There was a related fad a couple of decades ago in which proponents alleged that drinking lots of ice water increased the number of calories burned, explains Hensrud. “But even with low calorie foods, it’s never going to be more than the calories contained in the food.” “It accounts for approximately 5 percent of calories spent,” says Hensrud. The third way is in breaking down food and absorbing nutrients. A second way the body burns energy is through physical activity. This uses up the vast majority of a person’s calorific expenditure - as much as 80 percent - and we have absolutely no control over whether we’re blessed with a so-called “fast metabolism,” which uses a lot of energy or a “slow metabolism,” which uses comparatively fewer calories. The first is the basic metabolic rate, which is to say the energy the body uses for its normal functioning when at rest. There are essentially three ways that the human body spends its energy, says Hensrud. “There’s really no scientific evidence for negative calorie foods.” Why There's No Such Thing As a Calorie-Free Lunch “I did a quick Google search and you can find people selling low and negative calorie brownies which just can’t be true.” says Don Hensrud, associate professor of preventive medicine and nutrition at the Mayo Clinic. It’s also not hard to find websites that are prepared to make bolder claims - some even tout negative calorie recipes for deserts. A celery stick only contains six calories. Celery and apples are often pushed as examples and it’s certainly true that they’re low calorie. The concept of a negative calorie food is fairly straightforward: they’re supposed to contain so few calories that your body expends more energy in chewing and digesting them than it could ever extract from them.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |