You're viewing a single thread.
The butter won't make him fat but the pasta will.
Calories in/calories out. Butter is fat and some sugar and protein. Pasta is mostly carbs. But they all become calories, and if you eat more calories than you burn, they will be stored as fat.
The poster above is correct thay sugar is the easiest for your body to turn into calories, and carbs are basically complex sugars. Fat is also fairly easy for your body to convert to calories, and it is usually more dense. Protein is the hardest, but even protein will make you fat if you eat enough of it.
If you want to lose weight, burn more calories than you consume. Everything else is nuance.
As someone who’s quit sugar and vegetable oils: this food will have more calories with the butter, but it will keep full for longer
This thread makes no sense. People here apparently believe that you can eat sticks of butter and it won't increase your caloric intake for the day? It's basic fucking science. Calories in > calories out = weight gain. Yea, you can eat more carbs at once than butter without getting full, no shit, but it's almost as if people here deny the basic calories out vs. calories in formula. Bunch of pseudoscience morons here. Makes me embarrassed for thinking Lemmy was better than Reddit. There is just as much dogshit fake news here as there is on any other medium. People just wanna fucking argue. Unbelievable.
Your comment is incorrect in many different ways.
Butter is fat and some sugar and protein.
No. The butter in my fridge has almost no sugar (0.6g in 100g) and almost no protein (0.7 g in 100g).
Pasta is mostly carbs.
For comparison: The pasta I have at home have more sugar (most have roughly 3g in 100g) and way more protein (12g in 100g).
they all become calories, and if you eat more calories than you burn, they will be stored as fat.
Are you sure you're not simplifying too much?
Also, "just" eating less or more calories is not that easy if you ignore the side-effects. Carbohydrates will make you hungry very soon unless mixed (or eaten after) fibers, fat and protein. Which you should do anyways for health reasons.
I think the person you’re trying to correct was making the same point as you.
They were simply trying to demonstrate that butter isn’t 100% fat.
If you want to lose weight, burn more calories than you consume. Everything else is nuance.
The dumbing down of nutritional science and metabolic understanding so we can teach high schoolers a "health" class has resulted in disastrous knock-on effects from which it will take decades for the human body to recover.
What? This isn't suggested or taught in any high school curriculum I know of. Not only that but it is technically true and most people who actually diet do more research than "starve yourself" because who is too lazy to do research but not too lazy to make a huge lifestyle change and constantly exert control over their purchasing/prep/eating habits? Decades for the body to recover? I mean, if you literally starve yourself to near death to the point where you cause organ damage you might never fully recover I guess, but seriously, nobody is doing that without already having severe issues beforehand. The overarching suggestion of "eat less calories if you want to be less fat" is effective and non-harmful advice as the majority of people who remain overweight tend to overeat. Which is unhealthy and can take decades for the human body to recover.
Butter has 4.5x more calories than pasta by weight. It has roughly 100 calories per Tbsp.
If she adds 2 Tbps of butter to his meal preps daily, he would gain (or at least, not lose) 1 lb of body fat roughly every 16 days.