#empty calories

[rockstar-vamp]

If pasta is full of empty calories then why does it make me feel so loved and completed ??

[myboyrozanovv]

"Empty Calories"

I'm sure most people have heard of this term. It's most often used for carbohydrates, but I've also seen it applied to "sauces and oils" and almost all processed store bought food.

It has never made sense to me and i want everyone who reads this post to know that it is indeed a nonsensical term.

Now the first reaction to it from me is "Empty of what?" The answer to that is usually "nutrients". Nutrients being restricted to the nutrient group of choice of the person using the term, often vitamins and minerals.

Don't get me wrong, vitamins and minerals are great and many people don't get quite enough of them. But the people saying this type of thing tend to have overreacted and could usually benefit from some moderation, specifically the fact that you don't need to intake 3000% of your daily requirement of vitamins and minerals in every single meal. I am exaggerating that number for emphasis but only slightly. Plus most vitamins and minerals are water soluble so your body can't store them in large quantities. You just piss them out if you eat more than your body can use or store at the moment. And for the fat soluble ones: with the still widespread movement of a low or no fat diet people can't even absorb fat soluble vitamins properly so it doesn't matter how many they might eat.

Looking closer at the underlying logic that lies behind the usage of the term empty calories, it tends to be a fear of calories. Maybe they have progressed from trying not to eat anything at all but need a justification for what they allow themselves to eat, maybe they are trying to intensely maximise every single food intake for health benefits via vitamins or protein or whatever it is.

Whatever the specific logic is, the conclusion is usually that calories need a valid reason to be allowed inside their body.

So, what even is the point of calories? Do they need a justification for existence other than what they already bring to the table? (pun intended)

The point of calories is, of course, energy. And since taking in energy and building blocks for your body is sort of how we keep our bodies going to do the whole being alive thing, I don't see how "energy" by itself isn't already a valuable property for food to have.

To get into more specific examples: what is empty about carbohydrates? First of all, they often also contain a number of vitamins, minerals and protein as well. But secondly, they contain easily accessible energy. Which is of course a sin under the doctrine that energy is bad for you, but also makes this inaccurate on a definitional basis.

Food contains micro and macro nutrients. Micro nutrients we don't need a large quantity of, such as vitamins, minerals, etc. Macro nutrients are bigger quantity wise, and are carbs, fat and protein. And we do indeed need all three groups to keep up our body. Plus fibre but we usually can't absorb those nor are we supposed to, they're for the digestive tract.

When people say that carbs are "empty calories" it always confuses me. Empty of what? Empty of nutrients? They're literally one of the three macro nutrients. Empty of purpose? They have easily accessible energy. Empty of micro nutrients? Often not even, plus we don't need to consume our entire daily requirement of those with every meal. Side note, one of the purposes of food is enjoyment and the big bad scary sugar can certainly be useful for that.

One of the main applications of the term "empty calories" is processed food. Or specifically, (highly) processed store bought food (as opposed to the food processed at home i suppose).

And i agree that a lot of, especially highly processed, store bought food doesn't contain much micro nutrients and is maximised to be tasty (although that isn't bad, per se; pleasure isn't evil). But people also sometimes underestimate the nutritional contents of not instagram-photogenic store bought food (for example many frozen vegetables contain more vitamins and secondary plant substances than fresh vegetables who had a long way behind them). And while balance is important and yes, a lot of people don't could use some less highly processed food in that balance, one could, if one really cares about the topic, for example work to increase knowledge of home cooking skills and gardening. It is perfectly fine to get energy and macro nutrients from highly processed food. Because again, we won't wither like a petulant flower when we don't get all of our daily requirement of vitamins and minerals in every single meal. It is also completely normal to spread that intake not evenly over every day but in bursts, as we are evolved to. I am not a big fan of the current food industry, but demonising "empty" calories doesn't help change that industry or how it contributes to climate change and human rights violations and exploitation. Directly doing activism to reform the food industry might.

"But that is not how our ancestors lived and ate" first of all are you sure? Did you get that info from someone with cited credible sources and historical/archaeological research into diet and agriculture and common recipes 100 300 5000 years ago? Or from someone who sells a free pdf detailing how you can start your clean eating journey if you comment "course"? A lot of historical recipes were maximised to be tasty, to be high energy, or to use food that could be stored long term. They did have knowledge and skills about what they were doing but it wasn't some arcane mystical teachings that will bring us salvation cure you of all your issues.

Second of all yeah it's different. We are living in different times and we have a way higher population world wide that just can't be fed the same way anymore. Industrialisation has people in cities and a small number of people specialised in agriculture with big machines. This doesn't mean there aren't things that could do with some improvement in that system, but it's just different, not evil. Maybe learn about the fast food places and renter based apartment blocks in ancient rome 2000 years ago and realise that this is not some unprecedented thing, and you won't be easily influenced by people invoking a magical pure past to sell their stuff and get engagement on social media.

Im conclusion: what are empty calories? Usually all foods/food components that don't contain the specific group of nutrients, nutrients that the person making that claim has decided are valid as a justification for allowing calories into their body.

While actually, those calories aren't empty, they contain calories. And usually in high concentration, which is mighty helpful for taking in enough energy to keep staying alive, and the result of our ancestors working hard towards making food more nutrient and energy dense and hopefully also more tasty, so it may keep them alive with less effort. And isn't it marvellous that we now have such foods available to us?

I recommend anyone invested in the topic to get some available science education about the chemical base for what our food is made of, the biological processes in digestion, and what parts of the body all the various food components get used in. It's very helpful in learning to decipher what the health bloggers and "nutrition experts" are talking about and if they're just trying to sell you something.

Don't just believe my post either, google my claims. Read some more about the ones that interest or upset you the most.

[electronicsquid]

Eating cotton candy

(Nina Leen. 1939?)

[pathcend]

Ok, I get that this is a med blog but Healthcare workers deserve the occasional snack as well - especially these days.

Sadly only a handful of these are real [which is prob great for my blood sugar].

Shout-out to The Junk Food Asile [Instagram] for the mockups.

[silveragelovechild]

TEN COMMENTS ABOUT “ALITA BATTLE ANGEL”

1. In an early trailer, Alita’s manga eyes looked awful but the final effect works much better.

2. If you go wanting a plausible, adult scifi story, you’ll be disappointed.

3. If you go just to see the special effect, you’ll get what you’re looking for - over all they are quite good.

4. Alita and the human sized cyborgs look cool but the oversized lumbering behemoths look laughable (like that oversized Mr Hyde in “League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”).

5. Most of the characters seem morally bankrupt (even Alita) and I ended up not really liking any of the characters.

6. The death match game sequences take too much of the story; like the pod races in “The Phantom Menace” They feel like commercials for video games coming soon to Game Spot.

7. Alita is played as a 12 year old googly eyed girl with school boy crushes, and as the deadliest warrior soldier on the planet; the first undermines the credibility of the latter.

8. Alita has some similarities with James Cameron’s “Avatar” - Alita’s unobtainium is a trip to a floating city in the sky.

9. We’re suppose to buy Christoph Waltz as both a genius cybernetic scientist and a nighttime cyborg killing vigilant; but he doesn’t remotely look like he could over power a cyborg with his clumsy rocket powered mallet.

10. The film is rated PG-13 and shows characters get disemboweled and literally cut in half BUT the camera cuts away when the dog gets squished.

BONUS : When I saw “Avatar” it took me a few days to realize it was fairly light weight; but with “Alita” (also written by Cameron) i realized it between bites of popcorn. And frankly I’m not interested the the Sequels Robert Rodriguez and James Cameron have planned.

[constellraetion]

I wonder what a Herrah-prepared Emilitia dish included on the reception's dinner spread would taste like, assuming anyone wants to try it...

Don’t you know that the most expensive foods taste the worst? 

[pelicandensity]

Human Touch

We are becoming a nation of careless assassins, taking aim with half baked assumptions parading as the ultimate truth, triggered by our self absorbed state of mind. We climb aboard a platform of ones and zeros that promotes our narrow point of view and feast upon the empty calories of so many "likes" and "shares" while we smugly sit in a prison of our own digital design, safe in the comfort of never having to face the victim of our hateful words.

[nychealth]

Sugary Drinks Are Making You Sick!

Sugary drinks are beverages with added sugars. They include sodas, sweetened teas and sports, energy and juice drinks. They’re high in empty calories and have no or low nutritional value.

One 20-ounce bottle of soda can pack over 70 grams of added sugar. That's more than 250 empty calories!

Health risks of sugary drinks

Type 2 diabetes: a serious disease that affects how your body uses sugar. If left untreated, type 2 diabetes can lead to other health issues.

High blood pressure: a condition where the force of blood moving through your blood vessels is too high. High blood pressure increases the risk of heart disease and stroke.

Heart disease: conditions that affect blood flow to the heart. Heart disease and stroke are among the leading causes of death in New York City.

Tips for a healthier you

Avoid sugary drinks and do not give them to children.

If you do have a sugary drink, choose a small size so you drink fewer empty calories.

Check the Nutrition Facts label and avoid products with added sugars such as corn syrup, evaporated cane juice, honey or molasses.

Instead of reaching for a sugary drink:

Drink water or seltzer, and add fruits, vegetables or herbs for flavor.

Eat whole fruits instead of drinking juice.

Ask for coffee and tea with less or no sugar.

More resources

Flavor-infused water recipes

Are you pouring on the pounds?

Sign up to receive new Health Bulletins