Focus on foods with negative calories. They exist or not?
What is the common definition of foods at negative calories?
Are those foods that when ingested, supposedly consume more energy than they contribute to our body.
The result would be that if a person ate only that type of food, he would lose weight even if he ate tons of them.
Too beautiful to be true.
Are there really foods at negative calories?
It looks like it is.
Cold water is the only negative calorie food.
There are studies that confirm what has been said above. Its contribution in calories is zero, but when taking a glass of cold water the organism must metabolize it and readaptar the liquid to the corporal temperature, and to do it it needs to consume energy. Metabolizing half a liter of water at 22 degrees burns 23.8 calories and increases the metabolic rate by 30% to 40% more in the next 40 minutes of intake.
It must be emphasized that what actually burns calories is the process of heating the temperature from 22 to 37 degrees, and not the liquid itself.
Are there other foods with negative calories?
No. But each food consumes a certain amount of the calories it contributes to the organism for its own digestion. This process is called thermogenesis.
Protein-based foods (meats for example) have a thermogenesis effect of up to 35% and fats and carbohydrates (spaghetti!) Of up to 14%.
Comparing a plate of spaghetti and a chicken breast that have 100 calories each, while the first will provide 86 calories to our body, the second will provide only 65 calories because of thermogenesis.
Conclusion for a fat-burning diet:
Take cold water away from meals and significantly increase protein intake, not forgetting that the diet should be done in parallel with an exercise program that on the one hand uses accumulated fats and on the other increase muscle mass, without necessarily having to Become a bodybuilder.