[net.veg] Nutrition Puzzle Solved: flames reply

eugenez@azure.UUCP (Eugene Zinter) (10/17/84)

[Line Eater Junk Food]

                *************************************************
                **                                             **
		**  Reply to Mr. Carter Bullard:               **
	        **  My responses are prepended with asterisks  **
                **                                             **
                *************************************************

Relay-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site azure.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gatech.UUCP
Path: azure!teklds!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!houxm!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!amd!gatech!carter
From: carter@gatech.UUCP (Carter Bullard)
Newsgroups: net.veg,net.med
Subject: Re: FLAME:FLAME:FLAME:Nutrition Puzzle Solved
Message-ID: <10440@gatech.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Oct-84 08:05:58 PDT
Article-I.D.: gatech.10440
Posted: Tue Oct  9 08:05:58 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 12-Oct-84 19:25:03 PDT
References: <70@azure.UUCP>
Organization: School of ICS, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Lines: 42

> 
> All this information is based on burning food in a Calorimeter.
> The experts could be somewhat wrong to believe the body behaves
> exactly  as  a  Calorimeter.    After all, isn't protein really
> meant to build and maintain the body?  
> 
> That is, when the  amino acids  pass into the  circulation they
> are  used to  reconstruct  more than  1,600 different  kinds of
> protein  that make up  muscle tissues,  hormones, enzymes, etc.
> Why would the body use  amino acids as fuel?   Except if forced
> to?
> 
  Now don't take this personally.  I'm really mad about this and 
  have lost all control, so please don't hold me responsible until
  after this episode has subsided.

**  What are you mad about?  Are you saying that Calorimeters are
**  not  used to  determine  how  many  Calories  a serving  of a
**  particular foodstuff provides?  Or are you saying  that amino 
**  acids are not used to  reconstruct  protein?   Are are  upset
**  that I don't believe the main  purpose of  protein is to fuel 
**  the body?  Please explain.  I am fully aware that protein can
**  be used to fuel the body---but that is NOT  it's main purpose
**  and is usually due to wrong  eating  habits---in  particular,
**  the  overconsumption of  protein  (or the underconsumption of
**  carbohydrates).



Really,
  Before you say anything in net.med that is intended as information
  you should at least be qualified first.  Have you ever heard of 
  Biochemistry, the Krebs Cycle?  Have you ever had a Biology course 
  before? in a college? in high school?  in grammer school?

**  I hold a mere   B.S. In Electrical and Computer Engineering.
**  Apparently, this  doesn't  qualify me to make any statements
**  in net.med---at least  according to your  narrow  viewpoint.
**  I believe  practically  anyone has  heard of the  WELL KNOWN
**  Krebs Cycle.  It is extremely interesting.  

**  I do, however, read a lot.  And so if I run across something
**  of interest, I like to pass it along to others.

**  Are  you one of those  people who don't believe that someone
**  without   the  "proper"  degree(s)  can't  make   meaningful
**  contributions  to  the  world?    (Let's  not  tell   George
**  Washington Carver  about that.)  I hate to mention this, but
**  SOME of the most  stupid people in this world are those with
**  a string of capitalized letters following their whole name.

**  Oh yes, by the way---it's "grammar",  NOT "grammer".


  I would like to think that this news group could be a source of GOOD
  information and discussion about current topics in medicine.
  IF YOU DON'T KNOW SOMETHING, ASK.  MAYBE SOMEBODY KNOWS AN ANSWER,
  AT LEAST A REASONABLE ANSWER.

**  What GOOD  information  have you contributed in your letter?
**  Your letter provides NOTHING.

  JUST DON'T TAKE A POSITION OF AUTHORITY IN THIS NEWS GROUP UNLESS YOU 
  KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

**  What position did I claim?  What is your position?  Are you the
**  Master here?  This is still a free world where I live---perhaps
**  you  would like to  change  that.   If you  know  what  you are 
**  talking  about---then  please  tell  us,  it might  interest at 
**  least myself.

 "Nutrition Puzzle Solved" was and still is the biggest bag of garbage 
  I have ever read.

**  Rather than  behaving like a child,  why don't you act  like
**  a responsible adult and state in a simple informative manner
**  what is incorrect about my  article?   It would be much more
**  interesting and useful than your current remarks.

**  The following information was what I provided in my letter
**  to net.med and net.veg (surrounded by brackets):


*** ["Have you ever  wondered  about the  relationship  between  that 
*** nutritional information on the back of so many food containers?
*** The protein, carbohydrates, fat, and alcohol???

*** Try an experiment---for one  serving of the  particular food or 
*** drink, look on the back of some box or bottle (like catsup).  

*** 1)  Multiply the number of grams of protein by 4
*** 2)  Multiply the number of grams of carbohydrates by 4
*** 3)  Multiply the number of grams of alcohol by 7
*** 4)  Multiply the number of grams of FAT by 9
*** 5)  Now add those numbers (1-4) together.


*** 	This is how the number for Calories is gotten!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
***	Notice  how  close  your  calculation is to what the  label
***	claims (on your food container).  They round it off though."]


**  It is CORRECT.  And this was the main  interest of my letter.
**  My purpose in supplying it was that MANY people are not aware
**  of  how the  number of Calories  per serving  relates  to the
**  individual components---protein,  carbohydrates, alcohol, and
**  fat.  GET IT?  THE MAIN POINT!!
  
-- 
Carter Bullard
ICS, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta GA 30332
CSNet:Carter @ Gatech	ARPA:Carter.Gatech @ CSNet-relay.arpa
uucp:...!{akgua,allegra,amd,ihnp4,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!carter


**  And I admit my  example was  simple minded and not an exact
**  dissertation.   It  was  NOT  meant to  explain  the  EXACT
**  physiological happenings caused by eating foods composed as
**  stated.   It  WAS  meant to  imply  that  you  can't go  by
**  Calories  ALONE  when  designing  a  diet.   (That is, just
**  because  two foods  have the same  amount of  Calories  per
**  serving, don't expect them to be similar in their  makeup.)
**  You could have a VERY  unbalanced  protein-to-carbohydrate-
**  to-fat  ratio.   You can't go by just  carbohydrates  alone
**  (low carbohydrate diets---"Calories  don't  count" claims).
**  After  all,  fat  provides  over  twice the  Calories  that
**  carbohydrates  do.   And  for  efficient  protein  use,  an
**  adequate amount of carbohydrates must be present. You can't
**  go by just protein  alone either.   You have to look at the 
**  WHOLE  picture.   Oh yes, that also includes such things as
**  vitamins  and  minerals  too.   Those  who  are  minimizing
**  Calories had better do a little research to see if they are
**  lacking in any nutrients.

**  So what's wrong with that?  Again, please explain.

**  If you have  some constructive  information on all  this, I 
**  and perhaps others on the net  would appreciate  reading it
**  as diet has a large interest in our lives.


**                                           Eugene C. Zinter

carter@gatech.UUCP (Carter Bullard) (10/22/84)

> > 

Alright,alright,

  I apologize for being such an ***** about it.  But I did say that
  I was upset.  I did warn you in the beginning. 
  Anyway, you and so many others have pointed out my error and
  I would like to sincerely apologize.

  Ok, this is my opinion about why the article is deficient.

> > All this information is based on burning food in a Calorimeter.

    The information that you provide is not derived from burning these
    things in a calorimeter.  All the information on caloric potential
    is determined biochemically and is totally dependant on the amount
    of NADPH, NADH and subsequently the amount of ATP that can be produced
    from the material through the glycolytic chain, the Krebs cycle and 
    the process of oxidative phosphorylation( including the electron transport 
    chain ).

    The caloric potential is realized when phosphatitic enzymes
    cleave one or two of the phosphate bonds of ATP.  From a biochemical
    standpoint, there is only one way to deliver potential chemical
    energy to physiologic processes, and that is through the utilization
    of high energy bonds such as the phosphate bonds found in ATP.
    Now the kind of energy that is available from chemical bond cleavage
    is completely described in terms of heat, thus the use of the term
    calorie to begin with.  From a physics point of view, you have to 
    talk in terms of calorimeters, sense that is the definition of something
    that measures calories.  So in order to understand the energy potential
    of the foodstuffs that we put in our mouths, you have to look at the
    biochemical utilization which is measured finally in terms of heat
    production, and in order to measure that you need a calorimeter.
    Now, the amount of heat released by ATP when it is utilized has been
    determined to an extremely precise value.  And since everybody
    shouldn't have to reinvent the wheel so to speak, when a food stuffs
    caloric potential is determined, it is done through a determination
    of the amount of biochemical intermediates it can produce.  Actually
    the companies do exactly what you did.  They just figure out how much
    protein, fat and carbohydrates are in their product and then just whip
    out the old calculator.

> > The experts could be somewhat wrong to believe the body behaves
> > exactly  as  a  Calorimeter.

    You are absolutely correct!!! I don't know of any physiologist, biochemist, 
    endocrinologist, pharmocologist, microbiologist, ..., even, dare I say 
    it, nutritionist that does.

> > After all, isn't protein really meant to build and maintain the body?  

    What do you mean by build and maintain?  Everything you put into your
    mouth has the potential to build and maintain the body.  The majority
    of the protien that you eat is converted to pyruvate which enters the
    Krebs cycle and thus becomes indistinquishable from carbohydrates. It is
    the nitrogen that is striped from the amino acid in its conversion
    to carboxylic acids that becomes eventually urea, that substance that
    singularly justifies the existence of your kidneys.  Remember, the only
    source of nitrogen in the basic foodstuffs is from amino( this is the
    chemical prefix for nitrogen ) acids, and the only thing in urea is
    nitrogen( and a little hydrogen ).  The primary reason your urine is 
    yellow, is because amino acids are used the same as carbohydrates.
    This even applies to some of the essential amino acids, you know, those
    amino acids that you can't make yourself.
    
> > Why would the body use  amino acids as fuel?   Except if forced
> > to?
    
    Now where did you get an idea like that?  Really.  Where did
    you get this information?  That is the problem I have.  This stuff
    sounds like all the other nutritionist stuff that is not based on
    fact but on somebody's idea of what will sell in a bookstore.
    Now if I said that electrons were created simply so we could watch
    television, you would probably get a little perturbed.



> > That is, when the  amino acids  pass into the  circulation they
> > are  used to  reconstruct  more than  1,600 different  kinds of
> > protein  that make up  muscle tissues,  hormones, enzymes, etc.

    Come on.  There are a lot more than 1,600 different kinds of protein.
    Really.
    I would very much like to find out where that number came from.
    To think that that number is within even 4 orders of magnitude of an 
    intelligent quess is one of the most ridiculous ideas that I've heard 
    in several....now you see there, I'm gettin upset again.


    Well, you get the idea. I hope.
    No, I don't mind if anybody submits anything to the net.  I just
    pay particular attention when somebody submits an article entitled
    Nutrition Puzzle Solved.  I didn't even know that there was a puzzle
    to begin with.  

    No, you don't have to have a degree to talk intelligently about biological
    types of things. But its the intelligent part thats sometimes hard to do.

    But most of the stuff I said was in haste and not well considered.
    So please forgive me.

   PS     By the way, I don't remember misspelling grammar on purpose.


-- 
Carter Bullard
ICS, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta GA 30332
CSNet:Carter @ Gatech	ARPA:Carter.Gatech @ CSNet-relay.arpa
uucp:...!{akgua,allegra,amd,ihnp4,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!carter