Isekka's Shortform
post by Isekka · 2024-11-26T17:55:24.560Z · LW · GW · 2 commentsContents
2 comments
2 comments
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by Isekka · 2024-11-26T14:30:06.701Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
New frontiers in the "CICO is factually incorrect" crusade: I just read that, while all kinds of fiber burn in a calorimeter, some are partially digestible by non-ruminants and some aren't. So it's not just that fiber is more filling per calorie - it's that, when you buy processed high-fiber foods, you don't know how many human-digestible calories you're actually getting, because you don't know how hard they're going to correct the possibly-quite-deceptively-high values from the calorimeter.
Replies from: Dagon↑ comment by Dagon · 2024-11-26T19:23:30.797Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Not sure this is a new frontier, exactly - it was part of high-school biology classes decades ago. Still, very worth reminding people and bringing up when someone over-focuses on the bailey of "legible, calculated CICO" as opposed to the motte of "absorbed and actual CICO".