Commonly confused serving sizes (pasta, others?)

135

Replies

  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    One Pop Tart should not be "a serving." :angry:

    You're right!

    THREE Pop Tarts should be a serving.

    Well, in my world, anyway.

  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    A dry two ounces of pasta does not cook up to be a plateful of pasta.

    Maybe a Fiestaware salad plate, if it is a bigger pasta and you really overcook it. Maybe.

    It's not a plateful for me, but boy howdy am I full after I've eaten it.

  • JenMaselli
    JenMaselli Posts: 83 Member
    I just did 3/4 of a cup of Honey Nut Cherrios. It weighed 32g (serving weight is 28).

    Ah. There it is.
  • JenMaselli
    JenMaselli Posts: 83 Member
    nuffer wrote: »
    It's not wrong so much as inaccurate. Almost all food is sold by weight, not volume. Nutrition information is calculated the same way. I suspect that servings are given in volume because most people don't have scales at home.

    Makes sense. The difference of a few grams isn't something I would stress about, but I can understand why someone would weigh it out versus measuring in a cup.
  • vixtris
    vixtris Posts: 688 Member
    I wouldn't weigh it frozen. Just raw (thawed) or cooked.
    JPW1990 wrote: »
    Do you buy the meat already frozen and then cook it while it's still frozen?

    Most of the meat I buy raw then freeze, and cook it frozen.
  • JPW1990
    JPW1990 Posts: 2,424 Member
    vixtris wrote: »
    I wouldn't weigh it frozen. Just raw (thawed) or cooked.
    JPW1990 wrote: »
    Do you buy the meat already frozen and then cook it while it's still frozen?

    Most of the meat I buy raw then freeze, and cook it frozen.

    Weigh it before you freeze it, or just save the weight as marked on the label (depending where you buy it, it may not be accurate)
  • KateParker01
    KateParker01 Posts: 33 Member
    edited March 2015
    This is just totally alien to me - practically every home in the UK has a pair of kitchen scales :) I weigh everything to the gram if I'm in the house to do so. And a 15% diffence in calorie content scaled up across all my food (the 32g vs 28g cereal example from above) is enough to take someone out of maintenance!

  • JenMaselli
    JenMaselli Posts: 83 Member
    JenMaselli wrote: »
    nuffer wrote: »
    It's not wrong so much as inaccurate. Almost all food is sold by weight, not volume. Nutrition information is calculated the same way. I suspect that servings are given in volume because most people don't have scales at home.

    Makes sense. The difference of a few grams isn't something I would stress about, but I can understand why someone would weigh it out versus measuring in a cup.

    This is just totally alien to me - practically every home in the UK has a pair of kitchen scales :) I weigh everything to the gram if I'm in the house to do so. And a 15% diffence in calorie content scaled up across all my food (the 32g vs 28g cereal example from above) is enough to take someone out of maintenance!

    I do have a kitchen scale and I weigh out a lot of the food that I eat. But no, I don't stress over a couple of grams here or there and I lost 30 lbs doing it this way. That is just ME, I wouldn't suggest that anyone else do it my way, but I have to have a balance between keeping myself at the weight I want and driving myself bonkers.
  • vixtris
    vixtris Posts: 688 Member
    JPW1990 wrote: »
    vixtris wrote: »
    I wouldn't weigh it frozen. Just raw (thawed) or cooked.
    JPW1990 wrote: »
    Do you buy the meat already frozen and then cook it while it's still frozen?

    Most of the meat I buy raw then freeze, and cook it frozen.

    Weigh it before you freeze it, or just save the weight as marked on the label (depending where you buy it, it may not be accurate)
    Seems like too much of a hassle for me lol. It might be better to just weigh it frozen and over calculate than to under calculate (since I want to lose weight anyways).
  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    edited March 2015
    vixtris wrote: »
    JPW1990 wrote: »
    vixtris wrote: »
    I wouldn't weigh it frozen. Just raw (thawed) or cooked.
    JPW1990 wrote: »
    Do you buy the meat already frozen and then cook it while it's still frozen?

    Most of the meat I buy raw then freeze, and cook it frozen.

    Weigh it before you freeze it, or just save the weight as marked on the label (depending where you buy it, it may not be accurate)
    Seems like too much of a hassle for me lol. It might be better to just weigh it frozen and over calculate than to under calculate (since I want to lose weight anyways).

    But aren't you thawing it before you cook it?

    If so, why not just wait to weigh it until it's thawed? ETA: Oh, sorry. I didn't see that you cook it from frozen.

  • LAWoman72
    LAWoman72 Posts: 2,846 Member
    edited March 2015

    Another possibility: don't your meat packages have the total weight (of the meat) in ounces and/or grams? If so, cut up your meat in as equal portions as you can, then divide the total weight by the amount of pieces and just make a note of that.

    Or to make sure the total weight is accurate, weigh the whole slab yourself before cutting it up. :)

    If you don't want to cut it up beforehand (i.e. roasts and the like), still do the weighing before you freeze. Then after you cook the meat, cut it up into as equal portions as you can. You still have your number to divide into the total weight that way.

  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    Actually 2 ounces of pasta is more than enough....cuz more meat!
  • segacs
    segacs Posts: 4,599 Member
    edited March 2015
    The things I find tricky to weigh are:
    • Tofu -- when you buy it, it's packaged with water. With the water still in it, the total weight for the package is much higher than what's on the label. Do I weigh it after I squeeze the water out? Doesn't everyone squeeze out a different amount of water?
    • Apples -- I know I should weigh it, then go back after eating it and subtract the core, to get a true measure in grams. But usually I can't be bothered. So I just use an estimate for "1 medium" or "1 large" apple and leave it at that.
    • Chicken on the bone -- it's a royal pain to subtract the uneaten bone afterwards, not knowing how much I actual ate until I do. It could throw my calories off by quite a bit.
    • Chicken soup -- calories in cooked soup are NOT the same as the calories in the sum of their raw ingredients. Especially in something like a clear chicken soup broth, because the chicken and vegetables are strained out before eating, and the fat is skimmed multiple times during cooking. There doesn't seem to be any good way to even guesstimate at the calories.

    I should mention that I'm not OCD enough to let any of these things really bother me all that much; I take an estimate and move on. But in the spirit of the thread, they're the ones I can think of.
  • schelly81
    schelly81 Posts: 161 Member
    zyxst wrote: »
    Semi-solids with a liquid measurement. I'm looking at ice cream and canned fruits/veggies.

    ETA: I'm in Canada and most foods have gram weights, but the above items are half a cup/125 mL. Gimme grams, dammit! Stop making me do math, Health Canada! >:(

    I'm also in Canada. Would it kill them to put the weight on ice cream? Has anyone at Health Canada every tried to squish ice cream into a half cup measurer (okay, 1 cup) and then scrap it out before it starts to melt?

  • JPW1990
    JPW1990 Posts: 2,424 Member
    segacs wrote: »
    The things I find tricky to weigh are:
    • Tofu -- when you buy it, it's packaged with water. With the water still in it, the total weight for the package is much higher than what's on the label. Do I weigh it after I squeeze the water out? Doesn't everyone squeeze out a different amount of water?
    • Apples -- I know I should weigh it, then go back after eating it and subtract the core, to get a true measure in grams. But usually I can't be bothered. So I just use an estimate for "1 medium" or "1 large" apple and leave it at that.
    • Chicken on the bone -- it's a royal pain to subtract the uneaten bone afterwards, not knowing how much I actual ate until I do. It could throw my calories off by quite a bit.
    • Chicken soup -- calories in cooked soup are NOT the same as the calories in the sum of their raw ingredients. Especially in something like a clear chicken soup broth, because the chicken and vegetables are strained out before eating, and the fat is skimmed multiple times during cooking. There doesn't seem to be any good way to even guesstimate at the calories.

    I should mention that I'm not OCD enough to let any of these things really bother me all that much; I take an estimate and move on. But in the spirit of the thread, they're the ones I can think of.

    RE: chicken on the bone, honestly, I quit bothering to buy anything but boneless a long time ago for that reason. If for some reason I'm stuck (like when I buy a bunch at Costco and don't read the label closely enough), I'd rather debone it and weigh before I cook than deal with the magic math of cooking method + weigh the bones after I eat.
  • Wiseandcurious
    Wiseandcurious Posts: 730 Member
    segacs wrote: »
    The things I find tricky to weigh are:
    • Tofu -- when you buy it, it's packaged with water. With the water still in it, the total weight for the package is much higher than what's on the label. Do I weigh it after I squeeze the water out? Doesn't everyone squeeze out a different amount of water?
    • Apples -- I know I should weigh it, then go back after eating it and subtract the core, to get a true measure in grams. But usually I can't be bothered. So I just use an estimate for "1 medium" or "1 large" apple and leave it at that.
    • Chicken on the bone -- it's a royal pain to subtract the uneaten bone afterwards, not knowing how much I actual ate until I do. It could throw my calories off by quite a bit.
    • Chicken soup -- calories in cooked soup are NOT the same as the calories in the sum of their raw ingredients. Especially in something like a clear chicken soup broth, because the chicken and vegetables are strained out before eating, and the fat is skimmed multiple times during cooking. There doesn't seem to be any good way to even guesstimate at the calories.

    I should mention that I'm not OCD enough to let any of these things really bother me all that much; I take an estimate and move on. But in the spirit of the thread, they're the ones I can think of.

    I hear you about the apple core and chicken bones. Personally I decided to ignore them in the end and take the whole weight, because both apple cores and chicken bones are surprisingly light (yes, I checked <looks down embarrassed>).
  • krissyreminisce
    krissyreminisce Posts: 284 Member
    edited March 2015
    Oatmeal: dry vs. wet, and any kind of fruit!

    Oatmeal threw me off, too, for some reason. I made a cup dry, which would be four servings, but my brain got a little hysterical when I got to the wet part and I ended up making it into eight servings. Which annoys me because I'm having trouble netting over 1000 cals a day. :neutral_face:
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    The apple and chicken bones don't bother me. I vastly prefer bone-in chicken, but made my piece with pulling the chicken off the bone and weighing it before putting it on my plate (using cooked entries) long ago. It also makes slow cooking or braising excellent methods, since meat is already falling off the bones. Less accurate than weighing raw, but not enough to be an issue for me. Apples, well, I'm a weird person who hates biting into whole apples anyway, so I chop my apple into pieces, weigh, and eat. I also often eat bananas without the peel (although only if I am alone), although I am reasonably comfortable I can estimate the sizes well these days.

    However, the soup thing is always a slight irritant and probably means I make soup less than I used to. Stews where you cook bone-in and remove the bones also drive me crazy.

    I admit that I do a lot fewer one-pot meals or combined ingredient meals than I used to in favor of meals (including pasta) where it's easy to just weigh the components without creating a recipe and serving sizes. (Pasta sauces I usually half or quarter the whole, depending, which works okay.)
  • spoonyspork
    spoonyspork Posts: 238 Member
    A dry two ounces of pasta does not cook up to be a plateful of pasta.

    Maybe a Fiestaware salad plate, if it is a bigger pasta and you really overcook it. Maybe.

    2oz (dry weight) pasta on a 9" plate (it's the spaghetti noodles on the right):

    d9bt4iilffmu.jpg

    So yeah... doesn't fill up EVERY INCH of the plate... but that's seriously more than I usually ate per serving before I was measuring anything. Add some sauce/veggies/etc and it quickly becomes a HUGE meal...

    (that's the '150 calorie' ronzoni spaghetti btw, which doesn't expand as much as the regular stuff)
  • Cazzy34
    Cazzy34 Posts: 159 Member
    A dry two ounces of pasta does not cook up to be a plateful of pasta.

    Maybe a Fiestaware salad plate, if it is a bigger pasta and you really overcook it. Maybe.

    2oz (dry weight) pasta on a 9" plate (it's the spaghetti noodles on the right):

    d9bt4iilffmu.jpg

    So yeah... doesn't fill up EVERY INCH of the plate... but that's seriously more than I usually ate per serving before I was measuring anything. Add some sauce/veggies/etc and it quickly becomes a HUGE meal...

    (that's the '150 calorie' ronzoni spaghetti btw, which doesn't expand as much as the regular stuff)

    I must be measuring wrong, cos when i weigh mine it comes out at about half of this amount!!