How many calories do we absorb?

Okay, say that the average person is supposed to eat around 2000 calories per day, or something like that.

My question is, how many of those calories are actually assimilated by you, and how many of tghose calories pass right through you in the form of poop?

And yes, I realize that the specific number probably varies depending on the individual, and the food that is eaten by that individual. But I figure that there's still probably a general range for caloric absorbsion.

So anyway, IN GENERAL, what percentage of the calories that you consume ends up passing right through you?

Not sure about that.

But what I DO know is that your metabolic rate is about 30% efficient. Which basically means that for every 1molecule of glucose you ingest of attempt to turn into energy, you gain 30% and lose the rest to heat. At least for warm blooded animals that is. I'm not sure if that 2000 calorie numbers means before or after consumption and loss of energy.

your body should use all of the calories you eat, and if not they will be stored as fat. halfnaked

How is that even possible? If we absorb all of the calories that we eat, that would mean that feces contain 0 calories. And if that is the case, then how do organisms get energy by consuming our feces?

[QUOTE="halfnaked"]your body should use all of the calories you eat, and if not they will be stored as fat. MrGeezer

How is that even possible? If we absorb all of the calories that we eat, that would mean that feces contain 0 calories. And if that is the case, then how do organisms get energy by consuming our feces?

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="halfnaked"]your body should use all of the calories you eat, and if not they will be stored as fat. halfnaked

How is that even possible? If we absorb all of the calories that we eat, that would mean that feces contain 0 calories. And if that is the case, then how do organisms get energy by consuming our feces?

I'm sorry. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm black and I have a low IQ so my reasoning abilities are pretty low. So I probably shouldn;t even be talking about this with you. But isn't a calorie simply defined as the energy required to raise a gram of water by 1 degree C?

I mean, if anything, doesn't that reinforce my point? I mean, the sun can DEFINITELY raise a gram of water by 1 degree C, but we don't get fat when we get tans. Likewise, termites can eat wood, but we can't digest it. Just because we can't physically extrqact the energy from a food source doesn't necessarily mean that te energy isn't there, doe it? And aren't calories just a measure of energy?

I mean, even in the absene of light, don't feces get consumed by microorganisms? Doesn't tis mean that the microorganisms pretty much NEED to derive most of their sustanence (in other words, food, or energy) from feces, which would indicate that feces do indeed contain calories?

Once again, I'm sorry and I really feel uncomfortable asking this. I don't in any way want to imply that you're wrong. I am just asking you to humour me long enough to point out where my mistake is.

I mean, am I just being an idiot again? By no means do I want to suggest that you're wrong. But if calories are a measure of energy, then could you please do me the fvour of telling me how organisms manage to consume our feces as a source of energy if our feces contain no energy?

[QUOTE="halfnaked"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="halfnaked"]your body should use all of the calories you eat, and if not they will be stored as fat. MrGeezer

How is that even possible? If we absorb all of the calories that we eat, that would mean that feces contain 0 calories. And if that is the case, then how do organisms get energy by consuming our feces?

I'm sorry. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm black and I have a low IQ so my reasoning abilities are pretty low. So I probably shouldn;t even be talking about this with you. But isn't a calorie simply defined as the energy required to raise a gram of water by 1 degree C?

I mean, if anything, doesn't that reinforce my point? I mean, the sun can DEFINITELY raise a gram of water by 1 degree C, but we don't get fat when we get tans. Likewise, termites can eat wood, but we can't digest it. Just because we can't physically extrqact the energy from a food source doesn't necessarily mean that te energy isn't there, doe it? And aren't calories just a measure of energy?

I mean, even in the absene of light, don't feces get consumed by microorganisms? Doesn't tis mean that the microorganisms pretty much NEED to derive most of their sustanence (in other words, food, or energy) from feces, which would indicate that feces do indeed contain calories?

Once again, I'm sorry and I really feel uncomfortable asking this. I don't in any way want to imply that you're wrong. I am just asking you to humour me long enough to point out where my mistake is.

I mean, am I just being an idiot again? By no means do I want to suggest that you're wrong. But if calories are a measure of energy, then could you please do me the fvour of telling me how organisms manage to consume our feces as a source of energy if our feces contain no energy?

You seem to think you're alot stupider than you actually are. But seriously, what he's saying is that we can only derive energy from certain things in life. Calories are not the only way life can sustain itself (plants, as the other guy mentioned). Although most organisms do use calories, they don't get them in the way that we do. Take it like this:

An herbivore eats a steak and poops it out.

Because the herbivore is herbivorous, it can not assimiate the meaty (I have no idea what the word for this is) properties o f the meat, thusly rendering the meat useless to itself, so it poops alot of it out.

A dung beetle (or whatever eats poo) picks it up, realizes it can eat the leftover meat the herbivore couldn't and does so.

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="halfnaked"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

[QUOTE="halfnaked"]your body should use all of the calories you eat, and if not they will be stored as fat. TongHua

How is that even possible? If we absorb all of the calories that we eat, that would mean that feces contain 0 calories. And if that is the case, then how do organisms get energy by consuming our feces?

I'm sorry. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm black and I have a low IQ so my reasoning abilities are pretty low. So I probably shouldn;t even be talking about this with you. But isn't a calorie simply defined as the energy required to raise a gram of water by 1 degree C?

I mean, if anything, doesn't that reinforce my point? I mean, the sun can DEFINITELY raise a gram of water by 1 degree C, but we don't get fat when we get tans. Likewise, termites can eat wood, but we can't digest it. Just because we can't physically extrqact the energy from a food source doesn't necessarily mean that te energy isn't there, doe it? And aren't calories just a measure of energy?

I mean, even in the absene of light, don't feces get consumed by microorganisms? Doesn't tis mean that the microorganisms pretty much NEED to derive most of their sustanence (in other words, food, or energy) from feces, which would indicate that feces do indeed contain calories?

Once again, I'm sorry and I really feel uncomfortable asking this. I don't in any way want to imply that you're wrong. I am just asking you to humour me long enough to point out where my mistake is.

I mean, am I just being an idiot again? By no means do I want to suggest that you're wrong. But if calories are a measure of energy, then could you please do me the fvour of telling me how organisms manage to consume our feces as a source of energy if our feces contain no energy?

You seem to think you're alot stupider than you actually are. But seriously, what he's saying is that we can only derive energy from certain things in life. Calories are not the only way life can sustain itself (plants, as the other guy mentioned). Although most organisms do use calories, they don't get them in the way that we do. Take it like this:

An herbivore eats a steak and poops it out.

Because the herbivore is herbivorous, it can not assimiate the meaty (I have no idea what the word for this is) properties o f the meat, thusly rendering the meat useless to itself, so it poops alot of it out.

A dung beetle (or whatever eats poo) picks it up, realizes it can eat the leftover meat the herbivore couldn't and does so.

But IF calories are simply defined as energy (once againa, that's a BIG IF...I'm probably wrong about it), then doesn't EVERYTHING have to rely on calories?

I mean, I don't know much, but every organism that I'[ve ever heard of has had to rely on energy from some source. "IF" calories are a measure of energy, and "IF" every organism needs to "consume" energy in order to survive, then doesn't that mean that EVERY organism has to consume calories in order to survive?

Which brings me to another question. "IF" I am correct, then sunlight contains calories. Solar radiation contains enough heat to raise the temperature of water by 2 degrees C. Therefore, if has calories. But when you go to the beach, there's no sign listing the number of calories in sunlight. Presumably ecause those calories are not delivered to you in a digestible form. This leads to the implication that te calories that are LISTED are the calories that are ASSIMILATED.

So really....please someone answer me this question. Suppose I go to McDEonalds and order a quarter pounder with cheese to eat on my way to my other job. And because Morgan Spurlock doesn't like McDonalds, now McDonalds has to list the number of calories in their food on their food packaging. So I'[m driving down the street eating my quarter pounder with cheese, and I glance over at the box and see that the sandwich has 1000 Calories.

My question:...is the 1000 Calories the calories IN the burger? Or is the listed Caloric value what is expected to be be EXTRACTED from the food by the average person?

In other words, on food packaging, do the listed Caloric values take into account the calories that are not assimilated, or do I have to do that myself?

My question:...is the 1000 Calories the calories IN the burger? Or is the listed Caloric value what is expected to be be EXTRACTED from the food by the average person?

In other words, on food packaging, do the listed Caloric values take into account the calories that are not assimilated, or do I have to do that myself?