Where are you getting your information from? Because it's flat out incorrect.
From my continuing education school's courses load. It isn't the standard, conventional class. (Institute for Functional Medicine) (Functional Diagnostic Nutrition)
My explanation using my examples of comparison were not as clear as I could have been, please forgive me.
There are no "types" of calories in food. A calorie, as you actually stated earlier, is a unit of energy. Excluding the thermic effect of food or energy costs from metabolic processing (which are relatively miniscule), one calorie from lipids has the same energy value as one calorie from carbohydrate.
The different "types" of calories I was referring to were not applied directly to the unit of energy measure, but the
different types of sources of the calories. I will be more clear/accurate next time.
The calories from carbohydrates are not exactly the same from the calories from fat or from protein, hence/thus....I called them "different".
It is much easier for the body to breakdown/digest simple, refined carbs then compared to complex carbs. So the body will use more energy (calories) to digest/metabolize/absorb.
It will also take more caloric expenditure for the body to breakdown/digest/metabolize/absorb protein or fat, compared to simple, refined carbohydrates.
So the body will be using up different amounts of caloric energy to gain access to more calories from these sources.
The body will use up more of their reserve calories to help digest protein, fat.
The body does not require the use of its reserve calories to digest carbohydrates....hence....it is easier for people's bodies to store more/extra caloric energy back into the reserve.
Your body does not "distinguish calories" and "send these calories to the right organs". This is one of the most ridiculous things I've read and demonstrates that you do not understand the physiology behind nutrient digestion, absorption, and metabolism, nor the processes by which the body produces energy through glycolysis, the Krebs cycle, and the electron transport chain. It distinguishes macronutrients, not calories.
The body distinguishes the calories' sources. If the body doesn't do this, then the body will not know and give instructions to the Liver to increase production for more bile to work on fat......or to the Pancreas to produce more insulin to do its work on carbohydrates.
If things are working correctly inside a properly functioning internal system, the body WILL know which organs need which caloric source. The body will proceed to send the appropriate caloric sources to the appropriate locations or send the appropriate organ workers to do its work on the appropriate caloric source/macronutrient.
And yes, weight loss - actual loss of body mass, not water weight - results from negative energy balance. It has nothing to do with "types of calories", which doesn't exist in the first place.
"negative energy balance"....oxymoron much? I'm kidding, haha!
"negative energy".....I could have sworn the 1st Law of Thermodynamics was energy could never be created or
destroyed.
Losing fat mass is more important than losing weight. I could gain a lot of muscle mass or bone mass (gain "weight")....but
not look obese, a superficial benefit, but the increase in muscles & bone will help benefit my athletic performance, hopefully.
Likewise, two fraternal twins could weigh the same, but one twin looks like Shredder, the other twin looks more like Krang in his exo-suit.
Would one rather look like a 250 lbs Lebron or a 260 lbs Danny Fortson? To each his own!
