I have always assumed that there is but one food calorie ( = kilocalorie); I never heard about fat calories and other calories, just about the kilocalorie which is supposed to make way for the kilojoule. The producers of that treadmill must have been carried away by their ifp mentality. The supposed factor of 4 between those two 'calories' is strange as well as suspect as a kilocalorie is equal to 4.2 kJ and a BTU and a kilojoule are very close, they differ no more than 5%. I think that if the *tolerance allows for it* one could say: 1 BTU = 1 kJ! I wonder, maybe they use the BTU as one of the two 'calories'. Hidden use of ifp for the measurement of food-energy?
If there is really such a thing like 'fat calorie' and 'calorie' there must also be a 'fat kilojoule' and a 'kilojoule' How much would these differ? Han ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph B. Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, 2002-03-11 01:25 Subject: [USMA:18672] Re: Watts and treadmills > Ma Be wrote in USMA 18667: > >Interesting to comment that my treadmill provides 2 readings, one "fat calorie" and one "calorie" reading. They evidently differ by some factor of 4 or something (I haven't spent the time to find out how they would relate to each other). > Could it be that "fat calorie" refers to the fat consumed during the exercise, and the "calorie" reading tells what is actually mechanically produced? Joseph B.Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 TEL. 416-486-6071
