Personal perspectives are always plagued with some set of bias. For example, there are those that look at the great Egyptian pyramids as incredible acts of engineering prowess and still others that see the same building as representing a society that built with diminishing ambition (psssst, a joke). There is always an absurd way to categorize things and any time you base a theory, concept, or idea on a false premise, eventually that idea will crumble.
People can sell “snake oil” for a while, but eventually it will catch up with them and the facts (not opinions, perceptions, or feelings) will rule the day.
My Plate or Theirs?
I think it is certainly clear that the USDA Food Pyramid Scheme, is just that – a scheme and not a particularly good one. Recently we were presented with a “My Plate.” It’s certainly a step in the right direction. Not Earth-shattering innovation, but it at least it can serve as a foundation for a wide range of nutritional dialog. It’s got catchy colors, cool design, but take a look at it closely…
it doesn’t say meat.
Look at that. Most everything else on the plate is now in plain English: Grains (not breads), Fruits (not juice), Vegetables (not low glycemic carbs). Then there is Dairy (liquid meat – check out the nutritional labels and compare beef to milk or cheese) and Protein.
Does anyone REALLY know what a “protein” is? Isn’t that a Chicago song? Can you distinguish between a hydrophilic and hydrophobic amino acid or understand how these might affect proteins folding? If you could, would you care? The level of detail in macromolecular science is so incredibly complex today and yet we have many walking around with sound bites cashing in on the latest techno buzz-phrase pandering to the unknowing masses. Meanwhile, those trying to get funding for the basic research fueling this culinary renaissance struggle.
Saying protein is synonymous with meat, is like calling all rectangles squares. The good news is that there is now the foundation to separate this century old belief.
Rational Decisions
As people who know me will clearly defend. I am not AGAINST meat. I love the taste of meat, don’t have a personal issue with eating animals, nor do I focus on carbon footprints of steak. I am not trying to discount anyone that believes these things, but rather to put out clearly that I am simply not motivated by the politics or ethics of meat.
Yet I did live on a vegan diet for a little over a year. I did it as a “radical” self-experiment; you would have thought I was attempting to join a terrorist plot or cult by the reaction of some friends and family. There were those that thought it an unthinkable personal deprivation – akin to a prison sentence. Still others were overly concerned with how I would “get my protein,” yet none of them could really tell me what protein was or more importantly, how a rhinoceros, giraffe, or even <gasp> a beef-laden steer get’s protein when they are all herbivores.
Whatever protein is, the government wants to be sure you get some and make sure you get a little dairy too – all of the industry interest at the USDA need a “little help from their friends.” Sadly, I happen to LOVE sushi and chicken wings. I’m confident neither the mercury, saturated fat, nor animal protein are all that good for me, so I’ll significantly limit these from here on out.
And yet on my last few years of self reflection and intense study, there are many of the top ailments – Multiple Sclerosis, Diabetes, pulmonary hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, rheumatoid arthritis…the list goes on, which are all radically affected by diet and nutrition. I can’t IMAGINE having one of these and not giving this a try. I don’t understand the “I’d rather be dead then give up cheese” mindset. That sounds more like a heroin addict and less like a rational, or free decision.
My sensitivity and motivation was rooted in a looming trend towards Type II diabetes when I gave it a try. I used to have (and can more or less still induce with diet) bouts of hypoglycemia that was absolutely tied to my meal. It hit me within an hour or so and my friends saw it first hand. I was far more safe driving a car after doing four Jäger bombs, than eating a slice of cheesecake.
New World Order
Gary Taubes presents an interesting history of the media/medical PR machine in Good Calories, Bad Calories (2007) along with the political, socio-economic, scientific debates of Cholesterol-Heart Disease relations and ultimately Eisenhower’s own struggles to his nutritional-based death.
I want to change this thought by asserting two things:
1) a calorie IS absolutely a calorie in thermodynamics and
2) a “dietary calorie” is a very loosely determined set of averages related to a “kilocalorie” and isn’t necessarily exact.
Why this distinction? I have spent the better part of the last three years reading vociferously on food, diet, and exercise. Before that I spent a great part of the previous 15 years struggling with my weight. If you are overweight now, I get it and really do understand. What I have also learned is that a lot of people have made a lot of money on ideas they don’t really understand that well. Part of the issue is in the quest to make things “understandable” or generalized, it can often lead to further summaries that end up failing.
I believe that a dietary calorie is one of those things that is asserted with exacting detail when in fact it should be viewed more as an approximation.
The Art of Self Misdirection
Let’s take a quick diversion to something I am CERTAIN about, and then let’s see how these same steps might complicate the concepts around the dietary calorie. Certainly one of the best parts of the internet is that one doesn’t have to be a multi-million dollar corporation or famous spokesperson to get a message out. On the other hand, if you are viewed as a “reliable source,” you can unknowingly infect millions of people with incorrect information with a simple tap on the return key.
Here is a recent news piece from CBS MIami – Can “Chilling Out” On Ice Diet Help Lose Weight?
The actual news report (video) is quite accurate, even though they focus on the extreme, it covers the point made by both Tim and me. Clearly we have told everyone that these techniques are desinged to ENHANCE diet and exercise, not replace them. We point out, as do many, that “burning calories” (there’s those words again) isn’t that easy when compared to consuming them.
Having watched the video, read the story on the page. See the difference? Despite the credentials, Dr. Stacey Ingraham, is just wrong. In fact, this is the very point I made in my TEDtalk and unfortunately she isn’t alone. It is surprising just how many people confuse the body’s need to dump excess waste heat resulting from exercise as the cause of the energy consumption when in fact it’s a result of the body maintaining a core homeostasis. I tried to comment, but they were all rejected accept the one post asking that a comment be posted.
Not sweating it… Just know that many people that might be help will be confused. This doesn’t just happen with the media – it’s also common when science is summarized and generalized, which brings us back to the calorie.
First, we must look at thermodynamics with great respect. The laws have worked well and while they can be disproven if there is data to do so, no one has ever found any evidence to the contrary. This is the difference between science and dogma. So this is where I can state unequivocally that within thermodynamics a kilocalorie is the amount of energy to raise 1 kg of water 1 degree Celsius. It’s a simple definition and it does not change, nor can it be avoided. In thermodynamics, Heat (not temperature) = energy. It’s repeatable, measurable and observable.
Where we do have good reason to doubt is that 1 “dietary calorie” = 1 kilocalorie as it was defined over a century ago. I’ve participated in the past, and many of you still participate in nearly certain indisputable discussions about X calories of protein vs Y calories of carbohydrate. No matter what mental image you might have about a calorie of this or that, what each conversation, idea, and method involves is a basic estimate on digestibility and absorption of those macronutrients in order that it may be used, stored or excreted by the body.
This is the point where thermodynamics and food split paths. This is where I was able to achieve a thermodynamic advantage. This is where good calories/bad calories, body for life, sugar busters, slow carb, and Atkins all tweak and twist to make us all believe a “calorie is not a calorie.”
So is this all about semantics? I don’t think so. I am not going to take issue with any of these diet schemes; I’ve used all of them and they all worked for me to restrict calories. I was the one that ultimately couldn’t stick to them or make them a lifestyle.
A Plate Full of Schemes
The My Plate scheme is probably the best the USDA has ever done in helping people move towards a good balance. I think people can lose weight with either choice of protein: plant or animal. Plant will get you there much faster and my blood work suggests a much healthier landing.
Dairy? I think it’s seen it’s better days and yet I REALLY love cheese. When I look at the label and try to rationalize eating it, but giving up “red meat,” the rational debate goes right out the door. Liquid beef seems a better way to couch it for my mental process.

Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men. Bars to the right indicate these food tend to cause this weight gain over each four year period. Bars to the left are weight loss associated with that category of food.
I think most people are in fact trapped by what they THINK or are TOLD is healthy and the sales and marketing on the package, ESPECIALLY THE NUTRITION LABEL. It’s a sad case where in order to label the widest range of food, we have distilled down the categories and quantities until the point where the labels are not very meaningful. Take for example this: “Zero Calorie Olive Oil” I have in my pantry (hint ALL oil has calories and NO ONE sprays it for 1/3 of a second).
That’s all just plain dishonest and our children are suffering because of it.
Now looking at the chart to the right is anyone REALLY surprised by the results? This study published in last week’s New England Journal of Medicine tracked 120,000 men and women during a 20 year period (1986-2006), my fat years (1). During that same time I picked up an extra 50 lbs – go figure. Ok, don’t just rationalize your favorite junk food (cheese and yogurt looking good), but take in the entire picture. Bars to the right create a tendency to gain weight eating those foods and bars to left tend to lose. The length of the bar tells you how much on average.
Sure, you are not surprised, but what are you doing to change the trend in your life?
The Hot Points
Simply put – without some way to generate internal heat, you would assume whatever the temperature of your immediate surroundings. We don’t and it requires energy to create this heat in everyone and the energy source is food. If you control the food going in (nutrient dense, calorically poor foods – like plants) and exercise to strengthen your cardiovascular system and create excess waste heat, you’ll lose weight.
If you further expose your body to COOLER surroundings: swimming, cold showers, less layers, morning/evening walks, or just turning down the thermostat, your body MUST burn more or drop in temperature.
The resistance to change in temperature, the external thermal load on your body, depend on how large the temperature difference between your body and the environment and how fast heat (energy) is leaving your body. 40F water is a lot more drastic than 40F air, due to the increased heat capacity and thermal conductivity of water. A change of only 2-3 degrees down in water is equal to many more in air.
Swimming WILL positively effect your body’s heat loss and as such, will also trigger hunger. Resist the urge to eat and you’ll lose faster, guaranteed.
No amount of discussion changes these scientific facts; what is up for debate is how we might effectively and comfortably add these thermal loads to our lives. We don’t have to guess about calories in thermodynamics, maybe we should stick to words and food groups in diet schemes that people truly understand.
1) Changes in Diet and Lifestyle and Long-Term Weight Gain in Women and Men, Mozaffarian D et al. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2392-2404.






