Many of the calories in milk come from the sugar lactose.
Lactose-intolerant people have no lactase, so can't digest it.
So, for a lactose-intolerant person, does a glass of milk contain less calories than for a lactose tolerant person? I'm thinking, they can't digest the sugar, so the don't get the engergy from it.
People differ in their capability to digest lactose. Some people produce less lactase than others, even without being lactose intolerant. For such people, would milk contain less calories than for people who produce plenty of lactase?
Many of the calories in milk come from the sugar lactose. Lactose-intolerant people have no lactase, so can't digest it.
not exactly true. lactose intolerant people still have lactase, only in very low levels.
Quoted message said:
So, for a lactose-intolerant person, does a glass of milk contain less calories than for a lactose tolerant person? I'm thinking, they can't digest the sugar, so the don't get the engergy from it.
this depends on the levels of lactose, but in general: yes, it does have less calories then (lactose in milk makes about 30% of total calories) I don't think you'd get lactose intolerant people to drink milk for loosing weight because of the diarrhea and flatulence though.
Quoted message said:
People differ in their capability to digest lactose. Some people produce less lactase than others, even without being lactose intolerant. For such people, would milk contain less calories than for people who produce plenty of lactase?
depends of the levels of lactose intake really. at a certain level anyone's lactase won't be able to cope with the excess lactose any more. (this is why it is/was used as a laxative)
"Franco" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Hi
Many of the calories in milk come from the sugar lactose.
Lactose-intolerant people have no lactase, so can't digest it.
So, for a lactose-intolerant person, does a glass of milk contain less calories than for a lactose tolerant person? I'm thinking, they can't digest the sugar, so the don't get the engergy from it.
People differ in their capability to digest lactose. Some people produce less lactase than others, even without being lactose intolerant. For such people, would milk contain less calories than for people who produce plenty of lactase?
So what you're saying is, suppose you drink lots of milk in one go. You only have so much lactase. After a certain point, once all the lactase is "busy", you won't digest the lactose in the next bit of milk you drink. Hence you'll get less calories from maybe the 10th glass of milk than the first.
(Not that I'd ever want to drink 10 glasses of milk! That would just be silly)
So what you're saying is, suppose you drink lots of milk in one go. You only have so much lactase. After a certain point, once all the lactase is "busy", you won't digest the lactose in the next bit of milk you drink. Hence you'll get less calories from maybe the 10th glass of milk than the first.
(Not that I'd ever want to drink 10 glasses of milk! That would just be silly)
Have I understood you right?
Yes, this is right, however you would have to drink all glasses of milk directly one after another.. as long as the lactase is busy with splitting lactose it cannot take any more and the excess lactose will not be split (and will be later fermented by bacteria in the colon causing flatulence and diarrhea- depending on the ammount). after some time all lactose that could be bound by the lactase will have been split and the lactase is free again for more.
Note however that fat, of course, is still absorbed normally.
Note however that fat, of course, is still absorbed normally.
Enzymes is also involved in fat degradation, so most probably they will also be saturated and you may perhaps even get a fatty stool like in coelics :-). (But most probably bacteria will also take care about the fats too :-) )
"Alf Christophersen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
MMu said:
Note however that fat, of course, is still absorbed normally.
Enzymes is also involved in fat degradation, so most probably they will also be saturated and you may perhaps even get a fatty stool like in coelics :-). (But most probably bacteria will also take care about the fats too :-) )
People can eat a bunch of fat without getting fatty stool. The stomach will just hold on to the meal and release it slowly into the small intestine so that the intestines can get all the calories out. So eating too much fat won't usually cause fatty stools.
"Franco" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Hi
Many of the calories in milk come from the sugar lactose.
Lactose-intolerant people have no lactase, so can't digest it.
So, for a lactose-intolerant person, does a glass of milk contain less calories than for a lactose tolerant person? I'm thinking, they can't digest the sugar, so the don't get the engergy from it.
People differ in their capability to digest lactose. Some people produce less lactase than others, even without being lactose intolerant. For such people, would milk contain less calories than for people who produce plenty of lactase?
