Just curious - do you eat the serving size or just whatever amount you want?

hartmamp

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

icck

I tend to aim for portion sizes from packets (weight wise) as a base then decide if I want to add any more. Not necessarily for ease of logging, but just because I often find that the recommended serving is fine for me.

DemoraFairy

I eat however much I want that fits into my calories. Sometimes that's more than a 'portion', sometimes less.

smotheredincheese

I'll measure out a suggested portion size and then add to it if it doesn't look like enough. If I stick with the suggested serving size I log the calories the packet says, and if I use more than that will work it out from the full nutritional info.

Ninkyou

I use serving sizes as a guide. But I do eat what I want and weigh it out. Also how many calories I have left after pre-logging determines more how big my serving sizes are.

Jgasmic

If the entry has an option for grams then I will do whatever I want/need at the time. If it only has the generic serving size I weigh it to the serving size exactly because I usually don't feel like doing the math.

DeguelloTex

I eat whatever I want to fit in my calories. Servings sizes are typically pretty small, in my opinion.

jesikalovesyou

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

I'm with you, OP. I measure what they say is the serving size, in grams, and log it like that. Serving size is easy for me.

Francl27

I usually don't eat a serving size exactly. But if I had to log on my phone, I'd probably try to round it up because it's more of a pain than just popping the calculator on my computer, lol.

And I'm way too lazy to make grams entries for everything. I just know the serving size in grams of pretty much everything I use by heart now.

malibu927

Usually a serving, sometimes more, always weighed out

brightsideofpink

I'm very similar. I tend to weigh out a serving size of many things, or at least a portion of a serving size, especially if it is something that is easy to hit the exact g of. If people looked through my diary, they'd probably yell at me for estimating. But in truth, I weigh it all out when possible. I have those 28g of chips, the 55g of cheerios, etc. I don't do that with meats or veggies though. I'm not about to trim my steak down just to hit 4 oz. Hands off my steak!

roger1879

Certain foods I go by the Serving size.. others, which I kno I Can eat more of, and still stay on track, I will have more

ExRelaySprinter

Here in the UK, the serving suggestion sizes can be so small.
For example, 40 grams is the suggested serving size for most Cereals.
That's like a portion for a small child! Lol
I tend to measure out my own servings.

KrunchyMama

I measure out what I want, and weigh that. Sometimes I top it up to the portion size.

slaite1

I tend to use serving sizes for the same reason. When I first started on MFP years ago, I didn't use a scale. So I have TONS of entries that are based on serving sizes, rather than ounces or grams. So although I weigh it, I input it based on serving size. I am slowly replacing some of my common foods with the weighed entries bc I am sick of all the maths

enterdanger

I don't weigh my food so I usually stick as closely to the recommended serving size as possible.

jemhh

roger1879 wrote: »

Certain foods I go by the Serving size.. others, which I kno I Can eat more of, and still stay on track, I will have more

This. I still weigh it all though.

I usually eat 2 servings of cottage cheese, which shows up on the diary entry as two 1/2 cup servings but I know is 228 grams, which I do weigh out.

Pistachios, I weigh out exactly what the label says is a serving and I forget if that's 30 g or 40 g.

For fruit, like strawberries or watermelon, I just weigh what I cut up and log it. I don't try to only have 1/2 cup (I think that's the standard serving size) of that kind of thing.

majigurl

I eat for me. I figure out what portion size is right for me and calculate the calories for that.

SLLRunner

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

No, 1/4 cup of cheese is not always 28 grams.

Just like not all bananas are 110 calories either, and this thing about small, medium, large bananas is all in the perception.

I research to make sure I am using accurate entries and most of the time I log in grams, sometimes in ounces. I also weigh my food and never count on measuring cups/spoons for solid food because they are not accurate.

For me, it's much easier to weigh my food and ensure accurate entries, and it doesn't take any time at all.

Depending on my calorie allotment, I might eat more or less than the serving size. That's the beauty of weighing in grams--the serving size is very easy to adjust.

AbsoluteTara79

My diary probably looks like I don't weigh, but I do the same thing for most foods. I scan the label and then weigh out the listed grams. And now I just know 112 grams for the brand of cottage cheese I buy, 28 grams for my hummus, 75 grams for my ice cream, etc etc.

SezxyStef

SLLRunner wrote: »

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

No, 1/4 cup of cheese is not always 28 grams.

Just like not all bananas are 110 calories either, and this thing about small, medium, large bananas is all in the perception.

I research to make sure I am using accurate entries and most of the time I log in grams, sometimes in ounces. I also weigh my food and never count on measuring cups/spoons for solid food because they are not accurate.

For me, it's much easier to weigh my food and ensure accurate entries, and it doesn't take any time at all.

Depending on my calorie allotment, I might eat more or less than the serving size. That's the beauty of weighing in grams--the serving size is very easy to adjust.

all this.

Plus I don't always eat the suggested serving size.

For example suggested serving size of chicken...skinless boneless breast...what is the suggested serving size? 4oz?

And to top it all off...froot loops...suggested serving size is 3/4 cup or 25g(guessing) but guess what 25g of froot loops is not 3/4 of a cup...no way no how...so if I logged it as 3/4 of a cup I would be under logging my calories.

zyxst

I go with serving sizes listed on the packet as the base, altering the math when needed. Like I normally have 2 slices of bread for a sammich, so 1 slice = 23 g on the package, but both weigh 48 g so I log 2.09 servings.

afatpersonwholikesfood

I weigh and eat the portion that I want. I just use the serving size to calculate calories.

kommodevaran

I don't understand the concept of serving size, I'll eat how much I need/want/can fit in.

Cups is volume and shouldn't be used for anything but liquids, and even liquids can be weighed (I do that).

jemhh

SLLRunner wrote: »

hartmamp wrote: »

I started to wonder this when I see all the critiques of folk's diaries... i.e., "it says you ate 1/4 cup of cheese, use a food scale!" Well I personally use a food scale, and know that 1/4 cup of cheese is 28g. So if I go to log it and I weighed out 28g, then I log the 1/4 cup if that's what comes up first.

But then I started to realize that I mostly aim for serving sizes because to me, it's just easier to log that way. Am I the only one that does this?

No, 1/4 cup of cheese is not always 28 grams.

Just like not all bananas are 110 calories either, and this thing about small, medium, large bananas is all in the perception.

I research to make sure I am using accurate entries and most of the time I log in grams, sometimes in ounces. I also weigh my food and never count on measuring cups/spoons for solid food because they are not accurate.

For me, it's much easier to weigh my food and ensure accurate entries, and it doesn't take any time at all.

Depending on my calorie allotment, I might eat more or less than the serving size. That's the beauty of weighing in grams--the serving size is very easy to adjust.

I took that to mean that the label on her cheese says something like Serving: 1/4 cup (28 g). So if she finds that cheese in the MFP database with the same nutrition info that is on her label, she measures 28 g and logs it. It might show up as 1/4 cup on her diary but she's actually weighed it out.

Another example, my cottage cheese comes up as Food Club - 4% milkfat cottage cheese large curd, 1/2 cup on MFP. The label on the package says the serving is 1/2 cup (114 g.) The nutrition info on MFP for Food Club - 4% milkfat cottage cheese large curd, 1/2 cup matches what is on my food label. So I measure my 114 g and log it.

cwolfman13

it depends on the food item...sometimes I have a serving...sometimes less than a serving...sometimes more.

AndiDurall

I do like you do. Actually, when I have had struggles with my weight loss, I didn't come to the boards because I knew that all they would say is to open my diary and then tell me that I wasn't weighing everything. I do though! The only thing that I don't weigh consistently is bread because I don't eat a lot of it and I am always under on my calories anyway. But cheese? The cheese I use is a finely shredded blend. A serving size is 1/3 cup or 28 grams. I will set a container on my digital scale, tare it, and then weigh out exactly 28 grams. If I go over, I take cheese back out until it is 28 grams. Sometimes 27 or 26 grams will be used as 28 if I'm in a hurry. I even weigh my eggs though usually I just use the jumbo setting even though I only use large eggs and they weigh less than the jumbo. I weigh most of my liquids including salad dressing and coffee creamer the same way. I set my bowl, plate, cup, etc on the scale, tare, and then very slowly put my dressing or creamer or ketchup or mayo, whatever, until it says the right weight.

I don't only eat the serving size on everything but I usually do end up doing it in whole numbers. I don't know why. It seems easier, I guess. Haha.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

auddii

Caitwn wrote: »

"Serving size" doesn't mean much to me these days. I feel like the term has sort of turned into a game by companies to try to make their foods appear lower in calories - hence all of those amusing moments where you read the package and realize that a "serving" is some stupidly small amount of the total.

I just measure out whatever I'm interested in at the moment, weigh it, and make sure it fits into my day.

I was reading the back of some sausages, and the package said there were 6 servings in the package, but only 4 sausages. Who eats 2/3 of a sausage?! The manipulation of a serving is annoying, and supposedly when the new FDA rules go into effect (next year I think?), thing should get slightly better in the US. Slightly. I wonder if cereal servings are going to change; those are always ridiculous.

jemhh

HappyCampr1 wrote: »

auddii wrote: »

Caitwn wrote: »

"Serving size" doesn't mean much to me these days. I feel like the term has sort of turned into a game by companies to try to make their foods appear lower in calories - hence all of those amusing moments where you read the package and realize that a "serving" is some stupidly small amount of the total.

I just measure out whatever I'm interested in at the moment, weigh it, and make sure it fits into my day.

I was reading the back of some sausages, and the package said there were 6 servings in the package, but only 4 sausages. Who eats 2/3 of a sausage?! The manipulation of a serving is annoying, and supposedly when the new FDA rules go into effect (next year I think?), thing should get slightly better in the US. Slightly. I wonder if cereal servings are going to change; those are always ridiculous.

I agree with this. The bag of pre-shredded potatoes we occasionally buy for Sunday morning breakfast says it contains 7 servings. No way. My husband and I used to split the bag between us. Now, I only use a third of it, but still... 1/7 of the bag is nothing.

Also, I got a bottle of hard cider the other day. 11.2 oz bottle, but the serving size was 8 ounces. Is anybody NOT drinking the whole bottle?

That kind of thing annoys me the most. I can see myself thinking "I'll have a cup of cider" and then sitting down and drinking 8 ounces of it. But when would I ever then think "I'd really like four fifths of a cup of cider" or "Three point two ounces of cider would really hit the spot!"

peaceout_aly

Always the serving size. Always.