How accurate are Americans at estimating calories?

Re:How accurate are Americans at estimating calories? by bjourne on Tuesday December 18, 2012 @03:02PM (#4939282)

Really? Then couldn't one subsist by just eating one or two bars of chocolate per day and some vitamin pills? Or maybe a liter of coke per day would work just as well? It would be a very cost efficient way of eating as both candy and vitamins are cheap around here (well, not vitamins but a bottle of pills last a long time).

I've always assumed that that wouldn't work which is why I'm skeptical to your "it's all about the calories" argument.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How accurate are Americans at estimating calories? by guga31bb on Wednesday December 19, 2012 @10:52AM (#4943089)

Sure. Here's the classic example: http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How accurate are Americans at estimating calories? by bjourne on Thursday December 20, 2012 @12:47PM (#4948912)

Thanks! It's nice to be proven wrong sometimes.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How accurate are Americans at estimating calories? by indiecore on Tuesday December 18, 2012 @03:59PM (#4939545)

Well chocolate doesn't actually have that much to it (a regular chocolate bar is only like 250 calories) so it'd have to be more than two bars a day.

The main problem (as I'm told) with eating nothing but pure calorie sources supplemented with...uh, supplements is that the cost of the supplements is very high. Remember you need protein, carbs(I guess these wouldn't be in short supply on the candy bar diet) and fats plus micronutrients too or your body will start to break and those supplements aren't cheap.

I do know people that subsist mostly on protein shakes, rice and various supplement pills when they are doing hard cuts for body building competitions and while it's stressful on your body you aren't going to die from it.

[ Parent | on HN ]