Be Careful When Using The Database

vingogly

Quest Protein Bar, Cookies & Cream: from the product label, 190 calories.

There are a lot of user contributed entries in the database for this item; they range from 180 calories to 210. That's a 30 calorie range for a single food item. Multiply discrepancies like this for 10-15 food items in a day's menu, and you have potentially hundreds of calories in error. Whether this is due to ignorance, laziness, or malice on the part of those loading up the database with junk entries, who knows.

The lesson learned is that you *can't* look something up and just take the first entry that pops up. What I've found is I need to read (or scan) product labels, and sometimes refer to other calorie count sources if I'm in doubt. The other problem with entries is the amount: what's a "small banana" or a "medium apple"? The only sure measure is weight.

If you're logging everything and not losing weight the way you should, looking at these issues is one thing you can do to figure out why.

debtay123

thanks

spookyface

So true. They should let us put the green checkmark on there when we know that entry is accurate.

SCoil123

Don't trust labels 100% either. Legally they can be up to 15% off on total calories per serving. A nutritionist warned me of this when helping me find a good protein shake and I believe it to be true.

ogtmama

I always assume the worst and take the one with the highest calories.

RainaProske

I thought, at first, that some of these entries were hilarious, then I realized that they cause problems.

wolfgirl78

With the quest bars I would assume, its because people weighed them for accuracy. Lots of times those bars weigh more the serving listed. Or perhaps someone didn't eat their whole bar.

SCoil123

eveandqsmom wrote: »

I always assume the worst and take the one with the highest calories.

Me too now

CharlieBeansmomTracey

also a lot of the green checked entries are off too. I have seen where the calories/fat/carbs,etc were off. and you cant edit those either.I have seen entries for things were there were no carb counts as well. I wish bread had no carbs lol. if you weigh your food and compare it to the label you have to recalculate and put in the proper amount into the database. so say 100g of something is a serving and its 100 calories, you weigh the item and its 110g you would put 1.1 servings.the calories will of course be 110 calories. its easy to do that.the thing is if you cant find the proper entry you can always create one that is accurate.while labels can be off if you weigh food and put in the proper info then your diary will be more accurate as well.you can either try to get an exact serving listed on the package or you can do the math and get as close as you can.

hollygirl101

I always just enter my own, then they're saved in the portion sizes I actually use and I know they're accurate. Takes more time on the front end but it's worth it.

Psychgrrl

spookyface wrote: »

So true. They should let us put the green checkmark on there when we know that entry is accurate.

I've found green checked entries that were incorrect when compared to current product labeling.

fr33sia12

I never use the database, all my foods are added manually myself and not shared.

treegirl97

fr33sia12 wrote: »

I never use the database, all my foods are added manually myself and not shared.

Same with me.

nutmegoreo

Psychgrrl wrote: »

spookyface wrote: »

So true. They should let us put the green checkmark on there when we know that entry is accurate.

I've found green checked entries that were incorrect when compared to current product labeling.

There's also regional differences. My Oreos have fewer calories than yours type of thing.

Maxematics

Well, regarding the Quest bar, it's been through two formula changes since its launch. Each time the caloric value has changed. This is most likely why there are discrepancies in the database and some of the entries are no longer useful. Also, even though your label says your bar is 190 calories, due to rounding it could be higher or lower. Furthermore, by gram weight it's most likely 200 calories easily. Whenever I weighed Quest bars they were never 60 grams, they were 63 to 67 grams on average.

Anyway, yes, some of the database entries are ridiculous. This is why I always check several entries for accuracy; that's the way the database should be used. I usually put in the food myself complete with gram weight so I know I can depend on it, but most of the time with a little effort the correct nutritional facts of any food can easily be found.

JeromeBarry1

I do use the database and always check against https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/3030?manu=&fgcd=
for basic ingredients such as vegetables and meats. I have a simple spreadsheet set up to calculate percentages for A in RAE, C, Calcium, using the recommendation for a mature man, and Iron, using the Iron recommendation for a fertile woman. I find in almost every case that the food database has the values of A, C, Calcium, and Iron directly from the government database as presented in RAE, mg, or mcg. Before I add it to my food diary, I correct it. Nor do I trust that just because I corrected it before that it is still correct. I check every time I add it. It takes a lot of my time.

PaulaWallaDingDong

wolfgirl78 wrote: »

With the quest bars I would assume, its because people weighed them for accuracy. Lots of times those bars weigh more the serving listed. Or perhaps someone didn't eat their whole bar.

If that's the case, then they should be making the adjustment in their own diary, not in the database entry, unless they're making a new entry for each individual bar, since they're all different, which would be incredibly stupid and annoying.

MakePeasNotWar

Psychgrrl wrote: »

spookyface wrote: »

So true. They should let us put the green checkmark on there when we know that entry is accurate.

I've found green checked entries that were incorrect when compared to current product labeling.

AFAIK, the only thing needed to get the green check is for several members to "verify" an entry, so as long as the stats are accurate in one region, or were accurate at some point, they can be verified.

I find the verified foods much more reliable than others, but they aren't perfect.

At least it weeds out the really bizarre entries like apples with 50g of saturated fat, or 20 calorie doughnuts (if only!!!)

JeromeBarry1

fr33sia12 wrote: »

I never use the database, all my foods are added manually myself and not shared.

I even double-check my recipes to see if recent recipe tool screwups have messed up the ingredients and nutrition values in my recipes. I aver that I am not OCD.

Annahbananas

If you use the scanner icon in the food lists, this will activate your camera. This will grab the UPC code of the food in your hand and will give you the exact food nutritional content.

I always use this. Just take your phone or tablet to the grocery score and scan the foods u want.

This is how I do it. This way you don't grab a user inputed information. I've been doing this every time since I started and always got accurate readings

MakePeasNotWar

Annahbananas wrote: »

If you use the scanner icon in the food lists, this will activate your camera. This will grab the UPC code of the food in your hand and will give you the exact food nutritional content.

I always use this. Just take your phone or tablet to the grocery score and scan the foods u want.

This is how I do it. This way you don't grab a user inputed information. I've been doing this every time since I started and always got accurate readings

It can still be user inputted, though. If you scan something MFP doesn't recognize, it gives you the option to add it to the database manually, and then links your entry with the UPC code. I've done it several times.

fr33sia12

Do you mean the scanner on MFP as the scanner scans the barcode then searches for the product in the database that other people have entered. The database is made up of entries from people.

Annahbananas

I guess I got lucky..I hadn't run into that since February

MakePeasNotWar

Annahbananas wrote: »

I guess I got lucky..I hadn't run into that since February

They tend to be pretty accurate, since the people inputting them literally have the product label right in front of them, but I've still caught some transcription errors, or missing data.

PaulaWallaDingDong

Annahbananas wrote: »

If you use the scanner icon in the food lists, this will activate your camera. This will grab the UPC code of the food in your hand and will give you the exact food nutritional content.

I always use this. Just take your phone or tablet to the grocery score and scan the foods u want.

This is how I do it. This way you don't grab a user inputed information. I've been doing this every time since I started and always got accurate readings

I get wrong ones all the time. Can't scan a barcode without also checking the result against the label.

Maxematics

PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »

Annahbananas wrote: »

If you use the scanner icon in the food lists, this will activate your camera. This will grab the UPC code of the food in your hand and will give you the exact food nutritional content.

I always use this. Just take your phone or tablet to the grocery score and scan the foods u want.

This is how I do it. This way you don't grab a user inputed information. I've been doing this every time since I started and always got accurate readings

I get wrong ones all the time. Can't scan a barcode without also checking the result against the label.

I do as well. Some people only focus on their macronutrients so they'll put in those but leave out sodium, potassium, and fiber. I may not be monitoring those micronutrients carefully, but I still want a complete nutrition breakdown for my items when provided.

christareid28

Always good idea to check it out

CharlieBeansmomTracey

Annahbananas wrote: »

If you use the scanner icon in the food lists, this will activate your camera. This will grab the UPC code of the food in your hand and will give you the exact food nutritional content.

I always use this. Just take your phone or tablet to the grocery score and scan the foods u want.

This is how I do it. This way you don't grab a user inputed information. I've been doing this every time since I started and always got accurate readings

even a lot of those entries are incorrect.

3dogsrunning

MakePeasNotWar wrote: »

Annahbananas wrote: »

I guess I got lucky..I hadn't run into that since February

They tend to be pretty accurate, since the people inputting them literally have the product label right in front of them, but I've still caught some transcription errors, or missing data.

I am in Canada. I frequently run into UPC codes that are totally different than the product I have. I have learned from here it could be an issue with different countries.

I have also learned that some products available in US and Canada can still have different nutritional profiles.

And like someone mentioned, even products end up with different nutritional profiles.

I have also run into an issue where serving sizes on labels have changed. Oatmeal is one.

So some entries can have legit reasons for being incorrect.

Bottomline, always crosscheck with the label. Or create your own entries.

PAV8888

3dogsrunning wrote: »

And like someone mentioned, even products end up with different nutritional profiles.
I have also run into an issue where serving sizes on labels have changed. Oatmeal is one.
So some entries can have legit reasons for being incorrect.
Bottomline, always crosscheck with the label. Or create your own entries.

Part of the problem may also be people who have created a custom entry for themselves based on incomplete information.

Pam cooking spray is NOT zero calories no matter what it claims. Neither is Mrs Dash. Nor is yellow mustard.

Quest bars are reported on the label net of fiber. Depending on the formula some of that fiber is actually digestible to 2+ Cal per gram and some at 1+ Cal per gram. If you're talking 30g... that adds up. Then add up a 10% overage on the bar and you have a 240 Cal quest bar.

And of course different countries have different labels and the same product may have different formulations in different countries.

3dogsrunning

PAV8888 wrote: »

3dogsrunning wrote: »

And like someone mentioned, even products end up with different nutritional profiles.
I have also run into an issue where serving sizes on labels have changed. Oatmeal is one.
So some entries can have legit reasons for being incorrect.
Bottomline, always crosscheck with the label. Or create your own entries.

Part of the problem may also be people who have created a custom entry for themselves based on incomplete information.

Pam cooking spray is NOT zero calories no matter what it claims. Neither is Mrs Dash. Nor is yellow mustard.

Quest bars are reported on the label net of fiber. Depending on the formula some of that fiber is actually digestible to 2+ Cal per gram and some at 1+ Cal per gram. If you're talking 30g... that adds up. Then add up a 10% overage on the bar and you have a 240 Cal quest bar.

And of course different countries have different labels and the same product may have different formulations in different countries.

I didnt mean these were the only reasons. Just these are reasons where the information may actually be correct for some but not others.