> But, because our food sources no longer in jeopardy, that evolutionary urge which led to our survival in the wild now leads to the vice known as procrastination.
Where do the non-sugar/HFCS calories go? Do we secrete them? Is our body temperature lower when eating sugar? Do we become more active if we eat non-sugar calories, but not when eating sugar calories?
There's an ongoing and never-ending discussion on the topic all over the Internet.
Basically, the idea of those who oppose the "calorie in - calorie out" theory is that eating simple carbs quickly raises the blood sugar level. Body responds to that by secreting insulin. One of the tasks of insulin is to keep blood sugar within certain levels, so it "commands" to the cells to uptake sugar from blood, and one of the ways to do it is to convert it to fat. Eating food that does not has simple sugars in it, on the other hand, does not raise blood sugar that much so does not trigger insulin response.
To that the "calorie in - calorie out" guys respond that this does not take into account the 24-hour cycle, because even if some fat will be stored after a high-carb meal, it will still be used later if the overall calorie intake is low enough.
It seems that clinical studies, where it is possible to exactly know how much calories the subjects consumed, support the calories in - calories out. Studies where caloric intake is not precisely calculated may support the opposite theory.
No references to studies as I'm not sure if that's going to be read by anyone, it's been two days since ...
Well, energy is conserved so in one form or other calories in = calories out. The question is do they go out in a different way when you eat different stuff, and if so, how?
and to obesity.