Negative calories foods. Reality of myth and why?

''The idea that something is negative calories suggests that it burns more calories to digest the food than the food has in it. These fruits and vegetables are high in water content, and high in fiber. When you eat them they are so low in calories that sometimes they could be 0 calories, or just a few calories.

List of Negative Calorie Vegetables: Celery, cucumber, garlic, lettuce, green beans, spinach, zucchini, onion, radish, asparagus, cabbage, cauliflower, carrot and beet root.

List of Negative Calorie Fruits: Peaches, Pineapple, tomato, watermelon, Cranberries, blueberries, apple, grapefruit, mango, oranges, lemons, limes, papaya, cantaloupe, honeydew, raspberries, prunes, blackberries, strawberries, tangerines (clemontines), and watermelon.''

That's what I found written on a webpage. But I have my doubts. What do you think?


0|0
5|8

Most Helpful Guy

  • I do not believe most of those are negative calories. Celery I've heard is. There's no way most of those fruits are.

    Ice water is negative calories, because you must use calories to warm it up. You're looking at something like 8 calories per glass of ice water though.

    The amount of negative calories we're talking about is not very significant.

    1|1
    0|0
    • Water doesn't have calories!

    • Show All
    • @redeyemindtricks Yes. If unclear, I assumed an 8 oz glass in my original estimate ;)

    • interesting!

Most Helpful Girl

What Guys Said 7

  • I have heard that about Celery, lettuce, peppers and even some berries at times, because they have so few calories. I don't know how true that is, but I hear it about those foods often, so maybe there is some truth surrounding it.

    There is no way that the others such as peaches are a negative calorie food. Beets even have so much sugar, they often extract the sugar to sweeten other foods.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Calories in vs calories out. If it takes a person 1800 calories to maintain their weight those calories include digestive function. So if you were to gorge on 1800 calories of so called "0 calorie foods" you would still maintain your weight as the energy expenditure is still equal to the energy intake.

    So take your peach, average calorie count is about 50 or so kilo calories, so if you were to go on an all peach diet and gorge on say 36 peaches a day you would maintain your weight as that would give you the calories that your body used (but it might not be nice to your digestive tract) now if you wrte to eat say 50 peaches then chances are you'd start gaining weight as your body is taking in more food then it needs. Make sense?

    1|0
    0|0
  • Disagree with the fruits. Fruits are high in sugar. Your body process it the same way as it would a piece of cake. What helps with fruit is the fiber. Maybe the veggies. Just eat well balance diet with a caloric deficit and you'll loose weight. Dont worry about it.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Negative calorie foods as far as I've been able to tell are not a myth, but those lists I think are way too long.

    2|1
    0|0
  • It is technically possible to have food with a negative caloric value since the process of digestion uses up some of your calories based on the complexity of what you are trying to digest.
    Though I don't think there is any real and easily obtainable food that would do such a thing.
    Celery gets as close to that as possible, but won't burn your calories.
    Unless you are eating it in a really aggressive and energetic way.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Myth lmao just think about it

    1|0
    0|0
  • i think some foods indeed are difficult to digest but i cannot say that you would spend more energy than you can get out of it. would that not point out that our body is actually inefficient?

    1|0
    0|0

What Girls Said 4

  • In terms of the vegetables, we're talking about numbers of calories that are so infinitesimally small that they just don't matter one way or the other.

    Even if you count calories meticulously, yr daily calories still have an uncertainty of AT LEAST 5 to 10 percent.
    And, ironically, if you eat mostly whole/raw/non-processed foods, that uncertainty is even *greater* -- since those foods don't come in packages with convenient nutrition labels. Even if you meticulously weigh out EVERYTHING, it's folly to think you are judging yr calories to anything more accurate than ±10 percent or so.
    If you're eating, say, 1500 calories/day, that's an uncertainty of ±150 calories -- AT LEAST, even if you are totally fastidious about logging everything. So, the handful of calories that yr metabolism might "spend" to digest these foods is clearly neither here nor there.

    __

    The list of fruits is preposterous nonsense, by the way. Hahah what the hell? Especially pineapples and peaches?

    Girl, sugar is sugar is sugar, and you should limit yr consumption of it regardless of the source. Fruit is better than, say, candy, ONLY because (1) it has vitamins and (2) it's not as "nutritionally dense", meaning you have to eat proportionally more of it in order to get the same calories.
    In first-world countries #1 is a non-issue, so, really, fruit is something you should pretty much eat RATHER THAN sweets that are worse for you. Otherwise, it isn't really something you have to eat (and if you're trying to lose bodyfat, you should cut it out).

    1|2
    0|0
  • yeah i have my doubts too. i mean that'd b wonderful lol. thing is, if this were the case, people would go on diets with ALL these foods included alone, u know? but no one is doing that, and I'm quite certain that these all have calories. just very view because of their composition. for example, watermelon is 90% water, which is why u can eat a lot and it won't harm u health-wise.

    1|1
    0|0
  • It's not a myth lol, cucumbers, for instance, or other vegetables with a high water content actually burn more calories being digested than they contain. Water can also have negative calories if you drink it very cool because your body will use energy to bring it to your body temperature.

    1|0
    0|0
    • I don't believe the fruits on that list are negative foods though.

  • I think some vegetables are but not that many fruits. Watermelon is actually quite faattening... which is why I love it lol.

    1|0
    0|0
    • All fruits are potentially fattening. (You've probably heard about how high-fructose corn syrup is bad/fattening... well, fruit sugar has even more fructose than HFCS does.) It's just a matter of how much you consume overall.

      Watermelons aren't THAT dense in calories -- you'd get a lot fatter a lot quicker if you ate the same quantity of, say, pineapple -- but... yep still high-fructose sugar.

    • Show All
    • "Natural fructose" lol, fructose is fructose is fructose. (Similarly, "natural cane sugar" isn't any less bad, or less likely to cause diabetes or obesity, than any other kind of sugar.)

    • Watermelon is high glycemic. That's why it isn't the best fruit option. Still better than say candy

Loading...