How calorie-focused thinking about obesity and related diseases may mislead and harm public health. An alternative

Sean C. Lucan, James J. Dinicolantonio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Prevailing thinking about obesity and related diseases holds that quantifying calories should be a principal concern and target for intervention. Part of this thinking is that consumed calories-regardless of their sources-are equivalent; i.e. 'a calorie is a calorie'. The present commentary discusses various problems with the idea that 'a calorie is a calorie' and with a primarily quantitative focus on food calories. Instead, the authors argue for a greater qualitative focus on the sources of calories consumed (i.e. a greater focus on types of foods) and on the metabolic changes that result from consuming foods of different types. In particular, the authors consider how calorie-focused thinking is inherently biased against high-fat foods, many of which may be protective against obesity and related diseases, and supportive of starchy and sugary replacements, which are likely detrimental. Shifting the focus to qualitative food distinctions, a central argument of the paper is that obesity and related diseases are problems due largely to food-induced physiology (e.g. neurohormonal pathways) not addressable through arithmetic dieting (i.e. calorie counting). The paper considers potential harms of public health initiatives framed around calorie balance sheets-targeting 'calories in' and/or 'calories out'-that reinforce messages of overeating and inactivity as underlying causes, rather than intermediate effects, of obesity. Finally, the paper concludes that public health should work primarily to support the consumption of whole foods that help protect against obesity-promoting energy imbalance and metabolic dysfunction and not continue to promote calorie-directed messages that may create and blame victims and possibly exacerbate epidemics of obesity and related diseases.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)571-581
Number of pages11
JournalPublic Health Nutrition
Volume18
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2014

Fingerprint

Public Health
Obesity
Food
Hyperphagia
Fats

Keywords

  • Calories
  • Carbohydrates
  • Chronic disease
  • Obesity
  • Public health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Nutrition and Dietetics
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

How calorie-focused thinking about obesity and related diseases may mislead and harm public health. An alternative. / Lucan, Sean C.; Dinicolantonio, James J.

In: Public Health Nutrition, Vol. 18, No. 4, 01.05.2014, p. 571-581.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8b719a9c216444e29be6487a7282b76b,
title = "How calorie-focused thinking about obesity and related diseases may mislead and harm public health. An alternative",
abstract = "Prevailing thinking about obesity and related diseases holds that quantifying calories should be a principal concern and target for intervention. Part of this thinking is that consumed calories-regardless of their sources-are equivalent; i.e. 'a calorie is a calorie'. The present commentary discusses various problems with the idea that 'a calorie is a calorie' and with a primarily quantitative focus on food calories. Instead, the authors argue for a greater qualitative focus on the sources of calories consumed (i.e. a greater focus on types of foods) and on the metabolic changes that result from consuming foods of different types. In particular, the authors consider how calorie-focused thinking is inherently biased against high-fat foods, many of which may be protective against obesity and related diseases, and supportive of starchy and sugary replacements, which are likely detrimental. Shifting the focus to qualitative food distinctions, a central argument of the paper is that obesity and related diseases are problems due largely to food-induced physiology (e.g. neurohormonal pathways) not addressable through arithmetic dieting (i.e. calorie counting). The paper considers potential harms of public health initiatives framed around calorie balance sheets-targeting 'calories in' and/or 'calories out'-that reinforce messages of overeating and inactivity as underlying causes, rather than intermediate effects, of obesity. Finally, the paper concludes that public health should work primarily to support the consumption of whole foods that help protect against obesity-promoting energy imbalance and metabolic dysfunction and not continue to promote calorie-directed messages that may create and blame victims and possibly exacerbate epidemics of obesity and related diseases.",
keywords = "Calories, Carbohydrates, Chronic disease, Obesity, Public health",
author = "Lucan, {Sean C.} and Dinicolantonio, {James J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S1368980014002559",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "571--581",
journal = "Public Health Nutrition",
issn = "1368-9800",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - How calorie-focused thinking about obesity and related diseases may mislead and harm public health. An alternative

AU - Lucan, Sean C.

AU - Dinicolantonio, James J.

PY - 2014/5/1

Y1 - 2014/5/1

N2 - Prevailing thinking about obesity and related diseases holds that quantifying calories should be a principal concern and target for intervention. Part of this thinking is that consumed calories-regardless of their sources-are equivalent; i.e. 'a calorie is a calorie'. The present commentary discusses various problems with the idea that 'a calorie is a calorie' and with a primarily quantitative focus on food calories. Instead, the authors argue for a greater qualitative focus on the sources of calories consumed (i.e. a greater focus on types of foods) and on the metabolic changes that result from consuming foods of different types. In particular, the authors consider how calorie-focused thinking is inherently biased against high-fat foods, many of which may be protective against obesity and related diseases, and supportive of starchy and sugary replacements, which are likely detrimental. Shifting the focus to qualitative food distinctions, a central argument of the paper is that obesity and related diseases are problems due largely to food-induced physiology (e.g. neurohormonal pathways) not addressable through arithmetic dieting (i.e. calorie counting). The paper considers potential harms of public health initiatives framed around calorie balance sheets-targeting 'calories in' and/or 'calories out'-that reinforce messages of overeating and inactivity as underlying causes, rather than intermediate effects, of obesity. Finally, the paper concludes that public health should work primarily to support the consumption of whole foods that help protect against obesity-promoting energy imbalance and metabolic dysfunction and not continue to promote calorie-directed messages that may create and blame victims and possibly exacerbate epidemics of obesity and related diseases.

AB - Prevailing thinking about obesity and related diseases holds that quantifying calories should be a principal concern and target for intervention. Part of this thinking is that consumed calories-regardless of their sources-are equivalent; i.e. 'a calorie is a calorie'. The present commentary discusses various problems with the idea that 'a calorie is a calorie' and with a primarily quantitative focus on food calories. Instead, the authors argue for a greater qualitative focus on the sources of calories consumed (i.e. a greater focus on types of foods) and on the metabolic changes that result from consuming foods of different types. In particular, the authors consider how calorie-focused thinking is inherently biased against high-fat foods, many of which may be protective against obesity and related diseases, and supportive of starchy and sugary replacements, which are likely detrimental. Shifting the focus to qualitative food distinctions, a central argument of the paper is that obesity and related diseases are problems due largely to food-induced physiology (e.g. neurohormonal pathways) not addressable through arithmetic dieting (i.e. calorie counting). The paper considers potential harms of public health initiatives framed around calorie balance sheets-targeting 'calories in' and/or 'calories out'-that reinforce messages of overeating and inactivity as underlying causes, rather than intermediate effects, of obesity. Finally, the paper concludes that public health should work primarily to support the consumption of whole foods that help protect against obesity-promoting energy imbalance and metabolic dysfunction and not continue to promote calorie-directed messages that may create and blame victims and possibly exacerbate epidemics of obesity and related diseases.

KW - Calories

KW - Carbohydrates

KW - Chronic disease

KW - Obesity

KW - Public health

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922561502&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84922561502&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S1368980014002559

DO - 10.1017/S1368980014002559

M3 - Article

C2 - 25416919

AN - SCOPUS:84922561502

VL - 18

SP - 571

EP - 581

JO - Public Health Nutrition

JF - Public Health Nutrition

SN - 1368-9800

IS - 4

ER -