Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Dear ALL,

 

In his many valuable posts, Dean has speculated that nuts do not deliver as many calories as the nutritional information indicates.

 

In fact, as I recall, previous posts to the old CR List provided some evidence that this is true, at least for almonds.  However, I'm skeptical that that will be significantly true for nuts that are softer (and therefore I'd guess more digestible) than almonds.

 

Like many of you, I store my nuts in the freezer.   There, I keep raw almonds, raw cashews, raw hazelnuts, raw peanuts and dry-roasted peanuts.  For the past several months, when I eat nuts  (which is daily), I've been eating them right out of the freezer -- "frozen" (not really -- actually "directly from the freezer") nuts.

 

They're delicious -- I may even prefer them "frozen".

 

I speculate that Dean's hypothesis may be more true for the "frozen" nuts -- which are probably harder to digest than when at room temperature.

 

  --  Saul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saul,

 

Physics tells me that any frozen nuts you consumes will quickly thaw to body temperature in your mouth or stomach, so unless eating them frozen (which I do as well, BTW) causes you not to chew them as thoroughly, freezing shouldn't have any significant impact on nut digestibility as far as I can see.

 

But you might indeed chew them less thoroughly when frozen, so that is still a possibility.

 

--Dean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dean!

 

I probably don't chew them as thoroughly -- I like the feel of the big pieces.

 

Anyway, I like them better that way. 

 

It's hard to tell how much of any substance that you eat is really absorbed.

 

  --  Saul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's hard to tell how much of any substance that you eat is really absorbed.

 

That's for sure Saul. I actually don't even weigh my nuts these days, choosing instead to just eyeball my daily quantity.

 

I didn't think you were into counting calories anymore either (if you ever were). Has that changed? If not, why the concern over calories in nuts and their digestibility?

 

--Dean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Saul, looking forward to seeing you at FoL and hopefully sooner at Kripalu ( you too Dean at FoL). Dean's "hypothesis" is emperically validated by primary research data, see: https://www.crsociety.org/topic/11420-usda-to-revise-official-estimate-of-calories-in-walnuts/( sorry, ease of posting tradeoff with more elegant links, can post links via smartphone too, but with load time including the full length allowing for the traditional method encourages me to be more active on the forum, or so I apologetically rationalize ????).

 

As for the question on temperature, finely granular content may indeed hold, but I do not dismiss the possibility depending on heat capacity of the food and local "chemistry" ( I am butchering the term here), the absorption may be slowed / delayed a bit. It is not hard to find research for some food sources where GI/GL depends on temp but is more nuanced question is how much of it was temperature consumed vs how temperature and other preparation alters rhe food properties irregardless of served temperature ( eg- resistant starch via reheating / cooling rep carbs like rice). With the complexity of food science, basic principals can be deceptive, and I would lean more heavily on emperical data if available. Of course not much of that happening for nuts specifically that I have seen hence the very reasonable first pass response ????

 

A couple interesting links:

 

1) on preparation including heating/cooling (preparation needs to be sorted out from temperature consumed): :

http://www.montignac.com/en/the-factors-that-modify-glycemic-indexes/

 

 

2) on storage ( again storage impact on altering food structure needs to be sorted out from temperature consumed): http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-89132004000400010

 

Disclaimer have not read in full yet but the part I have interesting and helpful ????

 

Of course any impact of freezing/ storage / other preparation such as water content as highlighted in the first link of nuts and other consumableson GI/GL vs other choices, even if it is not temperature consumed per se that matters, is potentially relevant and actionable in and of itself... Teasing out the mechanism is most relevant, of course, if it is not clear whether it is the temp consumed vs pre-processing of the food and you also liked your nuts at ambient temperature... But as you pointed you enjoy your nuts better frozen too!

Edited by Mechanism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Dean!

 

My daily calorie intake is about 1500.  When I modify my basic diet (like switching from celery to Nappa cabbage for breakfast), I check with Cronometer, to make sure that I'm meeting my nutritional needs.

 

But of course, I check my weight daily.

 

  --  Saul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mechanism!

 

Yes, I also  believe that temperature, texture and other factors probably effect how much nutrition you actually absorb in various foods.   I also agree with Dean that I would guess that, at least some nuts (such as almonds) actually are somewhat lower calorie than their nutrition information -- as I said in my initial post, I suspect that this is true for harder nuts, such as almonds, and, I speculate, "frozen" nuts, eaten directly from the freezer, might share this property.

 

  --  Saul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×