3600 calories a day

Bob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Bite this.

tinyurl.com23jwwOpen ↗

Bob

Fact: 2 pounds of potatoes is about 3600 calories.

Thank you for proving that calories don't matter...

that carbs don't matter...

that only the amount of food matters (especially for the average American who is *not* going to give
up those modern labor-saving conveniences as the Amish have).

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:27:24 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

Bob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Bite this.

tinyurl.com23jwwOpen ↗

Bob

Fact: 2 pounds of potatoes is about 3600 calories.

Thank you for proving that calories don't matter...

that carbs don't matter...

that only the amount of food matters (especially for the average American who is *not* going to
give up those modern labor-saving conveniences as the Amish have).

You may wish to review this "party line" with Mu who is out spreading the rumor that calories are
important :-)

I think a little tickle with the Truth Discernment Ray might straighten him out. You want to nip
these things in the bud. Otherwise your zombies could start thinking for themselves :-)

Humbly wishing you would pray for me,

--
Steve

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

On 23 Jan 2004 14:27:24 -0800, [email hidden] (Dr. Andrew B.

Chung said:

Bob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Bite this.

tinyurl.com23jwwOpen ↗

Bob

Fact: 2 pounds of potatoes is about 3600 calories.

Thank you for proving that calories don't matter...

that carbs don't matter...

that only the amount of food matters (especially for the average American who is *not* going to
give up those modern labor-saving conveniences as the Amish have).

"Dr. Bassett is a professor of exercise science at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville..."

Hey, I think I know this guy.

Thanks Pastry Bob, You're good for (some)(no)thing.

antwrp.gsfc.nasa.govap031122.htmlOpen ↗ Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

Bob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Bite this.

tinyurl.com23jwwOpen ↗

Bob

Fact: 2 pounds of potatoes is about 3600 calories.

Er, no, not really ...

Perhaps that is true for _dried_ potatoes, but not for fresh or coocked ones.

According to my sources (GU Kompass Naehrwerte, among others) 100 g raw potatoes have 70 calories
per 100 g. This makes about 640 calories for two pounds, give or take a few calories.

In fact 2 pounds of _pure sugar_ (or starch) would have about 3600 calories. Considering that
potatoes contain not only carbohydrates (and some protein and very little fat) but also a lot of
water, it should have been a no-brainer that 2 pounds of potatoes cannot possibly yield 3600
calories, unless they are dried and/or soaked with fat.

Quoted message said:

Thank you for proving that calories don't matter...

They do, but you have to have a general idea how many calories the things you eat have, wild guesses
won't do ...

Quoted message said:

that carbs don't matter...

The Nurses' Health Study says otherwise.

Quoted message said:

that only the amount of food matters (especially for the average American who is *not* going to
give up those modern labor-saving conveniences as the Amish have).

The life-style of the Amish seems to be the key. If you get a lot of excercise you can burn a lot of
calories and even a lot of carbs.

Thorsten

--
"Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution"

(Theodosius Dobzhansky)

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

[...]

Quoted message said:

heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Btw., the FAQ about the 2 lbs diet on your webpage is less than accurate, too, on this point:

"Climbing mountains isn't something you are going to do while eating the USDA reccommended 2,000
calories a day.

Actually, 2 lbs of bread is about 4000 calories. "

(heartmdphd.comwtlossfaqs.aspOpen ↗)

According to my sources (GU Kompass Naehrwerte among others) 2 lbs of bread have between about 1760
and 2910 calories.

The higher value is for crispbread, the lower for whole grain bread, white bread lying somewhere
in between.

Thorsten

--
"Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution"

(Theodosius Dobzhansky)

Thorsten Schier <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

[...]

Quoted message said:

heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Btw., the FAQ about the 2 lbs diet on your webpage is less than accurate, too, on this point:

"Climbing mountains isn't something you are going to do while eating the USDA reccommended 2,000
calories a day.

Actually, 2 lbs of bread is about 4000 calories. "

(heartmdphd.comwtlossfaqs.aspOpen ↗)

According to my sources (GU Kompass Naehrwerte among others) 2 lbs of bread have between about
1760 and 2910 calories.

The higher value is for crispbread, the lower for whole grain bread, white bread lying somewhere
in between.

Thorsten

That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount of
food you are eating.

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 22:29:41 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

Thorsten Schier <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

[...]

Quoted message said:

heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Btw., the FAQ about the 2 lbs diet on your webpage is less than accurate, too, on this point:

"Climbing mountains isn't something you are going to do while eating the USDA reccommended 2,000
calories a day.

Actually, 2 lbs of bread is about 4000 calories. "

(heartmdphd.comwtlossfaqs.aspOpen ↗)

According to my sources (GU Kompass Naehrwerte among others) 2 lbs of bread have between about
1760 and 2910 calories.

The higher value is for crispbread, the lower for whole grain bread, white bread lying somewhere
in between.

Thorsten

That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount of
food you are eating.

Or a ruler :-)

I developed the Two Foot Diet approach (2FD) as a replacement for Dr. Chung's Amazing Logic Defying
Two Pound Diet to avoid having to carry a scale around.

Inspired by Dr. Chung's scientific approach, as described on his website, in 2003, my wife and I
attended an IMAX film about climbing the Bavarian Alps and learned that despite their exhausting
regimen, the climbers consumed only 10 packages of wieners per week. That's less than 2 feet of
wieners per day! Since none of the climbers died from starvation, I think it is safe to assume that
2 feet of food per day should be more than adequate for us non-climbing folks.

So I started a little experiment with the agreeable obese friends in my neighborhood. I gave them
ordinary 6 inch rulers with instructions to measure the length of everything substantial that passed
into their mouths. The only things exempted were water and sugar-free drinks. What I learned was
that my obese friends were consuming between 8 to 12 feet of food per day! At the time, I was about
10 lbs. over my ideal body weight so I decided to find out how much I was eating per day... 3 feet.
I cut back to less than 2 feet and was at my proper weight in one month.

My friends have responded similarly except they have taken longer because of having to lose more
weight. Admittedly, some of my obese friends were especially slow to respond. They also happen to be
the ones with an unfortunate propensity for accidentally loosing their 6 inch rulers and taking
weeks to buy replacements.

So here's the deal: measure all the food you eat, using it's longest dimension, and keep the
total length to less than two feet per day. That's all there is. No scales, no counting calories
or carbohydrates. Heck, if you loose your ruler, you can even use the first joint of your thumb
to measure.

I am making this diet available as a public service and without compensation.

If you have any questions, just see Dr. Chung's helpful FAQ and substitute "Two Feet" for "Two
Pounds" everywhere... what could be simpler?

"If I have seen farther than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of midgets"

--
Steve

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

Thorsten Schier <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

[...]

Quoted message said:

heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Btw., the FAQ about the 2 lbs diet on your webpage is less than accurate, too, on this point:

"Climbing mountains isn't something you are going to do while eating the USDA reccommended 2,000
calories a day.

Actually, 2 lbs of bread is about 4000 calories. "

(heartmdphd.comwtlossfaqs.aspOpen ↗)

According to my sources (GU Kompass Naehrwerte among others) 2 lbs of bread have between about
1760 and 2910 calories.

The higher value is for crispbread, the lower for whole grain bread, white bread lying somewhere
in between.

Thorsten

That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount of
food you are eating.

Humbly,

Andrew

What kind of logic is that supposed to be?

You have false information on your homepage and that is the reason why calories don't matter?

Newsflash: Calories _do_ matter, but only real ones, not fancied ones (like 3600 calories for 2 lbs
potatoes).

Thorsten

--
"Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution"

(Theodosius Dobzhansky)

Thorsten Schier said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

Thorsten Schier <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:
>
[...]
> heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Btw., the FAQ about the 2 lbs diet on your webpage is less than accurate, too, on this point:

"Climbing mountains isn't something you are going to do while eating the USDA reccommended
2,000 calories a day.

Actually, 2 lbs of bread is about 4000 calories. "

(heartmdphd.comwtlossfaqs.aspOpen ↗)

According to my sources (GU Kompass Naehrwerte among others) 2 lbs of bread have between about
1760 and 2910 calories.

The higher value is for crispbread, the lower for whole grain bread, white bread lying
somewhere in between.

Thorsten

That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount of
food you are eating.

Humbly,

Andrew

What kind of logic is that supposed to be?

Given any food item, you can't ever be certain how many calories are present (unless you have a bomb
calorimeter).

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Dr. Andrew B. Chung said:

Thorsten Schier said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount of
food you are eating.

What kind of logic is that supposed to be?

Given any food item, you can't ever be certain how many calories are present (unless you have a
bomb calorimeter).

This non sequitur from Chung says it all. He's not willing to accept the documented words of
scientists who have done the measurements and who have posted them on the USDA nutrient database.

Just like Chung's "estimate" for the caloric content of 2 pounds of potatoes as 3600 calories.
Here's the truth.

USDA Nutrient database for potatoes shows (among other things) caloric content per 100 grams.
2 pounds is approximately 900 grams, so I multiplied caloric counts below by 9 to get figures
for 2 pounds.

Potatoes, baked, flesh and skin, with salt - 93 cal (X 9= 837) Potatoes, boiled, cooked in skin,
flesh, without salt - 87 cal (X 9 = 783) Potatoes, boiled, cooked without skin, flesh, without
salt - 86 cal (X 9= 774) Potatoes, frozen, french fried, par fried, cottage-cut, unprepared - 153
cal (X 9= 1337) Potatoes, mashed, dehydrated, flakes without milk, dry form - 354 cal (X 9= 3186)
Potato flour - 357 (X 9= 3213) Fast foods, potato, mashed - 83 cal (X 9= 747) Fast foods, potato,
french fried in vegetable oil - 342 (X 9= 3078) Snacks, potato chips, made from dried potatoes,
plain - 558 (X 9=
5022) [38g of fat = 342 cal of 558 or just 216 from potato] Snacks, potato chips, plain, unsalted -
536 (X 9= ) [34 g of fat = 306 of 536 cal or just 230 from potato]

So when Chung says that 2 pounds of potatoes contain 3600 calories, it's simply nonsense. 2 pounds
of pure carbohydrate at 4 calories per gram would give 3600 calories, but even sugar falls short:
Sugars, powdered - 389 cal (X 9= 3501)

Even dehydrating potatoes doesn't give 3600 calories per 2 pounds. The only way to get numbers that
high is to include fat as in French fries (38% by weight) or American-style chips (34% by weight).
In which case, it's not about potatoes anymore.

But does Chung think that we should eat 2 pounds of potatoes a day? Or 3600 calories? He's not
answering those questions.

Bob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung said:

Thorsten Schier said:

"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount
>of food you are eating.
>
What kind of logic is that supposed to be?

Given any food item, you can't ever be certain how many calories are present (unless you have a
bomb calorimeter).

This non sequitur from Chung says it all. He's not willing to accept the documented words of
scientists who have done the measurements and who have posted them on the USDA nutrient database.

Just like Chung's "estimate" for the caloric content of 2 pounds of potatoes as 3600 calories.
Here's the truth.

USDA Nutrient database for potatoes shows (among other things) caloric content per 100 grams. 2
pounds is approximately 900 grams, so I multiplied caloric counts below by 9 to get figures for
2 pounds.

Potatoes, baked, flesh and skin, with salt - 93 cal (X 9= 837) Potatoes, boiled, cooked in skin,
flesh, without salt - 87 cal (X 9 = 783) Potatoes, boiled, cooked without skin, flesh, without
salt - 86 cal (X 9= 774) Potatoes, frozen, french fried, par fried, cottage-cut, unprepared - 153
cal (X 9= 1337) Potatoes, mashed, dehydrated, flakes without milk, dry form - 354 cal (X 9= 3186)
Potato flour - 357 (X 9= 3213) Fast foods, potato, mashed - 83 cal (X 9= 747) Fast foods, potato,
french fried in vegetable oil - 342 (X 9= 3078) Snacks, potato chips, made from dried potatoes,
plain - 558 (X 9=
5022) [38g of fat = 342 cal of 558 or just 216 from potato] Snacks, potato chips, plain, unsalted
- 536 (X 9= ) [34 g of fat = 306 of 536 cal or just 230 from potato]

So when Chung says that 2 pounds of potatoes contain 3600 calories, it's simply nonsense. 2 pounds
of pure carbohydrate at 4 calories per gram would give 3600 calories, but even sugar falls short:
Sugars, powdered - 389 cal (X 9= 3501)

Even dehydrating potatoes doesn't give 3600 calories per 2 pounds. The only way to get numbers
that high is to include fat as in French fries (38% by weight) or American-style chips (34% by
weight). In which case, it's not about potatoes anymore.

Reading the above, is it really any wonder that calorie counting has not worked to help people
overcome their obesity?

For past discussions see:

heartmdphd.comwtloss.aspOpen ↗

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

Dr. Andrew B. Chung said:

Bob <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung said:

Thorsten Schier wrote:

>"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" schrieb:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>That's why calories don't really matter, Thorsten, as long as you have a handle on the amount
>>of food you are eating.
>>
>What kind of logic is that supposed to be?

Given any food item, you can't ever be certain how many calories are present (unless you have a
bomb calorimeter).

This non sequitur from Chung says it all. He's not willing to accept the documented words of
scientists who have done the measurements and who have posted them on the USDA nutrient database.

Just like Chung's "estimate" for the caloric content of 2 pounds of potatoes as 3600 calories.
Here's the truth.

USDA Nutrient database for potatoes shows (among other things) caloric content per 100 grams. 2
pounds is approximately 900 grams, so I multiplied caloric counts below by 9 to get figures for
2 pounds.

Potatoes, baked, flesh and skin, with salt - 93 cal (X 9= 837) Potatoes, boiled, cooked in skin,
flesh, without salt - 87 cal (X 9 = 783) Potatoes, boiled, cooked without skin, flesh, without
salt - 86 cal (X 9= 774) Potatoes, frozen, french fried, par fried, cottage-cut, unprepared - 153
cal (X 9= 1337) Potatoes, mashed, dehydrated, flakes without milk, dry form - 354 cal (X 9= 3186)
Potato flour - 357 (X 9= 3213) Fast foods, potato, mashed - 83 cal (X 9= 747) Fast foods, potato,
french fried in vegetable oil - 342 (X 9= 3078) Snacks, potato chips, made from dried potatoes,
plain - 558 (X 9=
5022) [38g of fat = 342 cal of 558 or just 216 from potato] Snacks, potato chips, plain, unsalted
- 536 (X 9= ) [34 g of fat = 306 of 536 cal or just 230 from potato]

So when Chung says that 2 pounds of potatoes contain 3600 calories, it's simply nonsense. 2 pounds
of pure carbohydrate at 4 calories per gram would give 3600 calories, but even sugar falls short:
Sugars, powdered - 389 cal (X 9= 3501)

Even dehydrating potatoes doesn't give 3600 calories per 2 pounds. The only way to get numbers
that high is to include fat as in French fries (38% by weight) or American-style chips (34% by
weight). In which case, it's not about potatoes anymore.

Reading the above, is it really any wonder that calorie counting has not worked to help people
overcome their obesity?

As long as quacks like Chung offer such blatantly erroneous "information" as 3600 calories in 2
pounds of potatoes, people will be confused about the truth. He's abdicated his responsibility as a
doctor to deal in facts and truth in his field. All the more so when he insists that he's right, all
science to the contrary notwithstanding.

The truth about calories in potatoes is above. The truth about Chung is here to see every day.

Quoted message said:

For past discussions see:

heartmdphd.comwtloss.aspOpen ↗

Yes. By all means go look at this wacko website. See his foolish "diet" with its basis in some movie
he misunderstood about Everest climbers and what they eat and how much of it they eat. Google
"everest climbers food" and see how wrong he is. And watch him stick to that feeble story of his as
"inspiration" for his 2PD just like he has with the absurd 3600 calories business.

What a waste of years of schoolwork.

Bob

Quoted message said:

Reading the above, is it really any wonder that calorie counting has not worked to help people
overcome their obesity?

After reading this, I feel that we need to be more careful of what we eat rather than how much. I
feel like if you eat a healthy diet, you can spare a few treats here and there, but in general you
will be okay. I feel like the people who are on diets like Atkins and SOuthbeach are starving their
bodies of certain things and ruining their metabolic rates...