Forums | MacLife
You are not logged in.
#1 2006-07-29 2:22 pm
- Account axed on request
- Guest
Zero Calories = ?
I understand that calories are a way of measuring the amount of energy you can produce while burning the item in quesiton, or maybe it's the other way around. At least I know that they are not a weight measurement system.
But out of curiosity, when you drink something, like "Diet Coke" with *zero* calories, what are you drinking? Heck, fizzy water (club soda) has 160calories, how can diet coke have none? What are you drinking then? Something that takes no energy to burn off? Theoretically then, if you drank, let's say 50 diet cokes in the period of a few hours, or say 1 day, you could expend minimal energy (IE: breathing) and gain no weight. In fact, you'd actually be losing (very minimal amounts), correct?
Because calories you *don't* burn become Fat, or stored nutrients or whatever. If you have zero calories, and you don't burn any (no need too), you gain nothing in "nutrient storage" (fat).
Then why don't people drink *only* Diet coke? It tastes just as good in my opinion, and if you really don't gain any weight from it, you could have *something* on your diet-foods list that actually tasted good. (Besides that asparagus, yeah it's really good too.
)
Am I not wrong? 
EDIT: When I say *only* diet coke, I mean besides other pops. You'd still drink milk and water, for example.
Last edited by DudetheCreator (2006-07-29 2:24 pm)
#3 2006-07-29 2:39 pm
- Tallgeese
- Sternly Advising
- From: Pool Party
- Registered: 2000-10-17
- Posts: 34114
Re: Zero Calories = ?
DudetheCreator wrote:
I understand that calories are a way of measuring the amount of energy you can produce while burning the item in quesiton, or maybe it's the other way around. At least I know that they are not a weight measurement system.
But out of curiosity, when you drink something, like "Diet Coke" with *zero* calories, what are you drinking? Heck, fizzy water (club soda) has 160calories, how can diet coke have none? What are you drinking then? Something that takes no energy to burn off? Theoretically then, if you drank, let's say 50 diet cokes in the period of a few hours, or say 1 day, you could expend minimal energy (IE: breathing) and gain no weight. In fact, you'd actually be losing (very minimal amounts), correct?
Because calories you *don't* burn become Fat, or stored nutrients or whatever. If you have zero calories, and you don't burn any (no need too), you gain nothing in "nutrient storage" (fat).
Then why don't people drink *only* Diet coke? It tastes just as good in my opinion, and if you really don't gain any weight from it, you could have *something* on your diet-foods list that actually tasted good. (Besides that asparagus, yeah it's really good too.)
Am I not wrong?
EDIT: When I say *only* diet coke, I mean besides other pops. You'd still drink milk and water, for example.
If something has zero calories, that means it has no chcmicals your body is capable of breaking down for energy so they pass on through.
People don't drink only Diet Coke because the vast majority of us think it tastes terrible. Plus a lot of people don't like the weird chemicals in it.
I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh, there was a happy time when I believed in liberals.
Offline
#4 2006-07-29 2:42 pm
- dv
- Negusa Negest
- Moderator

- From: Minneapolis, MN
- Registered: 1999-08-30
- Posts: 18103
Re: Zero Calories = ?
DudetheCreator wrote:
I understand that calories are a way of measuring the amount of energy you can produce while burning the item in quesiton, or maybe it's the other way around. At least I know that they are not a weight measurement system.
But out of curiosity, when you drink something, like "Diet Coke" with *zero* calories, what are you drinking? Heck, fizzy water (club soda) has 160calories, how can diet coke have none? What are you drinking then?
Club soda contains other things besides just water and CO2. (like sugar) Diet Coke contains nothing that a normal human body can metabolize, which means there is no net gain of energy, and no energy is stored as fat. There is some salt, but the primary ingredients are fizzy water and artificial flavoring. Nutritioanlly speaking, it's like swallowing air, or gnawing on wood - and since caffiene is a diuretic, you actually end up getting dehyrdrated.
Something that takes no energy to burn off? Theoretically then, if you drank, let's say 50 diet cokes in the period of a few hours, or say 1 day, you could expend minimal energy (IE: breathing) and gain no weight. In fact, you'd actually be losing (very minimal amounts), correct?
So, yes, if you took in no calories, your body would burn fat - and muscle - tissue in order to keep you alive. This would cause you to lose weight, how much depends on how active your metabolism is. Voluntary starvation is usually referred to as "anorexia" and is considered a sign of mental illness.
However, when you take in NO calories, your body will go into 'starvation mode' and your metabolism will slow down a lot. Maximizing weight loss is generally done by "grazing" - having multiple smaller meals, 200-400 calories each, spaced out 5 or 6 times over the course of the day.
Because calories you *don't* burn become Fat, or stored nutrients or whatever. If you have zero calories, and you don't burn any (no need too), you gain nothing in "nutrient storage" (fat).
Let's recap.
1) Your body requires fuel to operate - even breathing burns calories.
2) When you ingest more calories than your body needs, your body stores them as fat.
3) When you ingest no calories, you body takes steps to minimize the amount of calories it burns - but it continues burning them at a slowed rate.
Then why don't people drink *only* Diet coke?
because some people think it tastes like smurf. I happen to like it, myself, but I wouldn't claim it tastes a damn thing like regular.
It tastes just as good in my opinion, and if you really don't gain any weight from it, you could have *something* on your diet-foods list that actually tasted good. (Besides that asparagus, yeah it's really good too.
)
This is true - but most people on diets aren't drinking regular sugary sodas, so there's no substitution to be made.
Am I not wrong?
Very wrong.
EDIT: When I say *only* diet coke, I mean besides other pops. You'd still drink milk and water, for example.
it's Soda. SODA!!!
"Now commences the process of cutting off the head, which generally takes from an hour to an hour and a half by an expert workman with a sharp blade." -Reuben Delano, Wanderings and Adventures
Offline
#6 2006-07-29 3:31 pm
Re: Zero Calories = ?
dvpierce wrote:
it's Soda. SODA!!!
Soda is for baking. And pop is a sound effect. Let's call it a soft-drink. Or call it by name.
Offline
#7 2006-07-29 4:03 pm
- tomfoolery
- Zu-Zu-Zune!

- From: Blue Zune of Death
- Registered: 2004-10-22
- Posts: 2303
- Website
Re: Zero Calories = ?
In other news, this week I succumbed to the marketing hype that is Coke Zero whilst at the supermarket.
I haven't dared to try it yet though. I hope it's OK, cos I bought 12 cans of it 
Darn TV advertising affecting my purchasing habits.
tF
Offline
#8 2006-07-29 4:34 pm
- Edward
- Addicted to this place

- From: morF
- Registered: 2002-12-08
- Posts: 3699
Re: Zero Calories = ?
Aqua Man wrote:
dvpierce wrote:
it's Soda. SODA!!!
Soda is for baking. And pop is a sound effect. Let's call it a soft-drink. Or call it by name.
down here we just call it coke.
All of it.
mountain dew = coke
sprite = coke
root beer = coke
diet coke = coke
sparkling fruit punch = coke
Offline
#9 2006-07-29 4:49 pm
- thume
- Only in Lapland

- From: Budapest, Hungary
- Registered: 2004-11-05
- Posts: 1352
Re: Zero Calories = ?
A calorie is enough energy to heat 1Litre of water 1 degree Cel.
Beer is my favorite source of calories. Yumm.
Offline
#10 2006-07-29 4:58 pm
Re: Zero Calories = ?
I almost never buy diet soda in a can. It has a particularly nasty aftertaste.
As far as soda being high in sodium a look a the nutritional info shows that isn't the case however soda can affect your sodium level in a similar process to how it affects calcium. The acids in sodas break down both elements fairly readily, quickly redistributing them into your blood stream instead of leaving them in the bone and tissues that can safely store then for later use.
Online
#11 2006-07-29 5:04 pm
- bedstuy
- Archimandrite, Eastern Elite

- From: King Cole Bar, St. Regis Hotel
- Registered: 2003-09-20
- Posts: 13629
Offline
#12 2006-07-29 5:45 pm
- Account axed on request
- Guest
Re: Zero Calories = ?
Wow... I never figured a thread like this would get such a huge reponse. Thank you DV, for your extended and very complete response, as usual. Thank you all.
No worries, I wasn't planning on living on Diet Coke.
I was just wondering about "zero calories" and why more people don't drink it. I guess a lot of people don't like the taste. I think it's as good as the "real thing" will ever be.
We haven't got a lot of "Coca Cola Zero" around here, it seems. Is it even in canada yet?
The ad was funny, so maybe I'll try some if I ever spot it in a vending machine. 
I also found it strange that something that is considered "junk food" could ever have less calories than, say... milk which is "healthy food". Then again, both mentioned drinks are on opposite sides of the "healthy vs. bad" food chain, I guess.
One helps your bones, the other kills them. Thank the cows!
#13 2006-07-29 6:18 pm
- imikedaman
- Righting Wrongs

- From: Maryland
- Registered: 2003-09-27
- Posts: 1425
- Website
Re: Zero Calories = ?
Tallgeese wrote:
If something has zero calories, that means it has no chcmicals your body is capable of breaking down for energy so they pass on through.
The zero calories refers to zero net calories, meaning that while the item does contain calories, your body burns the same amount of calories digesting the food (yes, digestion burns calories).
With my best friend at my side,
I face the new day in full stride.
I don't know what the future holds,
But I'll be waiting, proud and bold.
Offline
#14 2006-07-29 6:21 pm
- imikedaman
- Righting Wrongs

- From: Maryland
- Registered: 2003-09-27
- Posts: 1425
- Website
Re: Zero Calories = ?
DudetheCreator wrote:
I also found it strange that something that is considered "junk food" could ever have less calories than, say... milk which is "healthy food".
That's becuase calorie count is a poor measurement of how healthy something is. People need around 2,000 calories per day to maintain healthy weight, so if you eat a bag of chips, you're only fulfilling your body's daily requirements calorie-wise.
However, I'm pretty sure all the cholesterol in those chips that are trying to constrict your blood vessels might make it "unhealthy". 
With my best friend at my side,
I face the new day in full stride.
I don't know what the future holds,
But I'll be waiting, proud and bold.
Offline
#15 2006-07-29 6:32 pm
- Connemara
- Member

- Registered: 2006-02-13
- Posts: 563
Re: Zero Calories = ?
I recently heard a report on NPR about sodas containing sodium benzoate (sp?) and ascorbic acid in amounts that create benzene, an undisputed carcinogen. Apparently the FDA had asked the industry to remove the chemicals about 16 years ago, but recent testing has found that the amounts found in the sodas have actually escalated.
Why worry about calories?
Offline
#16 2006-07-29 6:48 pm
Re: Zero Calories = ?
I thought club soda was just carbonated water, while tonic water contained other things (like sugar). Maybe I am thinking 'mineral water,' or something.
I love the powerglove. It's so bad.
Offline
#17 2006-07-29 7:02 pm
- Tallgeese
- Sternly Advising
- From: Pool Party
- Registered: 2000-10-17
- Posts: 34114
Re: Zero Calories = ?
imikedaman wrote:
Tallgeese wrote:
If something has zero calories, that means it has no chcmicals your body is capable of breaking down for energy so they pass on through.
The zero calories refers to zero net calories, meaning that while the item does contain calories, your body burns the same amount of calories digesting the food (yes, digestion burns calories).
Are you sure? Aquafina lists "0 calories" on the back but as it is water, it would have negative net calories.
I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh, there was a happy time when I believed in liberals.
Offline
#18 2006-07-29 7:29 pm
- Account axed on request
- Guest
Re: Zero Calories = ?
Connemara wrote:
I recently heard a report on NPR about sodas containing sodium benzoate (sp?) and ascorbic acid in amounts that create benzene, an undisputed carcinogen. Apparently the FDA had asked the industry to remove the chemicals about 16 years ago, but recent testing has found that the amounts found in the sodas have actually escalated.
Why worry about calories?
I worry about all nutritional information. I've been trying to watch my weight of late.
#19 2006-07-29 8:31 pm
- wellfleation
- High on Life

- From: Metheun, Mass.
- Registered: 2001-11-13
- Posts: 8684
Re: Zero Calories = ?
justine wrote:
Actually, you don't lose a lot of weight drinking diet sodas. The sodium content is pretty high.
No it's not.
But studies have shown that people who drink strictly diet soda eat more and therefore make up for not ingesting a caloric drink.
FIGHT
POWEROffline
#20 2006-07-29 8:36 pm
- wellfleation
- High on Life

- From: Metheun, Mass.
- Registered: 2001-11-13
- Posts: 8684
Re: Zero Calories = ?
Tallgeese wrote:
People don't drink only Diet Coke because the vast majority of us think it tastes terrible. Plus a lot of people don't like the weird chemicals in it.
Diet drinks, including flavored water have a chemical called Benzoate (sp?) that causes cancer according to a local news report a saw recently.
I am a prime experiment for this theory as I've drank Diet Coke (and recently the flavored water water) exclusively for the past 12 years!
FIGHT
POWEROffline
#21 2006-07-29 8:58 pm
- wellfleation
- High on Life

- From: Metheun, Mass.
- Registered: 2001-11-13
- Posts: 8684
Re: Zero Calories = ?
imikedaman wrote:
DudetheCreator wrote:
I also found it strange that something that is considered "junk food" could ever have less calories than, say... milk which is "healthy food".
That's becuase calorie count is a poor measurement of how healthy something is. People need around 2,000 calories per day to maintain healthy weight, so if you eat a bag of chips, you're only fulfilling your body's daily requirements calorie-wise.
However, I'm pretty sure all the cholesterol in those chips that are trying to constrict your blood vessels might make it "unhealthy".
There isn't any cholesterol in 95% of chips, nor trans-fats (the worst type of fat for peoples health found in meat and cheeses). Also, the new trend is to use "sunflower" oil which is much better for you.
There is more miss-information in this thread than is the norm in Mac-Addict.
Do you guys not read the labels, or simply don't believe them? 
FIGHT
POWEROffline
#23 2006-07-30 9:37 am
Re: Zero Calories = ?
wellfleation wrote:
justine wrote:
Actually, you don't lose a lot of weight drinking diet sodas. The sodium content is pretty high.
No it's not.
But studies have shown that people who drink strictly diet soda eat more and therefore make up for not ingesting a caloric drink.
35-45mg sodium per 12 oz can is pretty high for people that drink a lot of soda a day.
Offline
#24 2006-07-30 11:15 am
- Account axed on request
- Guest
Re: Zero Calories = ?
justine wrote:
wellfleation wrote:
justine wrote:
Actually, you don't lose a lot of weight drinking diet sodas. The sodium content is pretty high.
No it's not.
But studies have shown that people who drink strictly diet soda eat more and therefore make up for not ingesting a caloric drink.35-45mg sodium per 12 oz can is pretty high for people that drink a lot of soda a day.
Sodium causes you to retain water, true? Hmm, then that would be a good drink for a movie. It would help you hold it in till the end. 
#25 2006-07-30 11:20 am
- mahakali
- anti-razor

- From: easter egg
- Registered: 2002-11-06
- Posts: 5593
Re: Zero Calories = ?
Isn't caffeine diuretic?
1. Instill fear.
2. ???????? (use your imagination)
3. Profit!
Offline


