[ExI] Good Calories, Bad Calories

[Stefano Vaj]

On 1 May 2011 22:01, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> I hate to post this.  I don't want to start up the carb-vs-fat thread again.

Come on. Even if I was not led to change my views, I found the
discussions on the subject rather informational and constructive.

> The summary of all my review has not changed my opinion one
> bit.  Instead, it has strengthened my resolve that this is the most
> unscientific book since "The Bell Curve".

I really fail to see the connection. I do not know what exactly your
objections to the Bell Curve are, but as far as I remember it is a
book based on original research as to the distribution of IQ across
the US population. Your main complaint about Good Calories, Bad
Calories appears to be that it does not reflect any such kind of
study.

> In conclusion, I still believe that total calories in minus total calories
> expended equals remaining calories stored as fat.

That would imply a perfectly "efficient" metabolism, wouldn't it?

Now, I think it is a fact with any dietary style a portion of the
calories ingested are simply... wasted.

In turn, it would seem reasonable to expect the metabolic influences
of dietary styles to affect the the quantity of calories that are "put
away" and "stored" for delayed use in the form of fat.

> He explains
> that Orientals on a traditional diet of rice are healthier than when they
> come to America and eat an Western diet.  He even admits that it would seem
> like they ate a lot of carbs.

I do not remember the author's position on the subject, but on the
merits I believe a consensus exists that if a large percentage of what
one eats is carbs, damages are contained by limiting his or her
caloric intake as low as possible, including by eating little else.
Conversely, if one eats carbs at will, reducing their overall
incidence in one's diet by ingesting other food on top of them is
likely to increase, not to reduce the damages.

-- 
Stefano Vaj