Calories Depend on Food Preparation

Mice gained more weight eating cooked food than raw food, indicating that preparing the food gives it a higher effective energy value. Sophie Bushwick reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Food is the body’s fuel. Now a study finds that the amount of energy in that fuel can depend not just on its calorie content—but on how it’s prepared. And the research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, could explain an ancient leap in human evolution. [Rachel N. Carmody, Gil S. Weintraub and Richard W. Wrangham, "Energetic consequences of thermal and nonthermal food processing"]

Food’s energy value is usually measured before consumption. But Harvard scientists fed two groups of mice either meat or sweet potatoes and prepared the items differently: either whole or pounded, raw or cooked—to create a variety of diets.

The researchers then measured the mice. They found that pounded meat and potatoes caused more weight gain than raw food. And that cooking increased weight the most.

The extra calories cooking makes available may have allowed the survival of humans with larger bodies and more complex brains, starting almost two million years ago. Those physical changes required more energy, and exposing food to fire may have provided that boost.

Of course, a legacy of evolution is that modern humans often gain too much weight. Which might be called a raw deal.

—Sophie Bushwick


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe