Sneaky Calories
Replies
-
Slightly off-topic I go through a rough time every Passover. I'm vegetarian, not vegan. But with most grains and legumes off-limits to me for eight days, my main protein sources are eggs (in almost every recipe already), dairy (would be fine except mixing meat and dairy at the table is a big no-no and Passover involves a lot of big family meals, which means everyone around me is having meat. Seriously, to suggest otherwise would be a bit like asking folks at Thanksgiving to consider a cheese souffle in lieu of turkey. Just... won't be done.), nuts and quinoa.
I got by this past holiday by taking a maintenance break, correctly anticipating that the limited protein sources would both be higher in calories and probably impact my satiety levels. Still had a hard time hitting my protein target, but... eight days out of the year. Family get-togethers. Etc, etc.1 -
Nothing is sneaky if you log and weigh your food properly. It took a lot of "label reading" for me to find out, calorie wise, what felt "worth it" to me. Just read your labels! Just because it says it's healthy, doesn't mean it is.2
-
skybleu329 wrote: »What are some healthy foods that can be sneaky on calories.....
Was also wondering if cottage cheese is sneaky in calories as well..
Look at the nutrition label...it's right there on the label...4 -
StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says2 -
I seem to remember a poster on here whose aunt was deliberately sabotaging her weight loss efforts by putting butter in her coffee when she wasn't looking. Now that's some sneaky calories!8
-
skybleu329 wrote: »What are some healthy foods that can be sneaky on calories.....
Was also wondering if cottage cheese is sneaky in calories as well..
The low-fat cottage cheese isn't too bad on calories, especially for the amount of protein it contains.1 -
I think it just depends on expectations. As others have said, a lot of foods are considered "healthy" but aren't actually low calorie, so you expect them to be lower calorie than they actually are. For example:
1. Quinoa - people talk about it like it's a super food and I ate it every day for the first month or two trying to lose weight before I joined MFP, but it's not low calorie at all. It's pretty similar to rice which is very high calorie, imo. I guess people like it because it has more protein than other grains, but unless you're vegan there are way more "calorie efficient" ways to get your protein.
2. Dates - they can be hidden calories for some people because you assume "it's a fruit, it's healthy!" They aren't *that* high in calories, but if you plan to eat a whole cup or something, it's not going to be 25 calories like it might be with another fruit.
3. Ground turkey - it's not really high in calories, but it's higher than people think it is; people assume it's lower in calories than ground beef, but if you get lean ground beef, it's pretty much the same or sometimes turkey is even higher.
4. Coconut oil - a lot of "healthy" recipes use coconut oil in place of butter - it has just as many calories so I think that's tricky for some people.
5. Nuts - they are straight-up calorie bombs. I think it's like quinoa. A lot of vegan "healthy" bloggers swear by nuts so people assume they're lower calories than other foods; they're not. If you aren't vegan, there are way more "calorie efficient" ways to get enough protein.
#3 - yes!.. ground turkey comes in varying ratios just like ground beef. My usual store carries 93/7 beef, but only 85/15 ground turkey.
#4- I'm not really sure where this "coconut oil is awesome and healthy" thing even came from. I use it for some stuff where I want a solid or at least thicker consistency oil at room temperature.
#5 - yep. nuts are an integral part of trail mix for a reason (you are trying to cram as many calories into a small volume and weight as possible).1 -
Smoothies. They can be glorified milkshakes. After x pieces of fruit, add ons like honey, wheat grass, protein powders, peanut butter, yogurt, milk, juices, and sometimes even ice cream it can be a huge total.5
-
I wouldn't call them "sneaky", but the assumption that nutritious = low calorie is incorrect.3
-
animatorswearbras wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
Oh my god croissants! I remember checking the calories of one after I'd eaten it, 600cals! How the *kitten* it's 80% *kitten* fresh air! lol
You make them by folding a pound of butter into the dough over and over bam calories3 -
collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says
I was commenting, similar to jesspen91, that the serving size caught me out. So you second option. Was/is that something that I shouldn't have done?
I'm still confused. "To be fair".... To who?3 -
It's food, so I wouldn't call it sneaky. But food packaging/labeling can certainly be misleading. You really need to watch serving sizes. The biggest eye-opener for me was that ONE stupid pop-tart is a serving, not 2 as they are packaged.3
-
Cottage cheese is the opposite of sneaky calories. It has a great calorie to protein ratio. And never mind that low fat stuff IMHO. Fat is delicious and satiating!1
-
It's food, so I wouldn't call it sneaky. But food packaging/labeling can certainly be misleading. You really need to watch serving sizes. The biggest eye-opener for me was that ONE stupid pop-tart is a serving, not 2 as they are packaged.
Yeah, you really have to pay attention. We had donuts the other day, I looked at the calories - 350. Thought, well, that's not too bad. And then read the rest of the label - a serving size was 1/2 a donut. Decided it wasn't worth that many calories for a measly 1/2 donut. I can eat a nice big bowl of ice cream for that many calories!4 -
CONDIMENTS DAMN YOU!2
-
It's food, so I wouldn't call it sneaky. But food packaging/labeling can certainly be misleading. You really need to watch serving sizes. The biggest eye-opener for me was that ONE stupid pop-tart is a serving, not 2 as they are packaged.
Yeah, you really have to pay attention. We had donuts the other day, I looked at the calories - 350. Thought, well, that's not too bad. And then read the rest of the label - a serving size was 1/2 a donut. Decided it wasn't worth that many calories for a measly 1/2 donut. I can eat a nice big bowl of ice cream for that many calories!
Yikes. What kind of donuts is that?0 -
It's food, so I wouldn't call it sneaky. But food packaging/labeling can certainly be misleading. You really need to watch serving sizes. The biggest eye-opener for me was that ONE stupid pop-tart is a serving, not 2 as they are packaged.
YES! And Amy's Frozen Enchiladas. One package has 2 enchiladas (a nice little frozen lunch), but the calories listed are only for 1 enchilada! Got to keep those eyes sharp
0 -
SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I seem to remember a poster on here whose aunt was deliberately sabotaging her weight loss efforts by putting butter in her coffee when she wasn't looking. Now that's some sneaky calories!
@JaydedMiss this was you, yes? How's the aunt?0 -
collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says
Yes, cereal is a good example of this. Who would ever think to eat just an ounce of cereal?0 -
It's food, so I wouldn't call it sneaky. But food packaging/labeling can certainly be misleading. You really need to watch serving sizes. The biggest eye-opener for me was that ONE stupid pop-tart is a serving, not 2 as they are packaged.
Yeah, you really have to pay attention. We had donuts the other day, I looked at the calories - 350. Thought, well, that's not too bad. And then read the rest of the label - a serving size was 1/2 a donut. Decided it wasn't worth that many calories for a measly 1/2 donut. I can eat a nice big bowl of ice cream for that many calories!
Yikes. What kind of donuts is that?
It was a chocolate donut - had a thick chocolate coating. Was a package I picked up at Costco, think it was Franz. I knew it was calorific, but 700 for one donut surprised me.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says
Yes, cereal is a good example of this. Who would ever think to eat just an ounce of cereal?
I do? I usually have about 35 grams worth, which is slightly more than an ounce. If I have the calories to spare in the day, I'll bump up to 50 grams, so just shy of 2 ounces. That always feels like a lot to me.
You can learn to be satisfied on less.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »SuzySunshine99 wrote: »I seem to remember a poster on here whose aunt was deliberately sabotaging her weight loss efforts by putting butter in her coffee when she wasn't looking. Now that's some sneaky calories!
@JaydedMiss this was you, yes? How's the aunt?
LOL ye that was me. She stopped when i began doing it back LOL7 -
collectingblues wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says
Yes, cereal is a good example of this. Who would ever think to eat just an ounce of cereal?
I do? I usually have about 35 grams worth, which is slightly more than an ounce. If I have the calories to spare in the day, I'll bump up to 50 grams, so just shy of 2 ounces. That always feels like a lot to me.
You can learn to be satisfied on less.
Is this always how you ate cereal or learned behavior once you started looking to lose weight?0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says
Yes, cereal is a good example of this. Who would ever think to eat just an ounce of cereal?
I do? I usually have about 35 grams worth, which is slightly more than an ounce. If I have the calories to spare in the day, I'll bump up to 50 grams, so just shy of 2 ounces. That always feels like a lot to me.
You can learn to be satisfied on less.
Is this always how you ate cereal or learned behavior once you started looking to lose weight?
Hard to tell, really. I didn't use to be a cereal person until I realized that I was OK with the amount that a serving size was, and that it was a good breakfast to replace my regular latte. And that was after I started tracking on MFP -- I've tracked for five years now.
But, regardless, you can still learn to be satisfied on less food. I was *shocked* when I first started Weight Watchers and saw what a "normal" portion size was for, say, rice, compared to what I was eating. That was a rougher adjustment, but a good lesson to learn.1 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »From the title i thought this would be about the spiders and moths people eat in thier sleep
Right? How do you log those?0 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »From the title i thought this would be about the spiders and moths people eat in thier sleep
Right? How do you log those?
There are listings for insects and generic insects in the database! Lol!2 -
newheavensearth wrote: »ruqayyahsmum wrote: »From the title i thought this would be about the spiders and moths people eat in thier sleep
Right? How do you log those?
There are listings for insects and generic insects in the database! Lol!
My favorite thread of all time:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10436997/i-swallowed-a-bug/p1
0 -
ruqayyahsmum wrote: »From the title i thought this would be about the spiders and moths people eat in thier sleep
Right? How do you log those?
Apparently after researchers filmed folks for a year the average is 6 spiders a year so log on a bi-monthly basis one medium spider raw?3 -
Nothing is sneaky if the calories are on the package and you track them.1
-
kshama2001 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »Food labels can be sneaky when the serving size is a ridiculous size that no one can eat. I've been caught out a few times like this when I've not been concentrating. One example was a croissant where the calories were listed for a serving size of 1/3rd of the croissant. Who eats 1/3rd of a croissant?
I've mentioned this before and I will again (such is my pain at the discovery) but Pop Tarts - sold in boxes, inside the box is a silver plastic pouch which contains 2 pop tarts. I assumed that the nutritional information was for one serving, i.e. a pouch containing 2 pop tarts - but No!! a pouch is 2 servings!! The cruel, cruel *kitten*!!
Now, too be fair, there's quite a difference between "I didn't check the nutrition" and "I saw the nutrition and didn't agree with the serving."
If you want to budget 400 calories for Pop Tarts, take both -- but that's a pretty big breakfast. If you're happy with the recommended size as one for a snack of breakfast, then you can get away with 200.
re: The stuff in bold. I don't think I understand what you're saying.
"I didn't check the nutrition" = I didn't bother to read the label and I think the calories were sneaky
"I saw the nutrition and I didn't agree with the serving" = I read the label, and I think that a serving is really more than the label says
Yes, cereal is a good example of this. Who would ever think to eat just an ounce of cereal?
I do? I usually have about 35 grams worth, which is slightly more than an ounce. If I have the calories to spare in the day, I'll bump up to 50 grams, so just shy of 2 ounces. That always feels like a lot to me.
You can learn to be satisfied on less.
Is this always how you ate cereal or learned behavior once you started looking to lose weight?
Giving my 2 cents here, when I was a kid, my mom used to buy those individual boxes of cereal, so I always knew what a serving is supposed to be like.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions