This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Suggestion for someone expert in this area: Please do include either a link or content regarding amount of energy consumed by human for different activities (average values) like exercising, studying (mental work), etc.
The text mentions that "The recommended daily energy intake for young adults and men is 2500 kcal (10 MJ) and 2000 kcal (8 MJ) for women." What's the meaning of this "recommended"? Recommended by who? Shouldn't there be a reference to the source? There are quite a number of them and the figures are somehow conflicting, so this may need a clarification. For instance: "Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) for energy for adult males and females are 3100 and 2400 kcal/day, respectively, but these amounts are generally exceeded by active competitive athletes, though not necessarily by recreational athletes.", Sports nutrition : fats and proteins / [edited by] Judy A. Driskell, 2007.-- Rigonz ( talk) 04:03, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
This article contains two separate conflicting descriptions on how the amount of energy in food is measured. one states:
"The food being measured is completely burned in a calorimeter so that the heat released through combustion can be accurately measured. This amount is used to determine the gross energy value of the particular food. This number is then multiplied by a coefficient which is based on how the human body actually digests the food."
the other:
"The amount of food energy in a particular food could be measured by completely burning the dried food in a bomb calorimeter, a method known as direct calorimetry [1]. However, the values given on food labels are not determined this way, because it overestimates the amount of energy that the human digestive system can extract, by also burning dietary fiber. Instead, standardized chemical tests and an analysis of the recipe are used to estimate the product's digestible constituents (protein, carbohydrate, fat, etc.). These results are then converted into an equivalent energy value based on a standardized table of energy densities"
so which is it?
Just as a note, 'calorie' (lowercase c) is used as the equivalent of 4.18 joules, while 'Calorie' (uppercase C) is used as an alternative to 'kilocalorie,' or 4.18 kilojoules. It would be nice if some of the usages in this article were corrected. (Calories, aka kilocalories, are the same units used on food labels, if that helps clarify.) -- T. S. Rice 03:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering if there was any possibility to find the digestion coefficient for proteins and fats... according to this bodybuilding site "It takes about five to six times more energy to process protein than it does carbs." http://www.bullz-eye.com/furci/2001/072701.htm ,under Macro nutrition/protein, 4th paragraf... However, I don't know how legitimate these claims are.
Wouldnt it be good to add information about how much physical exercise you need to get rid of the energy? Well, maybe this isn't the right article to add this info, I don't know. Though I'd really like to know and I can't find it anywhere, so is it possible to add? Thx Cybesystem 19:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Human fat is created when excess blood sugar is converted to fat by insulin -- this is very important to diabetics who don't produce enough insulin. Grain alcohol does not increase blood sugar, so it's not readily available as energy, and it can't be directly converted to fat. Other foods are digested slowly enough that the sugars are released slowly in the blood stream and are used, rather than converted to human fat. So burning alcohol (or other foods) in a test device to measure heat given off is really not a very reliable indication of whether you will gain weight in the form of fat. It may be relatively accurate for some foods, but totally inaccurate for others, like pure grain alcohol. I would like to see more comments on better ways to officially measure the energy value of food than using calories as a measurement. Glycemic index is one--why isn't it used? Rickhan 17:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC).
The article currently states: "The energy content of food is usually given on labels for 100 g and/or for what the manufacturer claims is a typical serving size." However, at least in the United States, the serving size is regulated by the government (in 21 CFR 101.9(b) and 21 CFR 101.12), not by the manufacturer. I can't come up with a concise rewriting of this sentence to express this... Can anyone else?
This article uses the figure of 4.1868 J/cal instead of 4.184 J/cal. The former is given as the international steam table calorie and the latter is the more commonly used thermochemical standard. What references/proof is there that the steam table value is the correct value used for food? Is there a USDA reference?
Also: what is the G.E.V mentioned in the measuring section? It is not previously mentioned, and it is not defined later in the article.
How much of an effect does the temperature of the food have? If you eat warm food, you don't need to expend chemical energy warming yourself. 71.167.69.224 ( talk) 15:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
This section assumes 30% digestion efficiency (by citing an article about digestion efficiency in insects). I suspect two things wrong with this:
If this is true, then the example calculation should be much more straightforward: ΔW (lbs) ≈ Econsumed - Eexpended (kcal) × (1 lb / 4000 kcal)
--
71.252.183.97 (
talk) 14:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
is awful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.156.144 ( talk) 00:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
There is much confusion in this article and in the population in general regarding the conservation of mass. "Burning" calories does not cause weight loss. There is no one-to-one correspondence between calorie expenditure and mass depreciation. Like any chemical reaction, extracting energy out of caloric sources does not alter the mass of the fuel. Only through excretion does mass depart a body. ---Ransom (-- 69.105.94.38 ( talk) 06:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC))
Someone care to attempt creating the following templates? 0 calories per gram (0 kJ/g) & 0 kilocalories per gram (0 kJ/g) Peter Horn 00:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I added a tag to this:
"Only carbohydrates (including fiber), fats, proteins, organic acids, polyols, and ethanol contain food energy."
I understand what it is trying to say, but it is simply not true. It sounds like something a nutritionist would say, so while being a useful guide for layman, but as a biochemist i know that other organic chemicals can be ingested and are metabolised to give energy. Ethanol is only singled out as it is legally sold to drink, but methanol, propanol, butanol, ketones, aldehdyes, amines, esters, etc can all also be metabolised, and some are less toxic than ethanol, and are common ingredients in foods.
This does not even approach the claim that spices have no energy. The only difference between parpika the spice and a pepper is the drying. Clearly peppers have caloires, and so does chilli powder.
Also, where did the definition of food being something with one of the allowed ingredients come from? Very many foods are available that claim no calories. I don't think anyone defines these as "not food" all because they do not provide calories. They are certainly foods for tax purposes. Yob Mod 12:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
The kWh calculation should also be mentioned. 2000 calories = 2,3 kWh see http://www.manicore.com/anglais/documentation_a/slaves.html Comes in handy when comparing robots energy expenditure to men, and for other uses
add to article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.178.120 ( talk) 06:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
A definition is not really a definition if it only refers to itself. Children make statements of this sort, encyclopedias do not. Nickrz ( talk) 21:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Whoever has designed this naming system has blundered. This is so errorprone. Pronounciation is same for both "calories". How do we know which is which ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vwalvekar ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
"In the European Union, manufacturers of packaged food must label the nutritional energy of their products in both kilocalories and kilojoules," This is wrong only joule is a requirement, calorie are only tolerated. EEC/EU even tried to prohibit the calorie as early as the 1970's (71/354/EEC chapter III). If memory servers me, it was the US who lobbied for the calorie, making is easier for US manufactures to export to Europe. 94.145.236.194 ( talk) 14:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 0 external links on Food energy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.anses.fr/cgi-bin/countdocs.cgi?Documents/ANC-Ft-TableauxApportsE.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:03, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Food energy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Why is this here? This article isn't about animal products in particular, or environmentalism, or veganism. Is there any reason at all to include it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:CF0:EE50:7079:B205:CF92:D52C ( talk) 02:17, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Done - agree it was irrelevant and is now removed. Thanks. -- Zefr ( talk) 02:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
I removed the following sentence since it seemed to be more confusing than illuminating to the readers:
It should be obvious that, in this article, "energy content" or "energy density" always refers to the energy that the body can obtain from the food by respirative metabolism, not to some other meaning that the term may have in chemistry or physics. However, for good measure, it seems best to avoid the term "energy density". -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 23:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
I removed this sentence since it seems to be "original research":
I wonder whether this is possible, even in theory, given the timing of ATP creation and regeneration, its creation from energy stored in the body etc. -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 23:58, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
The following sentence was removed because it was unsourced and appears to be "original research":
There may be some truth hidden in this statement, but given that most food is chewed and digested, down to a molecular level, before respiration actually starts, it does not seem to make much sense as it is. -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 06:10, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I removed this sentence because has long been unsourced and seems to be "original research" and mostly wrong:
-- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 06:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I removed the following sentences because they have been unsourced for a long time, and may be either "original research" or unproven "folklore":
It seems well-established and logical that that lowering the ambient temperature below the "room" values causes an almost immediate increase in metabolism rate, both at rest and under exercise, as the body needs to expend extra energy in order to keep the internal temperature at the normal level. But there are several sources on the internet claiming that high enough ambient temperatures also cause an increase in metabolism, either at rest or under exercise, because the body needs to consume more energy to shed internal heat. While this seems at least possible, intuitively, I could not find any reports of this effect having been measured. Anyway, those internet sources do not specify the ambient temperature at which the effect starts (that is, the ambient temp that minimizes the BMR or exercise MR). The claim above, that hot climates have this effect, also are unsourced and dubious. -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 08:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2023 and 12 January 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jnguyen7 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Remy.2005 ( talk) 18:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Suggestion for someone expert in this area: Please do include either a link or content regarding amount of energy consumed by human for different activities (average values) like exercising, studying (mental work), etc.
The text mentions that "The recommended daily energy intake for young adults and men is 2500 kcal (10 MJ) and 2000 kcal (8 MJ) for women." What's the meaning of this "recommended"? Recommended by who? Shouldn't there be a reference to the source? There are quite a number of them and the figures are somehow conflicting, so this may need a clarification. For instance: "Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) for energy for adult males and females are 3100 and 2400 kcal/day, respectively, but these amounts are generally exceeded by active competitive athletes, though not necessarily by recreational athletes.", Sports nutrition : fats and proteins / [edited by] Judy A. Driskell, 2007.-- Rigonz ( talk) 04:03, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
This article contains two separate conflicting descriptions on how the amount of energy in food is measured. one states:
"The food being measured is completely burned in a calorimeter so that the heat released through combustion can be accurately measured. This amount is used to determine the gross energy value of the particular food. This number is then multiplied by a coefficient which is based on how the human body actually digests the food."
the other:
"The amount of food energy in a particular food could be measured by completely burning the dried food in a bomb calorimeter, a method known as direct calorimetry [1]. However, the values given on food labels are not determined this way, because it overestimates the amount of energy that the human digestive system can extract, by also burning dietary fiber. Instead, standardized chemical tests and an analysis of the recipe are used to estimate the product's digestible constituents (protein, carbohydrate, fat, etc.). These results are then converted into an equivalent energy value based on a standardized table of energy densities"
so which is it?
Just as a note, 'calorie' (lowercase c) is used as the equivalent of 4.18 joules, while 'Calorie' (uppercase C) is used as an alternative to 'kilocalorie,' or 4.18 kilojoules. It would be nice if some of the usages in this article were corrected. (Calories, aka kilocalories, are the same units used on food labels, if that helps clarify.) -- T. S. Rice 03:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering if there was any possibility to find the digestion coefficient for proteins and fats... according to this bodybuilding site "It takes about five to six times more energy to process protein than it does carbs." http://www.bullz-eye.com/furci/2001/072701.htm ,under Macro nutrition/protein, 4th paragraf... However, I don't know how legitimate these claims are.
Wouldnt it be good to add information about how much physical exercise you need to get rid of the energy? Well, maybe this isn't the right article to add this info, I don't know. Though I'd really like to know and I can't find it anywhere, so is it possible to add? Thx Cybesystem 19:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Human fat is created when excess blood sugar is converted to fat by insulin -- this is very important to diabetics who don't produce enough insulin. Grain alcohol does not increase blood sugar, so it's not readily available as energy, and it can't be directly converted to fat. Other foods are digested slowly enough that the sugars are released slowly in the blood stream and are used, rather than converted to human fat. So burning alcohol (or other foods) in a test device to measure heat given off is really not a very reliable indication of whether you will gain weight in the form of fat. It may be relatively accurate for some foods, but totally inaccurate for others, like pure grain alcohol. I would like to see more comments on better ways to officially measure the energy value of food than using calories as a measurement. Glycemic index is one--why isn't it used? Rickhan 17:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC).
The article currently states: "The energy content of food is usually given on labels for 100 g and/or for what the manufacturer claims is a typical serving size." However, at least in the United States, the serving size is regulated by the government (in 21 CFR 101.9(b) and 21 CFR 101.12), not by the manufacturer. I can't come up with a concise rewriting of this sentence to express this... Can anyone else?
This article uses the figure of 4.1868 J/cal instead of 4.184 J/cal. The former is given as the international steam table calorie and the latter is the more commonly used thermochemical standard. What references/proof is there that the steam table value is the correct value used for food? Is there a USDA reference?
Also: what is the G.E.V mentioned in the measuring section? It is not previously mentioned, and it is not defined later in the article.
How much of an effect does the temperature of the food have? If you eat warm food, you don't need to expend chemical energy warming yourself. 71.167.69.224 ( talk) 15:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
This section assumes 30% digestion efficiency (by citing an article about digestion efficiency in insects). I suspect two things wrong with this:
If this is true, then the example calculation should be much more straightforward: ΔW (lbs) ≈ Econsumed - Eexpended (kcal) × (1 lb / 4000 kcal)
--
71.252.183.97 (
talk) 14:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
is awful —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.156.144 ( talk) 00:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
There is much confusion in this article and in the population in general regarding the conservation of mass. "Burning" calories does not cause weight loss. There is no one-to-one correspondence between calorie expenditure and mass depreciation. Like any chemical reaction, extracting energy out of caloric sources does not alter the mass of the fuel. Only through excretion does mass depart a body. ---Ransom (-- 69.105.94.38 ( talk) 06:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC))
Someone care to attempt creating the following templates? 0 calories per gram (0 kJ/g) & 0 kilocalories per gram (0 kJ/g) Peter Horn 00:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I added a tag to this:
"Only carbohydrates (including fiber), fats, proteins, organic acids, polyols, and ethanol contain food energy."
I understand what it is trying to say, but it is simply not true. It sounds like something a nutritionist would say, so while being a useful guide for layman, but as a biochemist i know that other organic chemicals can be ingested and are metabolised to give energy. Ethanol is only singled out as it is legally sold to drink, but methanol, propanol, butanol, ketones, aldehdyes, amines, esters, etc can all also be metabolised, and some are less toxic than ethanol, and are common ingredients in foods.
This does not even approach the claim that spices have no energy. The only difference between parpika the spice and a pepper is the drying. Clearly peppers have caloires, and so does chilli powder.
Also, where did the definition of food being something with one of the allowed ingredients come from? Very many foods are available that claim no calories. I don't think anyone defines these as "not food" all because they do not provide calories. They are certainly foods for tax purposes. Yob Mod 12:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
The kWh calculation should also be mentioned. 2000 calories = 2,3 kWh see http://www.manicore.com/anglais/documentation_a/slaves.html Comes in handy when comparing robots energy expenditure to men, and for other uses
add to article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.178.120 ( talk) 06:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
A definition is not really a definition if it only refers to itself. Children make statements of this sort, encyclopedias do not. Nickrz ( talk) 21:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Whoever has designed this naming system has blundered. This is so errorprone. Pronounciation is same for both "calories". How do we know which is which ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vwalvekar ( talk • contribs) 17:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
"In the European Union, manufacturers of packaged food must label the nutritional energy of their products in both kilocalories and kilojoules," This is wrong only joule is a requirement, calorie are only tolerated. EEC/EU even tried to prohibit the calorie as early as the 1970's (71/354/EEC chapter III). If memory servers me, it was the US who lobbied for the calorie, making is easier for US manufactures to export to Europe. 94.145.236.194 ( talk) 14:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 0 external links on Food energy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.anses.fr/cgi-bin/countdocs.cgi?Documents/ANC-Ft-TableauxApportsE.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:03, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Food energy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:25, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Why is this here? This article isn't about animal products in particular, or environmentalism, or veganism. Is there any reason at all to include it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:CF0:EE50:7079:B205:CF92:D52C ( talk) 02:17, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Done - agree it was irrelevant and is now removed. Thanks. -- Zefr ( talk) 02:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
I removed the following sentence since it seemed to be more confusing than illuminating to the readers:
It should be obvious that, in this article, "energy content" or "energy density" always refers to the energy that the body can obtain from the food by respirative metabolism, not to some other meaning that the term may have in chemistry or physics. However, for good measure, it seems best to avoid the term "energy density". -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 23:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
I removed this sentence since it seems to be "original research":
I wonder whether this is possible, even in theory, given the timing of ATP creation and regeneration, its creation from energy stored in the body etc. -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 23:58, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
The following sentence was removed because it was unsourced and appears to be "original research":
There may be some truth hidden in this statement, but given that most food is chewed and digested, down to a molecular level, before respiration actually starts, it does not seem to make much sense as it is. -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 06:10, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I removed this sentence because has long been unsourced and seems to be "original research" and mostly wrong:
-- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 06:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I removed the following sentences because they have been unsourced for a long time, and may be either "original research" or unproven "folklore":
It seems well-established and logical that that lowering the ambient temperature below the "room" values causes an almost immediate increase in metabolism rate, both at rest and under exercise, as the body needs to expend extra energy in order to keep the internal temperature at the normal level. But there are several sources on the internet claiming that high enough ambient temperatures also cause an increase in metabolism, either at rest or under exercise, because the body needs to consume more energy to shed internal heat. While this seems at least possible, intuitively, I could not find any reports of this effect having been measured. Anyway, those internet sources do not specify the ambient temperature at which the effect starts (that is, the ambient temp that minimizes the BMR or exercise MR). The claim above, that hot climates have this effect, also are unsourced and dubious. -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 08:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2023 and 12 January 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jnguyen7 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Remy.2005 ( talk) 18:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)