Calorie conundrum...
Discussion
A hot sausage grilled should have fewer calories as some of the fat will have dripped out?
If fried, more calories due to the fat it's fried in.
If served in 2 thick slices of granary bread, lashings of butter, a fried egg and sauce to suit, then possibly one or two more calories as well!
If fried, more calories due to the fat it's fried in.
If served in 2 thick slices of granary bread, lashings of butter, a fried egg and sauce to suit, then possibly one or two more calories as well!
Simple answer is yes, annoyingly like anything in the biological sciences, it is never that simple so I'll stick with the sausage and not venture beyond.
Majority of energy expenditure is homeostasis; the human carcass uses a hell of a lot of energy doing precisely nothing of virtue other than keeping the lights on and heating going.
Ingested calories are kilocalories, we need about 3000kCal a day for an active human male. That's 3,000,000 calories. (Rates vary according to gender and activity - top male athletes might require up to 12k a day, a female shrew in an office 1500 tops, random dude in an office 2k-2.5k)
Irrespective of the calories in a sausage, how many more calories are in a hot sausage? Considering it's gone midnight I'm going to make some assumptions, a pound of sausages has 8, assume a cooked sausage is 40g in mass and eaten at 60 degrees C. SHC of various protein/lipids is half to a third that of water (roughly) with a temperature difference of 20 degrees between sausage and body gives it an extra, what, oh idk , 250 calories?
The sausage itself from rough memory is 350kCal per 100gm making the sausage itself 140kCal.
Making the hot cooked sausage 250 calories more than the 140,000 calories said sausage possesses.
Ergo, a hot cooked sausage contains 0.002% more energy calorie wise. I've only used rough guesstimates, but from the final answer you can see it's pretty academic anyway, when you consider the overall percentage wise increase in calorific value.
TL:DR Hot sausage has more calories, 0.002% more. A smear of mustard will make significantly more difference to the calorific value than the temperature its served at.
Any analysis beyond this gets horribly complicated and it scares me, plus you get in to the debate about the merits of cooking food for energy conversion. On that note, one for the interesting facts thread - on a hot day, a nice cold ice cream contains so much lipid that it will warm you up, not cool you down. But then lipids are energy rich, because hydrogen....
HTH if you want a more detailed answer I'll check in over the easter weekend. Anyone know if Zulu is being shown? Easter isn't easter unless Zulu is on telly.
Majority of energy expenditure is homeostasis; the human carcass uses a hell of a lot of energy doing precisely nothing of virtue other than keeping the lights on and heating going.
Ingested calories are kilocalories, we need about 3000kCal a day for an active human male. That's 3,000,000 calories. (Rates vary according to gender and activity - top male athletes might require up to 12k a day, a female shrew in an office 1500 tops, random dude in an office 2k-2.5k)
Irrespective of the calories in a sausage, how many more calories are in a hot sausage? Considering it's gone midnight I'm going to make some assumptions, a pound of sausages has 8, assume a cooked sausage is 40g in mass and eaten at 60 degrees C. SHC of various protein/lipids is half to a third that of water (roughly) with a temperature difference of 20 degrees between sausage and body gives it an extra, what, oh idk , 250 calories?
The sausage itself from rough memory is 350kCal per 100gm making the sausage itself 140kCal.
Making the hot cooked sausage 250 calories more than the 140,000 calories said sausage possesses.
Ergo, a hot cooked sausage contains 0.002% more energy calorie wise. I've only used rough guesstimates, but from the final answer you can see it's pretty academic anyway, when you consider the overall percentage wise increase in calorific value.
TL:DR Hot sausage has more calories, 0.002% more. A smear of mustard will make significantly more difference to the calorific value than the temperature its served at.
Any analysis beyond this gets horribly complicated and it scares me, plus you get in to the debate about the merits of cooking food for energy conversion. On that note, one for the interesting facts thread - on a hot day, a nice cold ice cream contains so much lipid that it will warm you up, not cool you down. But then lipids are energy rich, because hydrogen....
HTH if you want a more detailed answer I'll check in over the easter weekend. Anyone know if Zulu is being shown? Easter isn't easter unless Zulu is on telly.
AshVX220 said:
I think I heard somewhere too that cooked food (meats in particular) are easier to digest, therefore from the available calories in the meat if it's cooked more of the energy in them is available for your body to use for other stuff other than digestion?
You can only cook it once, and whether hot or cold (I hope!) you'd always think of it as a cooked sausage roll...randlemarcus said:
Not sure the above is quite correct, as regards the more energy thing. Calories are measured by burning food, and calculating the heat output, so hot soss roll = cold soss roll, as input heat to burn is not measured. Calories are the same for both, surely?
This always makes me wonder how useful a measure it is for some foods, taken to extremes you could eat two slices of bread that nominally contained the same amount of calories, however if one of them had some sawdust as part of the ingredients your body would not extract the same calories from it.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff