Kroger Lentils: 80 calories, 10g Protein

alonsonater

Any reason why these lentils are better than others?

robertw486

Better in what way?

Lindsay_the_great

Lentils in general are an excellent source of plant based protein.

Will210

Thanks for sharing. They seem to share the similar nutrition value as Goya so it's not variant based on the manufacturer. 10 grams of protein and 11grams of fiber in an 80 cal serving. Pretty potent food. Stupid question - would this be a soy based food?

PiSquared

Will210 wrote: »

Thanks for sharing. They seem to share the similar nutrition value as Goya so it's not variant based on the manufacturer. 10 grams of protein and 11grams of fiber in an 80 cal serving. Pretty potent food. Stupid question - would this be a soy based food?

No, lentils are there own thing. They're a legume, like beans and peas. They have the advantage of not requiring a pre-soak and cook in about 20 minutes. There's apparently a bunch of different types of lentils, but I've only had the green (most common) and red.

sympha01

If you're comparing the calorie count to the calorie count on other lentils, I have a pretty good hypothesis.

The label on these says for an 80 cal serving there are 20g of carbs and 10g of protein. That right there is actually 120 calories, not 80. What it looks like is Kroger has chosen to report calories based on Net Carbs (i.e., subtracting calories from fiber), which I think food labels are allowed to do in the US but unfortunately is not done consistently, nor are they required to point out that they have done this. So BAM, Kroger has gotten away with making it look like their lentils are lower in calories than, say, the exact same green lentils packaged by Safeway, that have the exact same macros but report out at 120 calories because they're not deducting fiber calories.

alonsonater

Thank you so much sympha! You have solved this mystery for me

neohdiver

sympha01 wrote: »

If you're comparing the calorie count to the calorie count on other lentils, I have a pretty good hypothesis.

The label on these says for an 80 cal serving there are 20g of carbs and 10g of protein. That right there is actually 120 calories, not 80. What it looks like is Kroger has chosen to report calories based on Net Carbs (i.e., subtracting calories from fiber), which I think food labels are allowed to do in the US but unfortunately is not done consistently, nor are they required to point out that they have done this. So BAM, Kroger has gotten away with making it look like their lentils are lower in calories than, say, the exact same green lentils packaged by Safeway, that have the exact same macros but report out at 120 calories because they're not deducting fiber calories.

It's not necessarily Krogers that is reporting it that way - it is the Fooducate site. If you look to other sources, at least some of them are reporting the correct amounts. http://www.caloriecount.com/calories-kroger-lentils-i245395

(By correct, I mean consistent with how calories are traditionally counted. While it is correct that the fiber calories may be treated differently by your body that non-fiber carbs, if you are calorie counting you need to be consistent and virtually all labels include carb fiber calories in the calorie count)

For unprocessed foods, always go with the usda numbers.

VeryKatie

alonsonater wrote: »

Any reason why these lentils are better than others?

Well I look at this.. and I know that both protein and carbs are 4 calories per gram. 10g protein = 40 calories. 20 g carbs = 80 calories. So... I'd hesitate to say these are actually 80 calories when my math becomes 120 calories for the same serving. Something fishy going on here.

VeryKatie

sympha01 wrote: »

If you're comparing the calorie count to the calorie count on other lentils, I have a pretty good hypothesis.

The label on these says for an 80 cal serving there are 20g of carbs and 10g of protein. That right there is actually 120 calories, not 80. What it looks like is Kroger has chosen to report calories based on Net Carbs (i.e., subtracting calories from fiber), which I think food labels are allowed to do in the US but unfortunately is not done consistently, nor are they required to point out that they have done this. So BAM, Kroger has gotten away with making it look like their lentils are lower in calories than, say, the exact same green lentils packaged by Safeway, that have the exact same macros but report out at 120 calories because they're not deducting fiber calories.

Oh weird. Does Canada do this too? I should find out.

Huh cool. Looks like that isn't allowed here.

"Net Carbohydrate" and "Effective Carbohydrate" Statements
The following terms, "net carbohydrate", "net impact carbohydrate", "net effective carbohydrate", "effective carbohydrate", and "digestible carbs" are not acceptable due to lack of scientific consensus on their definition and their potential to mislead consumers. Additionally, the Regulations prohibit claims concerning the action or effects of nutrients, including carbohydrate, unless specifically provided for (B.01.311, FDR).

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/labelling/food-labelling-for-industry/nutrition-labelling/carbohydrate-claims/eng/1409844949900/1409845010355

mlboyer100

I want to thank Sympha01 for clarifying the label issue! I'm an avid label reader in the grocery store and these things drive me crazy! I didn't throw that manufacturers could label NET carbs without stating the fact. AloneStar, thanks so much for asking this question!