How or can I get the figures of the nutrition facts from a recipes ?

grandmagege
grandmagege Posts: 42 Member
edited November 18 in Health and Weight Loss
Hi I'm a cookbook collector. not a good thing when I need to lose weight. But I just bought more and one doesn't have the nutrition facts. How do people figure out these things?

Replies

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    I use the recipe builder on this website.
  • grandmagege
    grandmagege Posts: 42 Member
    wow where do I find that?
  • heiliskrimsli
    heiliskrimsli Posts: 735 Member
    edited May 2017
    It's on the Food tab under Recipes.

    For cookbook you can do "Add recipe manually".

    Or use this:

    Recipe Calculator
  • Tried30UserNames
    Tried30UserNames Posts: 561 Member
    I find the recipe builder difficult to use.

    For recipes, I tend to just look up the calorie counts of each recipe item online (USDA website or calorieking or nutritiondata or similar) and write it down on a piece of paper. It's easier for me than trying to wade through all the varied items in the data bank here and figure out which items are correct and which are way off.
  • grandmagege
    grandmagege Posts: 42 Member
    Thank you both :) I will try both ways. I love this site and I don't know why I keep paying for other sites.
  • danigirl1011
    danigirl1011 Posts: 314 Member
    I do the same where i add the recipe in here and the number of servings and save it and then every time i log it i know i'm getting the right amount
  • French_Peasant
    French_Peasant Posts: 1,639 Member
    I find the recipe builder difficult to use.

    For recipes, I tend to just look up the calorie counts of each recipe item online (USDA website or calorieking or nutritiondata or similar) and write it down on a piece of paper. It's easier for me than trying to wade through all the varied items in the data bank here and figure out which items are correct and which are way off.

    Recipe Builder can be a pain in the butt, and you are right that you have to go through things with a fine-toothed comb because it will import some crazy-@ss ingredients. I learned the hard way to enter "Gold Medal all purpose flour" or domino granulated cane sugar" or any ingredient in grams with USDA in the title, and I also have problems adjusting the recipe, especially from my phone or tablet.

    That being said...once you have the recipe in there, it is always there, so if you have something you make frequently, it is well worth the effort to navigate the system and have it in your recipe bank. That way you don't have to hand-calculate every time and/or ride herd on little scraps of paper (although you could always write it in the cookbook next to the actual recipe).

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,052 Member
    I find the recipe builder difficult to use.

    For recipes, I tend to just look up the calorie counts of each recipe item online (USDA website or calorieking or nutritiondata or similar) and write it down on a piece of paper. It's easier for me than trying to wade through all the varied items in the data bank here and figure out which items are correct and which are way off.

    I agree the database is full of useless or duplicate entries. This is one reason why I won't pay for Premium, which uses the same cluttered DB.

    Also, the green check marks are used for both user-created entries and system entries. To find system entries for whole foods, I get the syntax from the USDA database and plug that into MFP.

    For packaged foods, I verify the label against what I find in MFP.
  • grandmagege
    grandmagege Posts: 42 Member
    I used it tonight and it worked great for my first one. 494 cal. each serving that's a lot.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    always double check entries - there are some funky ones (3000cal garlic for example)
  • Rebecca0224
    Rebecca0224 Posts: 810 Member
    always double check entries - there are some funky ones (3000cal garlic for example)

    This, I often find entries that are way off.
This discussion has been closed.