Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gatech.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gatech!carter From: carter@gatech.UUCP (Carter Bullard) Newsgroups: net.med,net.veg Subject: Re: Nutrition Puzzle Solved: flames reply Message-ID: <10494@gatech.UUCP> Date: Sun, 21-Oct-84 20:17:03 EDT Article-I.D.: gatech.10494 Posted: Sun Oct 21 20:17:03 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 22-Oct-84 06:54:00 EDT References: <70@azure.UUCP> <87@azure.UUCP> Organization: School of ICS, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Lines: 110 Xref: gatech net.med:889 net.veg:278 > > Alright,alright, I apologize for being such an ***** about it. But I did say that I was upset. I did warn you in the beginning. Anyway, you and so many others have pointed out my error and I would like to sincerely apologize. Ok, this is my opinion about why the article is deficient. > > All this information is based on burning food in a Calorimeter. The information that you provide is not derived from burning these things in a calorimeter. All the information on caloric potential is determined biochemically and is totally dependant on the amount of NADPH, NADH and subsequently the amount of ATP that can be produced from the material through the glycolytic chain, the Krebs cycle and the process of oxidative phosphorylation( including the electron transport chain ). The caloric potential is realized when phosphatitic enzymes cleave one or two of the phosphate bonds of ATP. From a biochemical standpoint, there is only one way to deliver potential chemical energy to physiologic processes, and that is through the utilization of high energy bonds such as the phosphate bonds found in ATP. Now the kind of energy that is available from chemical bond cleavage is completely described in terms of heat, thus the use of the term calorie to begin with. From a physics point of view, you have to talk in terms of calorimeters, sense that is the definition of something that measures calories. So in order to understand the energy potential of the foodstuffs that we put in our mouths, you have to look at the biochemical utilization which is measured finally in terms of heat production, and in order to measure that you need a calorimeter. Now, the amount of heat released by ATP when it is utilized has been determined to an extremely precise value. And since everybody shouldn't have to reinvent the wheel so to speak, when a food stuffs caloric potential is determined, it is done through a determination of the amount of biochemical intermediates it can produce. Actually the companies do exactly what you did. They just figure out how much protein, fat and carbohydrates are in their product and then just whip out the old calculator. > > The experts could be somewhat wrong to believe the body behaves > > exactly as a Calorimeter. You are absolutely correct!!! I don't know of any physiologist, biochemist, endocrinologist, pharmocologist, microbiologist, ..., even, dare I say it, nutritionist that does. > > After all, isn't protein really meant to build and maintain the body? What do you mean by build and maintain? Everything you put into your mouth has the potential to build and maintain the body. The majority of the protien that you eat is converted to pyruvate which enters the Krebs cycle and thus becomes indistinquishable from carbohydrates. It is the nitrogen that is striped from the amino acid in its conversion to carboxylic acids that becomes eventually urea, that substance that singularly justifies the existence of your kidneys. Remember, the only source of nitrogen in the basic foodstuffs is from amino( this is the chemical prefix for nitrogen ) acids, and the only thing in urea is nitrogen( and a little hydrogen ). The primary reason your urine is yellow, is because amino acids are used the same as carbohydrates. This even applies to some of the essential amino acids, you know, those amino acids that you can't make yourself. > > Why would the body use amino acids as fuel? Except if forced > > to? Now where did you get an idea like that? Really. Where did you get this information? That is the problem I have. This stuff sounds like all the other nutritionist stuff that is not based on fact but on somebody's idea of what will sell in a bookstore. Now if I said that electrons were created simply so we could watch television, you would probably get a little perturbed. > > 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. Come on. There are a lot more than 1,600 different kinds of protein. Really. I would very much like to find out where that number came from. To think that that number is within even 4 orders of magnitude of an intelligent quess is one of the most ridiculous ideas that I've heard in several....now you see there, I'm gettin upset again. Well, you get the idea. I hope. No, I don't mind if anybody submits anything to the net. I just pay particular attention when somebody submits an article entitled Nutrition Puzzle Solved. I didn't even know that there was a puzzle to begin with. No, you don't have to have a degree to talk intelligently about biological types of things. But its the intelligent part thats sometimes hard to do. But most of the stuff I said was in haste and not well considered. So please forgive me. PS By the way, I don't remember misspelling grammar on purpose. -- Carter Bullard ICS, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta GA 30332 CSNet:Carter @ Gatech ARPA:Carter.Gatech @ CSNet-relay.arpa uucp:...!{akgua,allegra,amd,ihnp4,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!carter