 different  kinds of
protein  that make up  muscle tissues,  hormones, enzymes, etc.
Why would the body use  amino acids as fuel?   Except if forced
to?

						ECZ