Stupid question about weighing food.

Nertak
Nertak Posts: 34 Member
edited November 2024 in Food and Nutrition
I'm new to this and am about to bake some tilapia. I took it out of the freezer and it weighs 144grams. Right now its uncooked. I am, however, about to cook it. Do I use the cooked or uncooked numbers for the calorie count? Why are there different numbers to begin with?

While I have you here, I was thinking of making black beans along with the fish. Since the fish is a protein and so are the beans is it a bad idea to combine them? Would I be better off with a baked potato or something instead?

Thanks for the help.

Replies

  • MKEgal
    MKEgal Posts: 3,250 Member
    It doesn't matter. (Though cooked might be more accurate.)
    Just make sure you use the correct database entry.
    Search for [USDA tilapia raw] or [USDA tilapia baked]

    Not a bad idea to combine proteins... you've heard of bacon-wrapped scallops, right?
    Besides, beans have lots of fiber.
  • AllOutof_Bubblegum
    AllOutof_Bubblegum Posts: 3,646 Member
    I always weigh my food uncooked, because you can't account for the water that gets cooked out of/absorbed by the food.

    And feel free to combine macros any way you like. It won't make a difference. Beans are a significant amount of carbs, more so than protein.
  • cblue315
    cblue315 Posts: 3,836 Member
    No stupid questions.
    I use the cooked weight for meats/fish as you do not know how much water was added prior to freezing it.
    I usually try to eat more protein than carbs each day so watch your macros. Beans and a protien sounds good to me.
  • GBO323
    GBO323 Posts: 333 Member
    Not a stupid question. I use cooked weights and keep it consistent that way. As far as combining, MFP is a CICO plan with a some recommendations for daily intake of Protein and Carbs. Bottom line is if you are hitting your calorie goal in loss mode, you will lose weight regardless of macros.
  • Nertak
    Nertak Posts: 34 Member
    cooked is like 50 calories more then uncooked. I want those calories back :(
  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,603 Member
    If I don't mix it with other stuff, I use the cooked weight. My dietitian said that best. Other posters have said theirs did, too. I feel like it's more accurate and I want to get the best possible estimate (what other point is there, if you're weighing every little bit of food, you know?), so I go with cooked.

    However, many people use the raw weight and think that is the best way to do it.

    Choose whatever you like, but if you weigh it raw, use the raw entry and if you weigh it cooked, use the cooked entry. :)
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Well was it frozen when you first weighed it? What does the package say?
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Well was it frozen when you first weighed it? What does the package say?


    Yeah I usually use what's on the package and weigh raw. The manufacturer doesn't know how we plan to cook it..

    Beans or potato - eat what you want. If you're trying to hit certain macro percentages, one may give you more value than he other
  • JohnBarth
    JohnBarth Posts: 672 Member
    Packaging typically indicates raw weight unless otherwise noted. You can also search the food database for "raw" or "cooked" versions of many, many foods. Boneless, skinless chicken breasts, for instance net about 5oz cooked from an 8oz frozen state. Fresh would be a tad less than the frozen.
  • JohnBarth
    JohnBarth Posts: 672 Member
    Packaging typically indicates raw weight unless otherwise noted. You can also search the food database for "raw" or "cooked" versions of many, many foods. Boneless, skinless chicken breasts, for instance net about 5oz cooked from an 8oz frozen state. Fresh would be a tad less than the frozen.
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,652 Member
    Nertak wrote: »
    cooked is like 50 calories more then uncooked. I want those calories back :(
    Cooked is more because, typically, water is lost so the cooked item is more dense. You're not losing any calories, you're eating something that has more calories per gram because some liquid is gone.

  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Nertak wrote: »
    cooked is like 50 calories more then uncooked. I want those calories back :(

    Yeah it's the annoying thing. I once weighed the same chicken breast raw and cooked and compared the entries and it was 50 calories off too. Never know what to use. If you use the wrong one, have something like that 3 times in your day and bam, 150 calories off... it's a bit disheartening when you're trying to be as accurate as possible.

    Don't even get me started about logging steaks!
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    I only weigh cooked- b/c I split them up after I cook them. Really as long as you are consistent and use the correct entry- you're good.
  • Nertak
    Nertak Posts: 34 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Well was it frozen when you first weighed it? What does the package say?

    No packaging at all. Got it from the seafood department in the supermarket.

  • ki4eld
    ki4eld Posts: 1,213 Member
    My nutritionist says use the cooked weight.
This discussion has been closed.