NY Times reports restaurant calorie counts are often wrong. How doesthis affect MFP database?

NotPhyllis

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/01/upshot/more-menus-have-calorie-labeling-but-obesity-rate-remains-high.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=mini-moth&region=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0

This is the link to the New York Times article.

I rely on the MFP database for restaurant calorie counts especially thing like French Fries. If this is all wrong, what do we use?

Francl27

Eh this is not at all what the article is about actually. The article is about the fact that most people don't care about calories when going to the restaurant.

But yeah, calories are often off, as they don't typically weigh every single ingredient every time (and your order of fries might have more or less of them). If it really bothers you, just put 1.2 or 1.3 serving to make up for the difference, but unless you're eating out all the time, it shouldn't be a huge deal in the end.

kshama2001

That's interesting. I would have thought if people see something has a crazy amount of calories, they'd be influenced to chose something else. I would be. In fact, I've changed what I order at Chipotles now that I am looking at calorie info.

Asher_Ethan

kshama2001 wrote: »

That's interesting. I would have thought if people see something has a crazy amount of calories, they'd be influenced to chose something else. I would be. In fact, I've changed what I order at Chipotles now that I am looking at calorie info.

kshama2001 wrote: »

That's interesting. I would have thought if people see something has a crazy amount of calories, they'd be influenced to chose something else. I would be. In fact, I've changed what I order at Chipotles now that I am looking at calorie info.

Unfortunately, a lot of people still don't understand CICO and don't think calories really matter. I know this because I use to be one of those people and I still hang out with people that still believe this.

rankinsect

I saw a documentary on BBC that looked at calories in packaged foods. Any individual package may be off by up to 10%, but over time they average out, as some end up low and others high.

What would be problematic would be a systematic error (either being always high or always low).

ald783

The article actually says that the items are mostly accurate, and as a previous poster said, it mostly evens out because sometimes it's high and sometimes low. It would be literally impossible to track calories 100% accurately, especially when eating out, but you're generally getting close enough that it's not going to make a difference. If you follow MFP and rely on their database and have lost weight when sticking to their calorie target, it's clearly not a problem in the long run.

Francl27

kshama2001 wrote: »

That's interesting. I would have thought if people see something has a crazy amount of calories, they'd be influenced to chose something else. I would be. In fact, I've changed what I order at Chipotles now that I am looking at calorie info.

Honestly I think that people either really don't know how many calories they need in a day, or just don't care. I was a mix of both... I didn't care because I thought that my metabolism sucked anyway, and had no idea what a reasonable amount of calories would be for me.

But now, hell yeah, seeing calories makes a huge difference for me. I might still order the 1000 calorie burger, but if I'm hesitating between that and the 700 calorie dish, I'm more likely to go for the lower calorie dish... which is why it's so frustrating sometimes when you have no idea how many calories are in a dish.

Raynne413

Nothing is ever 100% accurate. You just have to look at it more like a guideline or an estimate.