Recipe calorie math and water evaporation?

guimonro
guimonro Posts: 1 Member
edited November 13 in Recipes
I have a question:

If I set up a recipe in the app for calorie counting purposes, how can the app adjust weights and portions to account for water loss?

For example, I like to make vegetable & meat stews. And I like to cook them for a long time on low heat. That means that a significant amount of water is lost during cooking. Later, if I want to eat a portion of said stew, won't the app simply calculate the caloric values based on the raw ingredients? That means the amount of calories per weight in the actual meal will be much higher than the app's estimate, since a ton of water weight was lost by evaporation.

How do I compensate for this?

Replies

  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.
  • pebble4321
    pebble4321 Posts: 1,132 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    This is a very good way to do it.

    But if you want to simplify it even more, you can enter a number of portions (4 or 6 serves, for example) then just estimate 1/4 or 1/6 of the finished dish as your serve.

    This works well if you are only cooking for yourself, as the calories balance out by the time you've eaten it all.
    It is more of an estimate if you are cooking for others too.

    Note that in both these examples we are talking about using MFP's recipe builder tool.
  • mlbish624
    mlbish624 Posts: 33 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    This is the exact thing I was coming to ask about. Can anyone comment on the accuracy of this? Do you feel this is a good method?

    I assume MFP rounds to the nearest gram? So my recipe could be 1.49 calories per gram and it would still be counted as 1? Does this bother anybody?

    Looking for wisdom/experience on the total grams = # servings method.

    (Context: My question is prompted by a batch of chili that I added into My Recipes using the grams as number of servings method that is so freaking delicious and filling that it seems too good to be true it's only 1 gram per serving.)
  • CyberTone
    CyberTone Posts: 7,337 Member
    mlbish624 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    This is the exact thing I was coming to ask about. Can anyone comment on the accuracy of this? Do you feel this is a good method?

    I assume MFP rounds to the nearest gram? So my recipe could be 1.49 calories per gram and it would still be counted as 1? Does this bother anybody?

    Looking for wisdom/experience on the total grams = # servings method.

    (Context: My question is prompted by a batch of chili that I added into My Recipes using the grams as number of servings method that is so freaking delicious and filling that it seems too good to be true it's only 1 gram per serving.)

    As far as I can tell (I do not usually set a Recipe Serving Size to one gram and have not tested this), the equations should calculate and save the per gram amounts of Calories and nutrients to multiple decimal places (not sure how many decimal places), then truncate only the display number to an integer. You can test this by sequentially adding 10 servings, 100 servings, 1000 servings to your Food Diary, then noting if the Calories and nutrients increase properly as the decimal point moves.
  • sllm1
    sllm1 Posts: 2,130 Member
    CyberTone wrote: »
    mlbish624 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    This is the exact thing I was coming to ask about. Can anyone comment on the accuracy of this? Do you feel this is a good method?

    I assume MFP rounds to the nearest gram? So my recipe could be 1.49 calories per gram and it would still be counted as 1? Does this bother anybody?

    Looking for wisdom/experience on the total grams = # servings method.

    (Context: My question is prompted by a batch of chili that I added into My Recipes using the grams as number of servings method that is so freaking delicious and filling that it seems too good to be true it's only 1 gram per serving.)

    As far as I can tell (I do not usually set a Recipe Serving Size to one gram and have not tested this), the equations should calculate and save the per gram amounts of Calories and nutrients to multiple decimal places (not sure how many decimal places), then truncate only the display number to an integer. You can test this by sequentially adding 10 servings, 100 servings, 1000 servings to your Food Diary, then noting if the Calories and nutrients increase properly as the decimal point moves.

    This was my thought.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    CyberTone wrote: »
    mlbish624 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    This is the exact thing I was coming to ask about. Can anyone comment on the accuracy of this? Do you feel this is a good method?

    I assume MFP rounds to the nearest gram? So my recipe could be 1.49 calories per gram and it would still be counted as 1? Does this bother anybody?

    Looking for wisdom/experience on the total grams = # servings method.

    (Context: My question is prompted by a batch of chili that I added into My Recipes using the grams as number of servings method that is so freaking delicious and filling that it seems too good to be true it's only 1 gram per serving.)

    As far as I can tell (I do not usually set a Recipe Serving Size to one gram and have not tested this), the equations should calculate and save the per gram amounts of Calories and nutrients to multiple decimal places (not sure how many decimal places), then truncate only the display number to an integer. You can test this by sequentially adding 10 servings, 100 servings, 1000 servings to your Food Diary, then noting if the Calories and nutrients increase properly as the decimal point moves.

    Yes, MFP rounds up, that's all, but they still remember the exact amount.
  • kgirlhart
    kgirlhart Posts: 5,167 Member
    I usually set the serving size as the final weight of the recipe. Then if the total weight is 500 g and I eat 125 g I log .25 servings. I think the most important thing i just to be consistent. It is all an estimate. You just want the best estimate you can get, but nothing will be 100% accurate.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,093 Member
    mlbish624 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    This is the exact thing I was coming to ask about. Can anyone comment on the accuracy of this? Do you feel this is a good method?

    I assume MFP rounds to the nearest gram? So my recipe could be 1.49 calories per gram and it would still be counted as 1? Does this bother anybody?

    Looking for wisdom/experience on the total grams = # servings method.

    (Context: My question is prompted by a batch of chili that I added into My Recipes using the grams as number of servings method that is so freaking delicious and filling that it seems too good to be true it's only 1 gram per serving.)


    No, as others are saying, rounding is only for display purposes; more decimal places are remembered. Almost all of my recipes display as 0 calories when I set the servings equal to total weight of recipe in grams (because of the water content of food, there's less than .5 calories per gram), but when I log multiple servings, they don't show up as zero calories, which they would if MFP weren't remembering the extra decimal places.
  • Evamutt
    Evamutt Posts: 2,757 Member
    I've been doing it by the cup as servings but the grams seems like a better way
  • CyberTone
    CyberTone Posts: 7,337 Member
    Evamutt wrote: »
    I've been doing it by the cup as servings but the grams seems like a better way

    There are many different ways to do this. I started my weight loss using only measuring cups and spoons and no food scale, so even after getting a scale, I still use cups as the basis for many of my Recipes, but I also now weigh everything.

    For soups, stews, and other one-pot Recipes, I prefer to set my Recipes in 230g increments (about one U.S. measuring cup), so that I can either weigh out a portion in grams or just grab a measuring cup. I will add water to make the total weight an increment of 230g; such as adding enough water to make the total weight 18 x 230g = 4140g for 18 one-cup servings. Then I use the following information in the Title of the Recipe so that it shows up in my Food Diary.

    Recipe Name Format:

    Recipe - [Keywords] [Date] [Total_Weight] [Number_of_Servings] [Weight_per_Serving] [Calories_per_Serving]

    Example:

    Recipe - Jambalaya, Chicken Chorizo Mussels 2015.10.03 4140g 18Srv 230g 169Cals
  • mlbish624
    mlbish624 Posts: 33 Member
    CyberTone wrote: »
    mlbish624 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Enter your ingredients raw, weigh the final product, put the number of grams as number of servings, then just weigh your portion.

    As far as I can tell (I do not usually set a Recipe Serving Size to one gram and have not tested this), the equations should calculate and save the per gram amounts of Calories and nutrients to multiple decimal places (not sure how many decimal places), then truncate only the display number to an integer. You can test this by sequentially adding 10 servings, 100 servings, 1000 servings to your Food Diary, then noting if the Calories and nutrients increase properly as the decimal point moves.

    Thanks! That's helpful. I definitely did not test it, but I'm glad someone is knowledgeable about this!! I can deal with an integer display as long as it's more accurate for calculating.
  • lorrpb
    lorrpb Posts: 11,463 Member
    Enter the serving size as 1 gram. Weigh your portion. If it's 10 grams, then enter 10 servings.
    As for water evaporating, you don't lose "a ton" of weight from evaporation. Its prob not as much as you think. Estimate. If you estimate that 2 cups evaporates out of a big pot of soup, then just enter 2 c less when you build the recipe.
This discussion has been closed.