Read what I said again.
Here’s another way to think about your statement. My gas furnace can convert chemical energy to radiant energy.
But nobody cares that it can’t make gas out of radiant energy.
For computation of energy, if I bring a cup of coffee into the house my furnace will shut off having burned 15 calories less gas.
If I drink the coffee, I will use 15 calories less food.
I have, and here it is: YOU may now read it again along with me and point out how I misinterpreted it.
It sure seems simple. It sure seems to be an ad absurdum error.
We get most of our caloric energy from fats and carbs. If your claim that heating a substance adds calories which the body can extract is correct, then surely we could replace most or all of our caloric intake with hot water, in sufficient amounts.
The body gets energy from the food we eat by breaking down the bonds between carbons and storing this energy in high-energy bonds.
and sto this energy in high-energy bonds. It gets the energy for the bonds by breaking down the bonds of the
The body gets energy from the food we eat by breaking down the bonds between carbons and storing this energy in high-energy bonds.
and sto this energy in high-energy bonds. It gets the energy for the bonds by breaking down the bonds of the
Reducto ad absurdum is a (valid) mode of argumentation and not a logical fallacy, as far as I can tell.
Substantiation follows:
Wow, I didn’t mean to submit that yet. It doesn’t make any sense 
One sec, technical difficulties…
I believe you are right. Then what is the fallacy Q.E.D. is using (namely that for hot coffee to have caloric value I must be prepared to only drink coffee. If I can’t, then it has ZERO caloric value)?
I never could remember my fallacies. I always run back to a book by Max Shulman The Many Loves Of Dobie Gillis. which became a TV show in the B&W era.
Ok, here’s what the post was supposed to be.
NOTE : the following is grossly oversimplified!
The body breaks down the bonds of the food we eat. It uses the energy gained from breaking these bonds to create other high energy bonds in ATP, a chemical. ATP is used to power various processes in the body. As a convenient way to talk about food energy, chemists call the amount of energy we get from these chemical bonds, energy that powers the reactions in cells, “calories.”
Heat, a form of energy, can also be measured in calories. But if it isn’t energy from chemical bonds, the body won’t be able to break it down and use it to form ATP. So heat calories and food calories are very different things. The E=mc2 thing doesn’t apply – if they calculated the amount of energy in a donut based on its mass times speed of light squared, you’d get a huge amount. The “calories” in a donut are the amount of energy you get from the chemical bonds in it, not the potential energy held within its mass.
If you’re very cold and your body is expending heat to warm you up, drinking a warm liquid will “save” your body energy that it would otherwise need to keep you nice and warm at 98 degrees internally. So in that sense, if you drink liquids, you’re “saving” your body energy in a sense, I guess. But your body can’t convert this heat energy into ATP, so it doesn’t help you as far as food energy calories go.
Disclaimer: This is all from a couple of years of college bio. I’m sure someone smarter will be along to correct me shortly…
I submit my authority on what a calorie is:
This is the relevant portion of this definition. The critical phrase is “oxidized in the body”. Bolding mine.
Yes, when you’re drinking something warm you’re drinking more “calories,” in the sense of energy. But if the body can’t use those calories to form high-energy chemical bonds, than you’re not going to gain any weight because it’s warmer, which was your original question, wasn’t it?
I mean, you could get a hell of a lot of energy if you converted all of its mass into energy in some kinda black-hole nuclear-reactor type dealie*, thereby turning its mass into energy via Einstien’s famous equation. But your body can’t do that either… so that theory isn’t going to help you gain weight.
*Note : Said dealie does not exist
Heating is only one of the many uses the body makes for food-fueled calories. Even in warm-blooded creatures like us, it is a relatively minor use, except in exceptional circumstances. Generally the heating is done by waste heat from the more essential biochemical processes.
You don’t necessarily ‘save’ 15 calories of food energy by intaking 15 calories of heatr in liquid. The human body is very homeostatic (it keeps a fairly tight set of boundaries on its internal physiological conditions. If you drink hot water, and you don’t specifically need more heat at that moment (e.g. if your body is already at a comfortable temperature, your body will discard the excess heat through imperceptible sweating and vasodilation [blood vessels near the skin surface open up slightly and radiate more heat) 18 grams - just over a tablespoon- of sweat absorbs 550 kJ or 137 Calories when it evaporates. A dozen or so drops of sweat spread over your entire body is imperceptible. Similarly a slight increase in the exhaled moisture that evaporates in your lungs is imperceptible.
Ten minutes after your body shed most of that ‘excess heat’ (under normal, clothed, room temperature conditions), it will heat itself up biochemically exactly as if you’d never drunk any hot water at all. You may gain a calorie or so in energy saved -or not. It’s generally not considered significant. You also absorb heat calories if the sun shines on you. That’s not considered relevant, either.
If you feel cold, the body may hang onto the thermal calories rather than producing more at that moment and you might save a few. If you fell warm, you may actually cost yourself more heat than you intake, because there is a slight energy cost associated with vasodilation (whichalso causes a slight increase in cardiac output) and sweating, etc. We normally are constantly shedding waste heat, not conserving it, when we feel comfortably warm, because our body needs to perform other heat-releasing chemical reactions to stay alive-- therefore, if you feel comfortable, you’d probably break even at best (give or take a calorie).
That’s not what he’s saying. He’s saying that if heating something adds Calories (the kind your body needs), then you should be able to get all the Calories you need from hot water. Instead of getting 2000 Calories from a few slices of pizza, you could simply heat 20 liters of water 10 degrees centigrade and drink it.
Of course, you won’t be able to do that, and it has nothing to do with whether you only drink hot water or whether you drink other things. A glass of water has zero Calories, and cannot be used by your body for energy, no matter how hot it is or how much you drink.
For those who were confused by this I have a link. I think I have discovered that Q.E.D.'s fallacy is Dicto Simpliciter, extrapolation of one to imply all.
So just what part of oxidized in the body wasn’t clear?
If you still have doubts look at the Nutrition label on the side of a bottle of water. It says zero Calories. Not Calories dependent on temperature of consumption.
You are all overthinking the question.
Take KP and suggesting that I *might *sweat off the 15 calories. I also might sweat off 15 calories if I ate the sugar.
The point is that the intake was 15 calories.
I know it’s puzzling to think heat is related to calories, but it is.
It was confusing at first when you heard exercise was convertable into calories. 15 calories = 1 minute of walking, or whatever the number is.
And external heat is similar. Drop the heat in the house by x-degrees for x-minutes and you’ll use 15 calories.
Units convert all over the place. Little calories conver to big, which convert to BTU’s, electon volts, horsepower-hours, therms, ergs, watt-seconds, etc.
All with the magic of math.
Did you know there are calories in fuel oil? Well, there are! But you’d better not try to eat only fuel oil.
The body DOES use the energy, in the sense that it now has to burn less calories to maintain its internal temperature.
This is a small amount, because the coffee probably isn’t much hotter than the body already. It’s the temperature differential that would matter, not the absolute temperature of the material.
If I drink ice water, it will cool my body down. My body will have to respond by burning additional calories to gain back the heat lost. If I drink 1 liter of ice water, my body will have to expend about 66 calories to regain the heat loss.
Likewise, if I drink a very hot liquid, I will raise my core temperature, and my body will have to expend fewer calories.
Of course, there are other mechanisms at play, so I don’t know how it all comes out in the wash. For example, if I drink enough ice water, I may cool down enough that I start to shiver. Shivering is the body’s way of forcing you to expend energy so that you heat up again. But that burns mucho calories. On the other hand, if I drink a lot of hot water, it may cause me to sweat, and the heat will get transferred off my body through evaporation.
But certainly there’s nothing wrong with the concept that drinking excessively hot or cold fluids will cause an energy transference that affects how much fat the body has to burn. A calorie is a calorie, and if the heat is transferred to the body, it has to go somewhere.
Dammit dammit dammit, just lost a long and tedious post to the hamsters. Try again.
Many of you are, as j.a.r.m. is saying, overthinking his question.
Your question is just a variation of the hoary old “does drinking beer cold neutralise [some or all] of its calories?” question.
Cecil deals with that here.
Sattua, Race Bannon and others (not to mention myself) do a thorough demolition job on Cecil’s answer here.
More information on the body’s regulation of heat than you might ever want is to be found here.
The bottom line if you want to be saved from wading through all the above is that KP nails it above. Your position is based on the false assumption that your body usually burns food for the specific purpose of keeping warm. It sometimes but only very rarely does. Mostly, your body produces more heat than it needs, just as a byproduct of doing all the other stuff that your body does. Mostly your body just temperature regulates by saving or dumping that byproduct heat as required.
So your assumption that if you have a cold drink your body will consume more food derived Calories on creating heat is wrong. Or conversely, your assumption that by drinking a hot drink your body will expend less food derived Calories because it will have received an input of more heat calories is wrong.
In fact, it is only when you are basically very, very cold that your body expends Calories on heating for heating’s sake, such that your theory about inputting calories to save Calories starts to become true.