You don't use a food scale?
Replies
-
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
What brand of flat bread is that? The whole thing is 100 calories give or take that's really good.
Great example!
I love Lender's Whole Wheat bagels. The bag states they are 81g. I've found that I have to weigh them. Some are as much as 97g and some are 77g.
4 -
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »
I weigh mine frozen. I experimented once by weighing a batch frozen and then letting them thaw and weighing again and they weighed the same, so I don't bother worrying about it anymore.9 -
4 -
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.
I don't have photos for proof, but I remember that some time ago I was using full packages of Maple Leaf "Ready Crisp" bacon in a recipe. I didn't bother to weigh the contents - I just went by the package info of it containing 65g, presuming that it wouldn't be too different, and multiplied the nutrition info accordingly.
One day, I decided to weigh the package contents, just to see how far off it might be.
My "65g" turned out to be something like 119. That's a heck of a lot more than 20% inaccuracy!
Great if you're getting more for your money than you'd thought, not so great if the calorie count of one of your ingredients has suddenly doubled.10 -
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.
I don't have photos for proof, but I remember that some time ago I was using full packages of Maple Leaf "Ready Crisp" bacon in a recipe. I didn't bother to weigh the contents - I just went by the package info of it containing 65g, presuming that it wouldn't be too different, and multiplied the nutrition info accordingly.
One day, I decided to weigh the package contents, just to see how far off it might be.
My "65g" turned out to be something like 119. That's a heck of a lot more than 20% inaccuracy!
Great if you're getting more for your money than you'd thought, not so great if the calorie count of one of your ingredients has suddenly doubled.
Wow. That's one of the more significant inaccuracies I've seen.1 -
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.
I don't have photos for proof, but I remember that some time ago I was using full packages of Maple Leaf "Ready Crisp" bacon in a recipe. I didn't bother to weigh the contents - I just went by the package info of it containing 65g, presuming that it wouldn't be too different, and multiplied the nutrition info accordingly.
One day, I decided to weigh the package contents, just to see how far off it might be.
My "65g" turned out to be something like 119. That's a heck of a lot more than 20% inaccuracy!
Great if you're getting more for your money than you'd thought, not so great if the calorie count of one of your ingredients has suddenly doubled.
Wow. That's one of the largest inaccuracies I've ever seen.1 -
5 -
-
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.
I don't have photos for proof, but I remember that some time ago I was using full packages of Maple Leaf "Ready Crisp" bacon in a recipe. I didn't bother to weigh the contents - I just went by the package info of it containing 65g, presuming that it wouldn't be too different, and multiplied the nutrition info accordingly.
One day, I decided to weigh the package contents, just to see how far off it might be.
My "65g" turned out to be something like 119. That's a heck of a lot more than 20% inaccuracy!
Great if you're getting more for your money than you'd thought, not so great if the calorie count of one of your ingredients has suddenly doubled.
That is one of the biggest inaccuracies I've ever seen.1 -
So has anyone actually done comparisons like this in real life? Does it ever work out the opposite way (where a serving by grams actually ends up being more than a serving by volume) or do you think in general, you usually end up overeating by not weighing? I normally weigh my food but have never done a comparison before.0
-
jessiferrrb wrote: »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.
i wanted to add to this a little bit to include a strategy that works really well for me when i want to add things quickly and painlessly. the example i'll stick with is salad, but i do this for a lot of recipes that i use a lot. i eat chopped salad really often. and i make it in several variations. so i started by creating a recipe in the recipe builder.
i put a large salad bowl on the food scale, chopped the first ingredient and added it to the bowl. then i searched the database for the ingredient as follows "baby spinach usda 100 grams" when i find the correct entry i adjust for the weight of what's in the bowl and move onto the next ingredient. when all is said and done, this gives me my base for chopped salad.
now the next time i make it i may use slightly different stuff depending on what i have on hand. i may add feta cheese. use a different brand of spiced nuts (for crunch), i may be out of red peppers but have a ripe avocado that needs to be used. i use the same recipe. zero out anything i'm not using in the quantity and add any new items. different brands i swap out using the "find replacement" function. if you just zero out the quantities the calories adjust correctly but the ingredient remains in the recipe.
by the time i've made a few variations pretty much every ingredient will be in the recipe so i don't have to search the database anymore. i just scroll through and adjust my quantities as i toss ingredients in. the whole process is painless and i find it pretty useful in any recipe that has a standard base. i eat greek yogurt based quiche pretty frequently as well and so the crust and filling are pre-entered along with most of my standard add ins and the weighing and logging takes virtually no extra time.
I do something similar, but I store the salad or smoothie or oatmeal with all the possible toppings I use, etc., as a meal (under the "my meals" tab) instead of as a recipe. That way, after I log the meal and delete any ingredients I'm not using, they're still saved in the meal, and I don't have to add them back the next time I want to log a salad or whatever. If you use any new ingredient that you think you'll use in the future, add it before you start deleting items you didn't use, save the meal and choose "replace existing meal," and then delete the ingredients you didn't use. Plus, deleting is a two-stop process in the recipes function, but it's only one click if you delete an ingredient after you log the meal.3 -
So has anyone actually done comparisons like this in real life? Does it ever work out the opposite way (where a serving by grams actually ends up being more than a serving by volume) or do you think in general, you usually end up overeating by not weighing? I normally weigh my food but have never done a comparison before.
On peanut butter. 2 leveled tablespoons were more than 32 grams, but I can't remember how much more. Maybe 37 grams?1 -
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.
I don't have photos for proof, but I remember that some time ago I was using full packages of Maple Leaf "Ready Crisp" bacon in a recipe. I didn't bother to weigh the contents - I just went by the package info of it containing 65g, presuming that it wouldn't be too different, and multiplied the nutrition info accordingly.
One day, I decided to weigh the package contents, just to see how far off it might be.
My "65g" turned out to be something like 119. That's a heck of a lot more than 20% inaccuracy!
Great if you're getting more for your money than you'd thought, not so great if the calorie count of one of your ingredients has suddenly doubled.
I find myself judging companies by how accurate their product is vs the label
Like the Quest protein powder packets I have ordered are pretty much spot on, so I like them even more! But your bacon thing would make me crazy, even if it was 'in my favor.' 0 -
Food scale is life. LOL well at least if I want to see progress. It's so easy to over portion stuff like peanut butter, nuts, cheese, etc.3
-
So has anyone actually done comparisons like this in real life? Does it ever work out the opposite way (where a serving by grams actually ends up being more than a serving by volume) or do you think in general, you usually end up overeating by not weighing? I normally weigh my food but have never done a comparison before.
I wish I'd kept the logs, but once upon a time I logged the same day's worth of foods by volume and then again by weight (same exact portions, I just used a cup or size estimates for veggies first, then put it on a scale second). Some foods were over. Some foods were under. But over the course of the day I think I had about a 400-calorie difference between the two logs.6 -
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.
I don't have photos for proof, but I remember that some time ago I was using full packages of Maple Leaf "Ready Crisp" bacon in a recipe. I didn't bother to weigh the contents - I just went by the package info of it containing 65g, presuming that it wouldn't be too different, and multiplied the nutrition info accordingly.
One day, I decided to weigh the package contents, just to see how far off it might be.
My "65g" turned out to be something like 119. That's a heck of a lot more than 20% inaccuracy!
Great if you're getting more for your money than you'd thought, not so great if the calorie count of one of your ingredients has suddenly doubled.
Once upon a time I had a package of Italian sausage links that were something like 260 calories for 1 sausage (82 grams). Not one single sausage in the entire batch was under 100 grams. I'd been logging them as 1 sausage for ages, but they were actually closer to 1.5 servings than 1 serving per sausage. Little stuff like that sure adds up.8 -
diannethegeek wrote: »So has anyone actually done comparisons like this in real life? Does it ever work out the opposite way (where a serving by grams actually ends up being more than a serving by volume) or do you think in general, you usually end up overeating by not weighing? I normally weigh my food but have never done a comparison before.
I wish I'd kept the logs, but once upon a time I logged the same day's worth of foods by volume and then again by weight (same exact portions, I just used a cup or size estimates for veggies first, then put it on a scale second). Some foods were over. Some foods were under. But over the course of the day I think I had about a 400-calorie difference between the two logs.
That would have been interesting to see. I haven't gone to that extent.1 -
Bumping2
-
I just wanted to point out to the Newbies, or anyone who doesn't already know...
When your scale says ml, and then it is the same as the number of grams...that is for water. Only the water will coincide properly due to differences in density of other liquids.
ml is volume, not weight. It could be used with some success for liquids that are similar in density to water, but for those you really need to stick with measuring cups and ensure you don't overfill. A liter or milliliter of any liquid will always be the same, but it will weigh differently for the same volume.
I just read a few posts on here that didn't seem to understand that concept and I thought I'd clear it up.11 -
Are all food scales created equal?2
-
I had a cheap one but it broke.0
-
Frankie_Fan wrote: »Are all food scales created equal?
You don't need to spend a lot. Just look for these basic functions to start:
-Digital
-Tare (zero) fuction
-Ability to weigh in grams and ounces
-Decent sized area to hold the bowl or plate your weighing in
8 -
Thank you @pinuplove2
-
Thanks for the woo for my question anonymous. I love woo's. WOO HOO..8
-
Frankie_Fan wrote: »Are all food scales created equal?
Hi. I have an OXO. Had it for years and don't remember exactly how much it costs. Not a whole lot as I'm a tightwad.
HTH.3 -
-
rhondaallisongray2609 wrote: »Frankie_Fan wrote: »Thanks for the woo for my question anonymous. I love woo's. WOO HOO..
I don't know why someone would woo your question. There wasn't anything wrong with it.
I think maybe people mistake it for a woowoo (as a good thing) rather than a negative. I know I did when I returned to MFP after being away for a while. I think they should rename it Whoah! Woo tends to be a positive word in the UK.9 -
Bump2
-
Great reminder to all of us not so newbies too!!! Damn I need to find my food scale!!!!
3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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