Sometimes I see inconsistencies between different Food Authorities
about the exact calorie count of a specific food.
I don’t think there is a way to really know which one of them is the most accurate.

It is always important to remember that Calorie Counts are ALL estimates,
even when they are written in books, online, or on menus and food labels.

I don't think it makes much difference which calorie counting source one uses.
Unless the calories are listed on the labels of the foods I use,

I ordinarily use the calorie counts listed in my software food journal, DietPower,
The source of which is a National Base. If it isn't in DietPower,
and I have no food label, there then I look at Calorie King,
or some other online source for a similar type of food.

I am doing the best I can to maintain my current weight,
or lose a few pounds. The idea of calorie counting
is just to do one's best to keep track of one’s food intake.
It is impossible to be totally accurate for a great many reasons.

First, my food measurements might not always be totally accurate,
for example, when I measure out 1/4 cup of dry oatmeal,
I fill a 1/4 cup as full as it goes.
The Oatmeal label says 1/4 cup equals x calories,
but it also says 1/4 cup is x grams...
Weighing out the grams shows that 1/4 cup is Less than full.
It is a very small difference, but these things can make quite a difference over time.

Another thing to be aware of is that the FDA only requires
food labels to be up to 20% accurate.
The reason those weights and measures laws exist
is to make certain the consumer isn’t shortchanged...
that is to make certain he/she gets at least that minimum amount of food.
Almost always, an inaccuracy is going to result in the consumer
getting MORE food ….which means a HIGHER calorie count that the label says.

Furthermore, labels aren't regulated very closely,
and there is a difference in accuracy between companies.
The very large food companies tend to be no more than 20% inaccurate,
but the smaller, mom and pop companies, can easily have up to a 50% error rate.

As a further example, fruit is now bred to be both larger and sweeter
than it used to be, but the calorie counts for fruits haven’t been increased.

What this means is,
no matter how closely one watches one's calories,
one is not going to be PERFECTLY accurate.
However, careful weighing and measuring food, and keeping track
in my food journal gives me the best chance of knowing my calorie number.

Those BMR or RMR numbers given by the charts showing the number of calories
that each of us burns, are ba...

                      
Here is a picture of the men who were in "Starvation mode
during the famous 1940s Minnesota Starvation Research project of Dr. Ancel Keys.

People online tend to throw around the term "starvation mode" quite a bit. I've done a great deal of research on this issue,and as a result of my study,  I agree with the Experts who say that "starvation mode"...as it is commonly defined...is a Dieting Myth. Starvation mode doesn't happen until one is actually starving.

Bottom line, unless you are genetically like one of those Zucker rats that Gary Taubes talks about in "Why We Get Fat And What To Do About It"if you have more body fat than the picture above, you aren't in "starvation mode".

I very much like this quote from Brad Pilon, author of Eat Stop Eat, on the Metabolism issue:

"Unless you have a degree in human biology…and in many cases even if you do…you do not understand what ‘metabolism’ means.

Eating Less Calories isn't Dangerous for your Metabolism,

This word gets thrown around the fitness and diet media and is used to scare people into thinking there is a dangerous level of calories that will destroy their metabolism. This of course is a false premise considering your ‘metabolism’ isn’t a thing that can be destroyed or sped up or slowed down (not without drugs).

“Metabolism’ is just the sum of the processes of your body on a cellular/systemic level...that’s it…that’s all it’s ever been…nothing more. So what…who cares. Why do fitness marketers keep talking about it?!  I’ll never know.

And there is virtually nothing you can do to change this. Eating at or below your actual BMR isn’t going to ‘damage’ your metabolism any more than eating above it. And speaking of which, why don’t marketers suggest that there could be ‘metabolic damage’ when people overeat!?…anyone…anyone?

Right, just what I thought, this lie doesn’t lead to lucrative weight loss products.

The following claims are false, and are your best way to know that a person is clueless about biology and physiology and nutrition if they say:

"Eating too few calories is going to ’slow’ your metabolism" (unless they’re referring to people who are starving to death…and are in fact about to die)

"That there are foods that can ‘damage’ your metabolism"

That you can speed up or slow down your metabolism (without drugs…and that this would be a good thing in either direction)

That a slow metabolism is responsible for weight gain

That a fast metabolism is responsible for weight loss

That you have any control whatsoever over your metabolic rate

That your meal timing ...