Starbucks is discontinuing Hazelnut coffee

[runnah]

A steak is not the same as a candy bar. It's not just about calories. The body is going to process a steak differently from how it processes a candy bar.

No it's not.

Your body breaks down all food into basic elements which it can absorb. The rest is passed.

Not quite. Now you're starting to sound like the corn lobby with their "sugar is sugar, your body can't tell the difference" crap.

I don't know enough about that to make an educated statement.

 

[Scatterbrained]

A steak is not the same as a candy bar. It's not just about calories. The body is going to process a steak differently from how it processes a candy bar.

No it's not.

Your body breaks down all food into basic elements which it can absorb. The rest is passed.

. . and it'll absorb poison just as fast as it'll absorb protein.

 

[limr30 3]

Okay, I'm really just not getting your point. Are you really saying it doesn't matter what we eat as long as it has calories?

 

[Scatterbrained]

I'm not a biochemist so I don't know all the specifics of how the body digests what, but while it's true that the body will take what it needs and eliminate the rest, you're going to get more of what you need from some things and less from others. There are also other substances that are in some foods and not in others. The process also takes varying amounts of time, which affects the body differently.

You're just not getting the same things out of a candy bar than you are going to get from meat or vegetables.

Right what I am saying like Jazzie mentioned is the house analogy. Think of the body as a house trying to be built. You need basic supplies, (bricks, wood, tiles..etc) every day a truck delivers supplies 3 times a day. Some trucks have more bricks, others have more wood some only have one supply while other have all evenly mixed.

...and what if the truck bringing the lumber starting bringing "synthetic" lumber? Lumber that supposedly looked and performed like real wood but actually bowed over time as well as releasing toxic vapors into your home? There are a lot of things that the agriculture lobby have managed to slip past the FDA that are actually quite bad for you over time. Aspartame comes to mind as a major one. . . . .

 

[JustJazzie]

So you're saying there is no such ththing as "higher quality wood" I can get solid wood, wood with termite holes, twigs and branches, or pressed particle board and I would end up with the same quality house in the end? After all, it's all "wood"

I'm not a biochemist so I don't know all the specifics of how the body digests what, but while it's true that the body will take what it needs and eliminate the rest, you're going to get more of what you need from some things and less from others. There are also other substances that are in some foods and not in others. The process also takes varying amounts of time, which affects the body differently.

You're just not getting the same things out of a candy bar than you are going to get from meat or vegetables.

Right what I am saying like Jazzie mentioned is the house analogy. Think of the body as a house trying to be built. You need basic supplies, (bricks, wood, tiles..etc) every day a truck delivers supplies 3 times a day. Some trucks have more bricks, others have more wood some only have one supply while other have all evenly mixed.

 

[runnah]

Okay, I'm really just not getting your point. Are you really saying it doesn't matter what we eat as long as it has calories?

My point is that I took much cold medicine today to form a cogent argument!

Anyways my point is this. All food is made up of basic elements that our body can absorb. The quantities of those various elements differ depending on the source. So an apple will have various amount of X, y and z where as a cracker only might have X.

 

[runnah]

So you're saying there is no such ththing as "higher quality wood" I can get solid wood, wood with termite holes, twigs and branches, or pressed particle board and I would end up with the same quality house in the end? After all, it's all "wood"

Yes, a tomato only knows how to grow into a tomato. it doesn't know if it's been grown is a field, green house or lab. The gene structure of a tomato doesn't change depending where it's grown (short of being outside chernobyl).

 

[limr30 3]

Okay, I'm really just not getting your point. Are you really saying it doesn't matter what we eat as long as it has calories?

My point is that I took much cold medicine today to form a cogent argument!

Anyways my point is this. All food is made up of basic elements that our body can absorb. The quantities of those various elements differ depending on the source. So an apple will have various amount of X, y and z where as a cracker only might have X.

I think I get it. Crappy food is crappy, but it's still "food" according to a strict definition of the word "food."

You might want to save that NyQuil for when you actually have a cold

 

[runnah]

You might want to save that NyQuil for when you actually have a cold

I am struggling today to be honest.

 

[runnah]

There are a lot of things that the agriculture lobby have managed to slip past the FDA that are actually quite bad for you over time.

I don't disagree with that.

 

[limr30 3]

Yes, a tomato only knows how to grow into a tomato. it doesn't know if it's been grown is a field, green house or lab. The gene structure of a tomato doesn't change depending where it's grown (short of being outside chernobyl).

The gene structure won't but the chemical make-up might be slightly different depending on where and how it was grown, thus making some more nutritious than others, or at least making them taste differently. A tomato grown in my back yard is going to taste differently than a tomato grown in the back yard of someone who lives across the country because the composition of the soil affects the taste and what the tomato absorbs. That's the concept of terroir, which is a term mostly used for wine but is starting to expand to the description of different foods like butter and cheese.

 

[limr30 3]

You might want to save that NyQuil for when you actually have a cold

I am struggling today to be honest.

Hey, but you get points for the correct use of the word "cogent."

 

[runnah]

The gene structure won't but the chemical make-up might be slightly different depending on where and how it was grown, thus making some more nutritious than others, or at least making them taste differently. A tomato grown in my back yard is going to taste differently than a tomato grown in the back yard of someone who lives across the country because the composition of the soil affects the taste and what the tomato absorbs. That's the concept of terroir, which is a term mostly used for wine but is starting to expand to the description of different foods like butter and cheese.

Nope, sorry but that is 100% inaccurate and physically impossible. The only way for one tomato to be more nutritious than another is for it to be physically bigger.

 

[waday]

Mercy, that is complicated!

Sometimes i get fancy and use real creamer instead of the powdered kind.

Ugh, please tell me you're kidding! The ingredients in that stuff are horrifying.

You beat me to this comment. Powder is not food. And neither are flavored liquid lightener. I'll take it black over fake anything else.

Food is any 'nutritious' substance, whether liquid, powder, solid, or gelatinous form.

Key word, NUTRITIOUS. Hydrogenated oils and chemicals are actually considered hazardous which is, I am pretty sure, an opposite of nutritious.

Do You Know What's in Your Non-Dairy Creamer?

Even things that are nutritious can be hazardous. It depends on the quantities and concentrations.

Also, water is a chemical.

 

[limr30 3]

Nope, sorry but that is 100% inaccurate and physically impossible. The only way for one tomatoe to be more nutritious than another is for it to be physically bigger.

Why?