You don't use a food scale?
Options
Replies
-
When I began 2 years ago, I did not have a food scale.
When I began 2 years ago, I learned that using measuring cups was prone to getting more than the intended amount.
When I began 2 years ago, I decided that my vegetables would be a portion of 1/2 cup. Knowing that I'd be over-guessing if I used a 1/2 cup measure, I used a 1/3 cup measure.
When I got a scale 2 years ago, I measured how much beans were in a 1/3 cup measure.
Now when I want beans, I measure 78 grams.
17 -
I use a food scale for every thing12
-
Lesson learned going to do my best to measure everything on my scale5
-
Glad someone did a post about this, hopefully all the panicking newbies will read it.4
-
sexysizeme wrote: »Lesson learned going to do my best to measure everything on my scale
Yay! Tell what what you find out. It’s always interesting to learn what happens.2 -
I picked up a food scale last week and haven't thought to use it yet, thanks for the reminder!6
-
I have one but I hadn't been using it for everything. Today I weighed a banana (unpeeled) for the first time. This was an average size banana (definitely have eaten bigger and smaller ones) and it was 40 calories more (once I weighed it and took the USDA value) than the banana that is "medium" in the database. So for 6 months I've been using that "medium" and underestimating most of the time for a banana.
I also weighed a thick slice of bacon for the first time. (First time weighing my bacon at all). For thick slices I had been using the calorie equivalent of "2 slices" in the database. In the first place, I had no idea how big those slices were. I was just lazy. Sometimes I'd look on the package but the bacon I have this week has no information--it was fresh from a butcher. Anyway, ONE thick slice was 70 calories more than the "two slices" in the database. So had I not weighed the bacon and the banana today, I would have eaten 110 calories extra that I didn't realize. I'm weighing everything today!!25 -
shandy82165 wrote: »Jeepfreak81 wrote: »We're trying to weigh more of our stuff, our dinner gets weighed as best we can and usually I have leftovers for lunch so that gets weighed too. Prepacked stuff I don't weigh, but I've started weighing snacks I bring to work like crackers and such and I've definitely been estimating 10-20% low
You might want to be aware that many pre-packaged foods don't weigh the same as their serving size suggests. For example, I bought some flour tortillas once that had a weight in grams for a single tortilla, but when I weighed the tortilla it weighed a full 30% more than the package claimed.
That happens to me with my favorite flatbread, Flatouts Lite. 90 calories a flatbread - but the weight for the flatbread is supposed to be 53g. Most of them are actually 59g. Now that does only translate to about a 10 calorie difference - when you are needing to be extremely careful with calories the closer you get to goal this could make a difference. I also noticed it with English muffins too.
I have not weighed frozen meals though I probably should. Right now I am losing on a regular, steady basis so I'm going to let that ride for now.7 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Since it comes up so often, if you're looking to buy a food scale you don't need anything fancy. A friend of mine bought hers on eBay for $8. Mine cost about $20, but I didn't shop around and just bought what I could at Target. You want a scale that has a tare button (they all should) and can switch between ounces and grams easily. If you're cooking big pots of food for a family or weekly batches, then the ability to weigh heavy loads will be nice (11 pounds is a common upper limit for food scales). Other than that, get the cheap one unless you have very specialized needs.
I paid about $30 for the EatSmart scale on Amazon that has a weight limit of 15 lbs. I chose this one because it has a large platform and a very large, easy to read display - my other scale ($10 at Walmart) had a much smaller display .
2 -
lucerorojo wrote: »I have one but I hadn't been using it for everything. Today I weighed a banana (unpeeled) for the first time. This was an average size banana (definitely have eaten bigger and smaller ones) and it was 40 calories more (once I weighed it and took the USDA value) than the banana that is "medium" in the database. So for 6 months I've been using that "medium" and underestimating most of the time for a banana.
I also weighed a thick slice of bacon for the first time. (First time weighing my bacon at all). For thick slices I had been using the calorie equivalent of "2 slices" in the database. In the first place, I had no idea how big those slices were. I was just lazy. Sometimes I'd look on the package but the bacon I have this week has no information--it was fresh from a butcher. Anyway, ONE thick slice was 70 calories more than the "two slices" in the database. So had I not weighed the bacon and the banana today, I would have eaten 110 calories extra that I didn't realize. I'm weighing everything today!!
I can't bear those database entries that jus say '1 piece' or '1 slice' etc. That tells me nothing without a reference point of how big the piece or slice is. They're just useless really.19 -
I weigh my calorie-dense foods and use measuring cups for my liquids. For example, today at bfast, I weighed my shredded wheat at 70g and my banana was 120g, but I measured one cup of milk. At lunch, I made a salad, but the only ingredients I actually weighed were the feta cheese and avocado. I can eyeball my cucumber, tomatoes, spinach, and kale. They don't add very many calories to my lunch. And even if I'm slightly off, it takes too much time to prepare the salad if I weigh them too.
Honestly, you can get carried away with all this weighing, and if you've been doing it for months, it will get tedious. If it becomes a fixation, there's a chance you won't enjoy eating out from time to time or sharing a meal at someone else's house.
Don't let it rule you.
If you do a reasonable job of logging your food (and weighing the high calorie stuff) and you don't eat back ALL your exercise calories, you probably won't need to worry about being a few grams off here and there. The only problem I can see is if you maximize your calorie allotment every day without weighing anything and you also overestimate your exercise.
I'm only responding to this because this thread is geared towards new members.
If the above, regarding weighing high calorie stuff and not eating all your exercise calories, works for a person, great. However, a salad is ridiculously easy to weigh. Place plate/bowl on scale and tare, add kale and write down weight and tare, add spinach and write down weight and tare, add tomatoes and write down weight and tare, etc. How could it possibly be easier?! That hardly adds tons of time to prepping a salad.
Also, I really dislike it when others label those who weigh most of their food as "fixated" or "obsessed." A scale is an incredibly easy tool to use. If you're logging already, using a scale doesn't add a big complication. Again, if reducing portion sizes or weighing only high-calorie stuff works for someone, good for them, but it doesn't make everyone else obsessed.
Having used a scale for years now, I'm very happy to have it. It's simple and I know I'm being more accurate than if I eye-balled. It's actually very freeing for me, and I've seen others say the same. I don't eat out regularly, mostly because I think most restaurants around here are mediocre and I don't fancy paying for food that's just so-so, but I don't panic if I eat out. I've been logging long enough that I feel comfortable estimating meals out. I've been on MFP on and off since 2011 (I think, maybe 2012), but very consistently over the past several years. It becomes easier and easier for me, not tedious.40 -
Just to reiterate the importance of weighing packaged products, the flat bread I eat for lunch often is packaged as 1 bread = 56g = 100 calories. Today's weighed 66g, a difference of 18 calories. No, not much but over time and multiplied throughout the day, it can add up, particularly if you've got a small deficit to begin with.
Not sure why the pics are sideways. Sorry
12 -
lucerorojo wrote: »I have one but I hadn't been using it for everything. Today I weighed a banana (unpeeled) for the first time. This was an average size banana (definitely have eaten bigger and smaller ones) and it was 40 calories more (once I weighed it and took the USDA value) than the banana that is "medium" in the database. So for 6 months I've been using that "medium" and underestimating most of the time for a banana.
I also weighed a thick slice of bacon for the first time. (First time weighing my bacon at all). For thick slices I had been using the calorie equivalent of "2 slices" in the database. In the first place, I had no idea how big those slices were. I was just lazy. Sometimes I'd look on the package but the bacon I have this week has no information--it was fresh from a butcher. Anyway, ONE thick slice was 70 calories more than the "two slices" in the database. So had I not weighed the bacon and the banana today, I would have eaten 110 calories extra that I didn't realize. I'm weighing everything today!!
I can't bear those database entries that jus say '1 piece' or '1 slice' etc. That tells me nothing without a reference point of how big the piece or slice is. They're just useless really.
Well they aren't useless for the person who made them! I knew that there was no reference but I was lazy. I didn't realize it would be "that" off. I think that a lot of newbies don't realize that they are user generated and believe that they are "correct." Whenever I make a recipe or add a food I do NOT add it to the database. No need for me to add to the confusion. When I had a large deficit of 1000 calories it didn't make much difference, but now at 500 cals I need to be more precise.3 -
alwaysbloated wrote: »I stopped using a food scale because they kept breaking. I'm on my third one now, *fingers crossed*
Well not breaking, but these funny numbers kept appearing on the screen when I tried to change the functions and then it would freeze. I'm wondering if I need a non electronic scale to compare numbers with.
Is yours battery operated? I noticed that the battery icon was not fully charged on the screen and I ordered some new batteries. It hadn't yet died but it was acting weird. I changed the battery today and the battery icon is still not full but it is working faster and better now.1 -
lucerorojo wrote: »
I also weighed a thick slice of bacon for the first time. (First time weighing my bacon at all). For thick slices I had been using the calorie equivalent of "2 slices" in the database. In the first place, I had no idea how big those slices were. I was just lazy. Sometimes I'd look on the package but the bacon I have this week has no information--it was fresh from a butcher. Anyway, ONE thick slice was 70 calories more than the "two slices" in the database. So had I not weighed the bacon and the banana today, I would have eaten 110 calories extra that I didn't realize. I'm weighing everything today!!
Just wanted to point out that typically the serving weight for bacon is listed for "pan-fried". Raw bacon will be much heavier. I can't remember ever having bacon that ended up being more than the serving weight for the designated number of slices.2 -
lucerorojo wrote: »
Well they aren't useless for the person who made them! I knew that there was no reference but I was lazy. I didn't realize it would be "that" off. I think that a lot of newbies don't realize that they are user generated and believe that they are "correct." Whenever I make a recipe or add a food I do NOT add it to the database.
No, I don't add it either unless I'm able to give an accurate breakdown of the nutrients per 100g. It's rare I find something that's not in the database and needs adding though.
0 -
lucerorojo wrote: »I have one but I hadn't been using it for everything. Today I weighed a banana (unpeeled) for the first time. This was an average size banana (definitely have eaten bigger and smaller ones) and it was 40 calories more (once I weighed it and took the USDA value) than the banana that is "medium" in the database. So for 6 months I've been using that "medium" and underestimating most of the time for a banana.
I also weighed a thick slice of bacon for the first time. (First time weighing my bacon at all). For thick slices I had been using the calorie equivalent of "2 slices" in the database. In the first place, I had no idea how big those slices were. I was just lazy. Sometimes I'd look on the package but the bacon I have this week has no information--it was fresh from a butcher. Anyway, ONE thick slice was 70 calories more than the "two slices" in the database. So had I not weighed the bacon and the banana today, I would have eaten 110 calories extra that I didn't realize. I'm weighing everything today!!
I can't bear those database entries that jus say '1 piece' or '1 slice' etc. That tells me nothing without a reference point of how big the piece or slice is. They're just useless really.
I agree. Also "bowl." A bowl can range in size from a half cup dessert bowl to a cereal type bowl to a much larger soup bowl and even those distinctions vary!!!5 -
diannethegeek wrote: »This image is about plate sizes, but I think it demonstrates how bad our eyeballing can be sometimes:
Super helpful and eye opening. Thanks!7
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 911 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions