Weighing food vs measuring food...

lemurcat12

I find it easier to use a food scale when I'm logging. I started estimating and measuring but had a scale anyway (I used to bake and used it for that) and found it was easier for me not to bother with trying to estimate, just to pop things on the scale as part of the cooking process.

I never cook to recipes and therefore almost never use measuring cups or tsp/Tsp anyway -- the one main exception is occasionally with oil. I'll estimate greens if the scale isn't convenient (or anything if it's not available, like if I am not home).

tomteboda

Someone questioned whether the mass or volume measurement marking on USDA labels is accurate. Mass. Always mass.

So if the package says 3/4 cup (47 g) = 160 Cal ((Wheat Chex)), they mean a 47 gram serving of Wheat Chex has 160 calories, and that its volume is *approximately* 3/4 of a cup.

Nutrition information is scientific data and that's never, ever EVER going to hold a standard using US Standard Units. Not even in the USA.

tomteboda

I lost the first 60 lbs without weighing. I didn't want to weigh. If you dig through my posts, I justify somewhere (reasonably) this decision. It's not essential, especially if you're meticulous about your consistency in logging & measurement, and accept a certain margin of error, and are willing to cut back on calories if not getting the weight loss you want.

Then I bought a food scale. I didn't buy it for my efforts to lose weight; I bought it because I bake a lot and my bread was failing miserably. Loaf after loaf came out oddly. One of the tips I received was to weigh ingredients because bread is super-duper touchy about proportions and it's just easy as heck to mess it up with to much salt or too much sugar or not enough yeast or..(you get the idea). So I bought a scale.

Then I started weighing my food. I discovered the following.

1. Bread comes out perfectly every time when you weigh.
2. Baking is a GAZILLION times quicker and easier
3. You go through fewer utinsels/dishes weighing
4. Logging weights takes a little longer. I now jot down stuff on a notepad to transfer to my phone so my food doesn't get cold.
5. Volume measurements are usually too large.

The validity of the photographic evidence was questioned above, so I decided to provide some of my own. All photographs were taken a few minutes ago on my cell phone in my badly-lit kitchen.

*The label on the chocolate chips should read "15 grams vs 12 chips". Pictured on the left are 15 grams, on the right 12 chips*

ogtmama

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Weigh.

LOL Agree it might be a good idea to weigh if you can't see that one of those cups is not full.

I actually find that you can use a measuring cup of cooked pasta and log it as raw, it fixes that discrepancy

ogtmama

Those noodles are raw...if they were cooked they would fill the cup at the proper calorie level.

ogtmama

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Francl27 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Weigh.

LOL Agree it might be a good idea to weigh if you can't see that one of those cups is not full.

Yeah but... that one cup is 289 calories. Cooked pasta is supposedly 200 calories a cup... hence why eyeballing doesn't cut it.

That measurement on the package of noodles say 1cup (56g) dry equals 200 calories. That's not for cooked. And both those images contain dry pasta. If one measurement was supposed to be cooked and one dry it would indicate that on the package. I've seen it once or twice.

Oh! Haha, you beat me to it.

Wynterbourne

eveandqsmom wrote: »

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Francl27 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Weigh.

LOL Agree it might be a good idea to weigh if you can't see that one of those cups is not full.

Yeah but... that one cup is 289 calories. Cooked pasta is supposedly 200 calories a cup... hence why eyeballing doesn't cut it.

That measurement on the package of noodles say 1cup (56g) dry equals 200 calories. That's not for cooked. And both those images contain dry pasta. If one measurement was supposed to be cooked and one dry it would indicate that on the package. I've seen it once or twice.

Oh! Haha, you beat me to it.

I know the pasta was raw in that picture because it was my pasta in my measuring cup on my scale in my kitchen taken with my camera.

@Need2Exerc1se to say that someone should weigh it if they are incapable of knowing what a full measuring cup looks like tells me that you completely missed what information was trying to be relayed with the image I made.

ogtmama

Wynterbourne wrote: »

eveandqsmom wrote: »

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Francl27 wrote: »

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

Wynterbourne wrote: »

Weigh.

LOL Agree it might be a good idea to weigh if you can't see that one of those cups is not full.

Yeah but... that one cup is 289 calories. Cooked pasta is supposedly 200 calories a cup... hence why eyeballing doesn't cut it.

That measurement on the package of noodles say 1cup (56g) dry equals 200 calories. That's not for cooked. And both those images contain dry pasta. If one measurement was supposed to be cooked and one dry it would indicate that on the package. I've seen it once or twice.

Oh! Haha, you beat me to it.

I know the pasta was raw in that picture because it was my pasta in my measuring cup on my scale in my kitchen taken with my camera.

@Need2Exerc1se to say that someone should weigh it if they are incapable of knowing what a full measuring cup looks like tells me that you completely missed what information was trying to be relayed with the image I made.

I thought they were saying that the package said that there were a 56 grams in a full cup but 56 grams only filled it 3/4 of the way...I'm late to the party anyhoo, and I have no skin in the game, I just remembered the conversation about the pasta being uncooked from before

smelliefeet

Weigh with food scale 100% of the food that enters my mouth. At least for a solid 6 months so I can get the hang of how much I'm supposed to be eating for my size.

Gisel2015

Over 6 years ago I lost weight just using measuring cups. I didn't own a scale and I did fine, but I only had 10lbs to lose.

I got a scale at a friend's suggestion when I was already in maintenance. I do not know why I got it because I don't bake but I did and I am now using it but not all the time. I got to be very good at estimating when I eat out and I don't weigh my food when I am not at home (I don't log it either), and I don't weigh 100% of the food that I eat at home. A slice of bread gets logged like that not in grams; and large egg is just a large egg, not logged in grams, etc. You get the drift.

It all depends in your relationship with food. If you like to eat a lot, then weigh it until you became familiar with the proper portions/amounts until you learn to judge without a prop. Or you can weigh your food for ever, it is just up to you and what works better to achieve your goals.

tomteboda

I'm apparently not very detail-oriented tonight. Correction on wild rice:

savithny

As others have said, the actual testing of foods in a bomb calorimeter for energy content is absolutely done by weight and not by volume. If the volume and the weight don't match, it is 100% the volume that is incorrect, and not the weight.