/ck/ - Food & Cooking

Apples are calorie negative, and yea it's real, it just takes your body more caloric energy to digest the food than the food has calories. Don't eat an apple if you are hungry, it might make you hungrier

>>4251507

It's true, there are some foods that are so low in macronutrients that their net energetic contribution is < 0.

>>4251518
bro sciences

Sauerkraut I heard.

>>4251518
That's not true, apples have a lot of sugar in them

there's no such thing. Other than maybe stuff that's just entirely indigestible but that's not food. Just because it's less than 60 calories and is 90+% water does not mean it's free of calories.

>>4251518

>>4251591
the calorie count of celery is not a negative. but the act of eating celery Burns more than it has. therefore making it a negative calorie count. and no you can't just eat celery for the rest of your life. you'd die of malnutrition

>>4251591

>missing the point entirely

It's not that it has no calories, it's that eating/digesting it burns more calories than you gain.

If you eat a 60 calorie piece of celery, you'll burn around 100 calories just from chewing.

>>4251620
>100 calories just from chewing

>>4251507
>incapable of just eating less food
>believes
the trick to weight loss may just be to eat more food

>>4251620
>If you eat a 60 calorie piece of celery, you'll burn around 100 calories just from chewing.
possibly but burning 100 calories by chewing would take all day. you'de spend your entire day eating celery. constantly needing to chew. you're either really stupid or this is Grade A troll material. i cant really tell which.

IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE KOFAX IS A JEW

>>4251632
This. I don't get why you would obsess over whether celery is a "calorie negative" food.

The kind of people who need to lose weight are generally not the kind of people who would find raw celery palatable in the first place, and certainly not in place of what they normally eat. Hell, I'm a healthy weight and I wouldn't eat it raw.

>>4251632
this
if you want to lose weight dont try to take shortcuts or youll never learn your lesson and just gain the weight back again.
diet and exercise is all you need.
now on the celery topic as >>4251620 said
thats how it is though i believe you barely burn enough calories for anything
to lose a pound of weight you need to burn 3500 calories FYI
theres also the drinking 6 glasses of water burn calories which was discussed in another thread. but you only burn 50 calories from that is not even worth it.
go for a run fatty

>>4251643
>
cold water because your body has to warm it up and shit

>>4251643
>>4251645

>mfw someone dies of water intoxication trying to lose weight

Celery has a thermic effect of around 8%, much less than the 100% or more required for a food to have "negative calories".

The only true "negative calorie" "food" is water. 0 calories, and it will require a small amount of energy to process it.

>>4251620
Really? The recommend diet is 2000 calories a day, so I just need to chew 20 celery sticks and spit them out and I just burnt my entire day's diet? I'm going to get fit fast.

>>4251690
Your jaw muscles are going to get ripped.

>>4251618

Incorrect and I'm a RD. Celery has very low caloric value, it does not equate prior to consumption and digestion unless perhaps you are chewing it for a period of time that I can't imagine more than a handful of people on earth tend to chew for.

>>4251702
equate to none*

>>4251690

The act of chewing has nothing to do with burning calories, the amount burned by chewing is a negligible increase compared to sitting around doing nothing.

The people who say celery burns calories argue that the human body can't break them down, but uses energy processing them. Even if you were to subsist on a diet of celery, you would only come out to a deficit of 50 or so calories from the activity of eating it.

>>4251708

Yes, I was implying that they would have to be chewing a small amount of celery for several hours.

There is such a thing, but the effect is so small that you won't notice much. People who try to lose weight like that are usually soccer moms who believe anything they find. To lose any significant amount of weight, you have to do more shit and you feel more hungry than if you had just reduced your food intake in the first place.

There's a lot of either ignorance or poor excuses for what is now known as 'trolling' in this thread.

Go to reputable websites for this sort of thing, not 4chan. As in places where the writer is an actual registered dietician or nutritionist.

There's no way a celery stalk is 60 calories. A fucking cheeseburger is like 300.

>>4251620
Running on a treadmill for 5-10 minutes on a fast pace burns only 150 calories, where you pulling them numbers from bro?

>>4251901
This.

>>4251518
>apples
>calorie negative

Lmfao. Apples are full of sugars, they have quite a lot of calories.

>>4251620
>100 calories
>chewing
You burn 100 calories walking for like an hour. There is no way chewing would burn that much; the calories you burn chewing are essentially negligible.

There is no negative calorie food. The act of breaking down food is done mostly by the bacteria in your intestinal track. Digestion by acids and enzymes controlled by the body are negligible loss in calories compared to the gains.

Most times what people call negative calories food are food with high fiber content. This means it literally scrapes the shit out of you. Most people who believes these diets fads start with poor diets and have higher fecal content in their intestinal lining and overall water weight. This is why you hear initial losses with these diets.

As with anything the most sensible answer would be to get advice from a licensed professional to see how to supplement your daily diet of what you are lacking and to start an exercise regimen that would be appropriate for your lifestyle.

>>4252081
>The act of breaking down food is done mostly by the bacteria in your intestinal track.
No.

>>4251507
I have a feeling my beloved /fit/ has trolled us dear anons...and it is funny.

>>4252093
Yes.

So much retard in this thread.
Yes, there are calorie negative foods. You get less out of them than you burn digesting them. But it's not just the chewing, guys. Fully digesting food is quite an intensive exercise for your body. After chewing comes stomach roiling, and the production of the acids that the body breaks the food down with. Then there is the transition into chemicals which the body can store (fats) and the transition back from that into chemicals the body can utilise for energy (simple sugars) finally, there is the elimination of all the stuff your body has no use for. The interesting thing is that your body has no mechanism for determining if what you eat has surpluss calories or not. Thus, it can be forged into a dieting aid of monstrous efficiency...http://www.cabbage-soup-diet.com/

>>4252135
That must explain why humans often starve to death when given high doses of antibiotics.

The problem with negative calorie diets is malnutrition. You are not replacing your diet with nutritious alternative you are just replacing it with water and fiber. Eating wood and drinking water would have the same effect.

>>4251641

lol'd so hard

>>4252182
Being this retarded/10

>>4252279
Try to refute my post instead of dancing around it.

The only calorie negative "food" is ice cold water, for obvious reasons.

>>4252182
High dose antibiotics leads to digestion issues and malnutrition through diarrhea and until the patient fauna recovers vitamin water and nutrition aids are recommended.

>>4252300
*flora

>>4252048
>the digestive system requires no energy to run aside from the muscle energy expended in chewing.

>>4252165
the farts have to be unbearable

>>4252286
This is correct. You can do some calculations it's not much but it is definitely negative calories.

>You burn 100 calories walking for like an hour.

You burn 300 cal/hour unless you are a fuckin turtle