Things I have learned from weighing my food
Options
Replies
-
tara_means_star wrote: »I feel like this is a dumb question but I want to ask anyway
My scale only weighs in ounces for foods, not grams. Still accurate?
Well, not as accurate as grams, but it's better than nothing I guess.0 -
why isn't it as accurate?
0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »why isn't it as accurate?
Ounces are a larger unit is all.
It's like the difference in rounding off your height to the nearest foot (or meter), which won't be as accurate as using the nearest inch (or centimeter)0 -
still effective for weight loss?0
-
tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.0 -
I generally overestimate without a scale, with the one exception being chips, crackers, or things that tend to break up in the package before you serve them to yourself. Those are fun to weigh out
0 -
juggernaut1974 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.
Ok, last question. OP, so sorry to derail your thread....
I'm still 40 pounds to goal and 20 pounds overweight. Would it make since you just measure and log 4 ounces as 4 ounces until it no longer works, then weigh 3.9 or even 3.8 but log 4?0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.
Ok, last question. OP, so sorry to derail your thread....
All good. No worries
0 -
QueenofHearts023 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.
Ok, last question. OP, so sorry to derail your thread....
All good. No worries
Thanks for posting about this! Reminded me how important it is to use my scale! 0 -
Yeah. It's really for my state of mind.. overestimating 'just in case' sucks because if you end up hungry later, you don't know what to do (one of the reasons I dislike eating out now). By weighing everything, I know exactly where I stand and don't feel bad about eating an extra snack if I get hungry.
+1
SO very happy I got my scale - the inaccuracy was driving me crazy! I've been eating more since I got the scale lol.
0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.
Ok, last question. OP, so sorry to derail your thread....
I'm still 40 pounds to goal and 20 pounds overweight. Would it make since you just measure and log 4 ounces as 4 ounces until it no longer works, then weigh 3.9 or even 3.8 but log 4?
Buy a new scale that weighs in grams and get it over with. It's $10 and it means you can practice the new skill of thinking in grams. Seriously, under logging your food isn't a good option, because that's still estimating. Buy the new scale, weigh in grams, and tighten your logging. That'll take care of the shrinking deficit.0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.
Ok, last question. OP, so sorry to derail your thread....
I'm still 40 pounds to goal and 20 pounds overweight. Would it make since you just measure and log 4 ounces as 4 ounces until it no longer works, then weigh 3.9 or even 3.8 but log 4?
If your scale is giving you tenths of an ounce, and you're logging that way, then the margin of error is a lot smaller than if it only weighed in half-ounce or ounce increments. Given that the whole system is kind of inherently one estimate after another, I'd say don't worry about it until/unless you stop losing weight doing what you're doing. A tenth of an ounce is less than 3 grams. 3 grams of pure sugar is 12 calories. 3 grams of butter is 22 calories. Just to give an idea of the possible margin of error involved. You're probably getting larger margins of error weighing and logging a random piece of fruit or meat (because not all bananas are equally sweet, not all steaks are equally fatty).
ETA: and remember your scale is rounding up or down to that tenth of an ounce, so the real potential margin of error is a bit less that a gram and half. pish.0 -
weigh cooked or precooked?0
-
I paid $20 for a scale that weighs in gram and ounces with a big ole bowl included. That's less than I used to spend on Diet Dr. Pepper for a week.
I still drink my DDP just not two liters a day! LOL. but that's a whole 'nother issue.0 -
-
HappyCampr1 wrote: »seltzermint555 wrote: »I agree...I underestimate some things and overestimate others. While it's not strictly related to weighing food, I had the same issue when I began using MFP. I thought I was eating like 3 servings of cereal and it turned out my portion was dead-on for the correct amount of 1 serving. I thought I would only be able to have 1/3 of my usual portion for pasta, but it turned out I'd been eating the correct portion size all along and 2 oz. of any pasta is really way more than I would have guessed.
Yes. I hear complaints about the tiny portion of pasta people get, and yet I hardly ever eat a full portion and I love pasta.
Before I got my scale, I was seriously overestimating all my meats. (A deck of cards my rear, lol). I was depriving myself of needed proteins and didn't even realize it.
Pasta is weighed dry...that might be why it looks so tiny? I know that was a huge revelation to me. Cooked to the consistency I like, mine usually comes to around 4 oz.. With meat sauce and a salad, its usually plenty for me. Could be just me!
What I have found to be most valuable in this whole weighing my food exercise is becoming more familiar with the calorie density of the foods I eat. Now 8 months into this adventure I am pretty good at eyeing things. I think that after I hit maintenance there will always be some foods I need to measure, but I know I will never again be able to lie to myself about how much I am really eating. Now I know better.
Good thread! Thanks!0 -
sheermomentum wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »tara_means_star wrote: »still effective for weight loss?
If you have more margin for error, probably. As your margin for error tightens, your accuracy generally needs to increase to be effective.
Ok, last question. OP, so sorry to derail your thread....
I'm still 40 pounds to goal and 20 pounds overweight. Would it make since you just measure and log 4 ounces as 4 ounces until it no longer works, then weigh 3.9 or even 3.8 but log 4?
If your scale is giving you tenths of an ounce, and you're logging that way, then the margin of error is a lot smaller than if it only weighed in half-ounce or ounce increments. Given that the whole system is kind of inherently one estimate after another, I'd say don't worry about it until/unless you stop losing weight doing what you're doing. A tenth of an ounce is less than 3 grams. 3 grams of pure sugar is 12 calories. 3 grams of butter is 22 calories. Just to give an idea of the possible margin of error involved. You're probably getting larger margins of error weighing and logging a random piece of fruit or meat (because not all bananas are equally sweet, not all steaks are equally fatty).
ETA: and remember your scale is rounding up or down to that tenth of an ounce, so the real potential margin of error is a bit less that a gram and half. pish.
That's kinda what I was thinking and since I already have this scale and money is tight...0 -
I learned, "oh *kitten*. THAT'S four ounces of wine???????"
I also realized I can eat a lot more chicken and fish than I thought. I often double portion salmon and eat like 8 oz. OMG. Totally stuffed, and really not all the big on the cals. And I have it beat into my head that 4 oz of chicken is a serving, so I would never eat more than that. It has been a real change to eat 6 oz (or like 180 grams or whatever) so that I am actually full and satisfied and happy, instead of guilty that I overate on protein.
Mental shifts, so important. I have been pretty solid for a month now (finally!) and feeling pretty in the zone right now.0 -
This thread has motivated me to buy a scale- I was perfectly happy estimating until I realized that I could be eating more.
I want to be eating more lol0 -
That I eat around 4-5lbs of food every day. Not counting my liquids. Lol, yep, I'm a volume eater. (Yes, I do realize weight =/= volume. But with a plant heavy intake, it's a lot of food, lol).
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions