Sometime in the nineteenth century they figured out there was such a thing as protein and fat and carbs, and how much heat was released from each when you burned it, whether in a crucible or metabolically. No, really, it is important to know that. But it’s not something we should run our lives by. Since that time, we’ve learned a few more things. Like about hormones, say.
We keep using calories as if it were a meaningful concept because it’s a simple number that measures a real thing. That’s very good. But not all real things are meaningful. There exist books that, say, give brief biographies for the peers and nobles of Great Britain up until the mid 1860s. Of limited application. Is there some way of expressing useful nutritional information in a simple way? A grade? ORAC value, glycemic index, available energy content (with a nod to DIT and fiber)? Bioavailable protein? Bioavailable mineral content? Something where you don’t have to be a brain genius to be able to make a decision? Something where crafty marketeers can’t up the score by dumping some vitamins and fiber into their cotton candy? -- like every breakfast cereal?
That’s a lot of info. Looks like a grade isn’t enough. A report card. That’s too much. Not easy. But we can’t just express it as a ratio, dry weight over calories ... sugar would get a grade of ¼, grams over calories. So does a granola bar. Hm. Broccoli is 29 grams over 98 calories. Call it 3/10. In other words, sugar is 25%, broccoli is 30%. Does that seem reasonable? Because that’s what the current system thinks is important to tell us. As if 100 grams of one carb is the same as 100 grams of another. That’s just insane. Is the math right? Because something here is insane.
Point is, calories are like women. All the same.
Oh, is there something wrong with that idea? Not all women are the same? It hardly seems possible that sophisticated men of the world could be wrong about this. But in the vanishingly small likelihood that it is wrong -- and the idea is both absurd and offensive -- maybe the world is wrong about calories. It’s just barely possible.
Absurdity, of course. A thing has merit because of its particular qualities, not because of imposed judgments and sloppy assumptions. Nutrient-dense / calorie-poor foods are manifestly superior. Empty-calorie foods are drugs -- non-nutritive substances that manipulate hormones.
No, it's not just diet. Lots of actual work involved. It's a big-picture thing. Approach it with open eyes.
FW
CrossFit Burbank
CrossFit Burbank
Posts
