No announcement yet.

Interesting New Study - Nutritional Data on Almonds

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Interesting New Study - Nutritional Data on Almonds

    I just came across this article.
    It's really "sciency" and from what I gather it seems that because of the way most people digest them, almonds don't have the amount of fat and calories as previously thought.

    ETA. For some reason the link posted above is broken.

  • #2
    Well, that balances out a touch sneaking an extra almond or two....
    My Journal:
    When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.


    • #3
      It can't be right because a calorie is just a calorie....kidding. It does explain differences people find when eating certain ways if the calories are not what they seem.

      I did find this part of the article very interesting.

      The digestibility of macronutrients and energy from the diet as a whole was significantly affected by the addition of almonds to the diet (Table 3).

      It does give credence to the "there is more going on than just calories in vs calories out" crowd.

      It goes to show you really need to listen to your body.
      Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
      Don't forget to play!


      • #4
        A lot of my fitness and foodie friends have been chattering about this lately. I think it's very interesting and never realized before how old the method for determining energy in food is! I think it's about time that a more modern (and hopefully accurate) method has been created. I hope that they can verify the results to some level of confidence before everyone gets all giddy over the news and prices of nuts skyrocket!
        >> Current Stats: 90% Primal / 143 lbs / ~25% BF
        >> Goal (by 1 Jan 2014): 90% Primal / 135-ish pounds / 20-22% BF

        >> Upcoming Fitness Feats: Tough Mudder, June 2013
        >> Check out my super-exciting journal by clicking these words.

        Weight does NOT equal health -- ditch the scale, don't be a slave to it!


        • #5
          The most commonly used method is calculation according to the Atwater factors. However, both sets of Atwater factors fall short, which renders the information on food labels and in databases flawed and of lesser value, at least for nuts.

          Nuts are a food group for which the Atwater factors may be particularly poorly suited. A key component of the Atwater factors is the coefficient of digestibility. Numerous studies and varied evidence suggest that the coefficient of digestibility for nuts and peanuts is different from that for other foods
          "Therefore, it can be assumed that macronutrients (and therefore energy) from whole peanuts were less available than those from peanut butter and peanut oil."
          "These studies support the premise that the coefficient of digestibility for at least fat from nuts is significantly less than that for other foods."

          seems unlikely anyone has an accurate measure of what they're putting in their bodies, if I'm understanding this and extrapolating correctly..


          • #6
            Another interesting tidbit: your body absorbs up to 30% fewer calories from raw food than from cooked. I was reading Richard Wrangham's book Catching Fire (which talks about the history of fire, great read), and he talks about that in great detail. It really caught my attention because I was a raw vegan at the time.