Very Discouraged
Not exactly. What you are talking about is called the thermic effect of food, which is the energy your body expends to digest, absorb, and distribute the nutrients you consume. It is indeed a real thing; however, it's only part of the equation.
It is generally accepted that protein is the hardest to process so you burn 20-35% of protein calories just digesting it. Next is carbohydrates, which take 5-15%. At the bottom are fats, the easiest macronutrient to digest, estimated to actually be as low as 0-5%.
So even in their isolated form, not all non-carbs "typically take longer and require more energy to actually burn." Fats are the worst.
Further complicating the issue is processing. Processed foods have a much, much lower thermic effect than whole, unprocessed foods. So for example your classic protein shake might be protein but it's also a highly-processed liquid, whereas a serving of blueberries, with all its tough fiber and other structures, makes your body work hard to digest.
Finally, one must consider the issue of calorie density. So while different foods might have different thermic effects, they also start off with different numbers of calories per pound (or cup). A serving of chicken might be harder to digest but 65% of 190 calories (124) is still more than 85% of 85 calories (72) for a severing of blueberries -- and that's a whole cup of blueberries!
Which is just one of dozens of reasons I'm a strong advocate of whole foods, especially plants, over processed products and supplements.
the body is still going to burn those calories from blueberries first.
I don't think "prove" means what you think it means. You claimed fruit (or carbs in general) are "bad" in terms of energy balance because they're burned "first" or "easiest". I've explained that all food you consume is burned "first" so carbs are nothing special. Further, I've explained that carbs are neither the easiest nor most difficult macronutrient to digest and there are tons of compounding factors.
Fruit is absolutely nothing to be afraid of.
I don't think "prove" means what you think it means. You claimed fruit (or carbs in general) are "bad" in terms of energy balance because they're burned "first" or "easiest". I've explained that all food you consume is burned "first" so carbs are nothing special. Further, I've explained that carbs are neither the easiest nor most difficult macronutrient to digest and there are tons of compounding factors.
Fruit is absolutely nothing to be afraid of.
so because YOU,have "explained" it,it has to be correct. Not. Really done here.
on 1/19/15 2:49 am, edited 1/19/15 2:49 am
Thank you. I keep my carbs below 50 a day. If I limited myself to 30 carbs or less per day as some here do, I couldn't do it. I am not a meat eater. If I could find a vegetarian diet for the sleeve that includes dairy products, I would follow it, but I knew going in I was going to have to eat meat and eggs which I dislike.
The OP sounds like many of us. I want this weight off NOWWW.
Before surgery, I wrote a list of NSVs. As I have moved along these 5 months I look at my list and smile at the victories. When I hit my first stall I really used that list. While the scale was not moving I noticed crossing my legs was easier. My collar bones are prominent. I purposefully parked my car away from a store and enjoyed the longer walk. I made it up the stairs without losing my breath. With those victories it didn't weigh on my mind so much when the scale didn't move.
I do weigh every day BUT I only record my Monday weight. So the fluctuations during the week don't both me any. After these 5 months I can really see the trend of my weight going down. So I don't remember the week where I lost 5 pounds or the week where I lost 1 pound. It is the downward trend that I am interested in.
