Question about canned beans
sean_hancock
Posts: 3 Member
On the side of most cans of beans, black, pinto, etc., It says about 3.5 servings per container. However, if you drain and weigh the beans there’s just barely 2 servings in weight. Which is correct? Is that 3.5 servings listed on the can including the water that’s in the can? I never know how to account for the calories eating beans because there’s clearly not 3.5 serving drained and weighed. Thoughts?
1
Replies
-
The servings don't particularly matter. Weigh them in grams and don't worry about it.
But to answer your question, they're approximate servings plus you're draining off some of the water weight.
3 -
The Nutrition Facts on the can includes the weight of the liquid.
If you drain the liquid, weigh the cooked beans and use the data from the USDA food database for beans, cooked, drained.13 -
Well, I think the servings do matter. In the nutrition label it says that there are 3.5 servings per can X 125 grams per serving for approximately 437 grams per can (420 calories). But drained and weighed there are only < 2 servings in the can (approximately 240 calories). Is “bean water” really holding 180 calories?
Maybe I should drain and weigh the beans and divide that number by 3.5?4 -
Go by the grams of the beans themselves. Ignore the 'servings' it says.
It does suck that they seem to be underfilling the cans food-wise to that extent, but the liquid is included in their weight calculations.
They go by the weight of the whole can itself, not just the beans. They do not say, "x beans, x water"... So however much water weight is in there, they don't remove calorie. They assume it is ALL beans.6 -
Really, just drain the beans and use the USDA entry for the cooked, drained version of the type of beans it is: No need for mental contortions.
The servings and weights on the can assume beans + liquid, but most of the calories and nutrients are in the beans. If you dump the whole can (liquid + beans) into a soup or something, you can use the can data. If you drain the contents and use just the beans, trying to do math from the label is a fool's errand.
If you have free time and like to learn about food, look up "aquafaba".
https://www.bonappetit.com/test-kitchen/ingredients/article/aquafaba-health-benefits
Enjoy your beans!
11 -
Really, just drain the beans and use the USDA entry for the cooked, drained version of the type of beans it is: No need for mental contortions.
This is the easiest.
If you want to use the can information, I'd assume the 3.5 is correct (it includes the water) and so if you drain and use half a can (which is normal for me), I'd multiple the calories (or grams) times 3.5 and then divide by two (or 3 if you use a third or so on).2 -
Go by the grams of the beans themselves. Ignore the 'servings' it says.
It does suck that they seem to be underfilling the cans food-wise to that extent, but the liquid is included in their weight calculations.
They go by the weight of the whole can itself, not just the beans. They do not say, "x beans, x water"... So however much water weight is in there, they don't remove calorie. They assume it is ALL beans.
This - there may be a few calories in the water that they count towards the weight - but it's mostly in the beans.
Much like that bag of frozen vegetables to be steamed has a weight that includes the frozen water.
Microwave them and open bag and they will lose weight.
Now - difference on those bags - they usually say 45g frozen weight per serving (or whatever). So 45g cooked and missing water would actually be more calories than an label.
In those cases you have to do the math on your cooked serving from the total cooked weight, %.
Or eat the whole bag!
Much easier with beans.
But you need to do the same thing.
Full can weight divided by serving weight is exactly how many servings in can.
Drain water - weigh total. Divided by same servings.
Weigh what you are eating for that new per serving size.
And then write that down and buy the same can again.0 -
Go by the grams of the beans themselves. Ignore the 'servings' it says.
It does suck that they seem to be underfilling the cans food-wise to that extent, but the liquid is included in their weight calculations.
They go by the weight of the whole can itself, not just the beans. They do not say, "x beans, x water"... So however much water weight is in there, they don't remove calorie. They assume it is ALL beans.
No, they don't assume it is all beans. They assume you're weighing the beans with a proportionate amount of the liquid from the can.
As AnnPT77 says, the easiest thing to do is use the USDA entry for "beans, [specific bean type], mature, cooked, boiled, drained."
https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search/list2 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »Go by the grams of the beans themselves. Ignore the 'servings' it says.
It does suck that they seem to be underfilling the cans food-wise to that extent, but the liquid is included in their weight calculations.
They go by the weight of the whole can itself, not just the beans. They do not say, "x beans, x water"... So however much water weight is in there, they don't remove calorie. They assume it is ALL beans.
No, they don't assume it is all beans. They assume you're weighing the beans with a proportionate amount of the liquid from the can.
As AnnPT77 says, the easiest thing to do is use the USDA entry for "beans, [specific bean type], mature, cooked, boiled, drained."
https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search/list
I more meant the weight assumption on the can versus the label's calorie information. The label is to be if all of the weight was beans.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »Go by the grams of the beans themselves. Ignore the 'servings' it says.
It does suck that they seem to be underfilling the cans food-wise to that extent, but the liquid is included in their weight calculations.
They go by the weight of the whole can itself, not just the beans. They do not say, "x beans, x water"... So however much water weight is in there, they don't remove calorie. They assume it is ALL beans.
No, they don't assume it is all beans. They assume you're weighing the beans with a proportionate amount of the liquid from the can.
As AnnPT77 says, the easiest thing to do is use the USDA entry for "beans, [specific bean type], mature, cooked, boiled, drained."
https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search/list
I more meant the weight assumption on the can versus the label's calorie information. The label is to be if all of the weight was beans.
No, the nutrition label is information for a mix of beans and liquid, which is what is in the can.
For example, I have a can of pink beans that says a serving is 125 g and 80 calories, but that is the calories for 125 g that has both beans and a proportionate amount of the liquid. If you drain the beans and weigh out 125 g and record it as one serving of 125 g, using the nutritional information from the label, you are undercounting your calories by more than half, as 125 g of cooked pink beans is 186 kcal (per the USDA database).
Note that the label says there are 3.5 servings in the can. There are only 3.5 servings if you weigh the liquid. If you drain the beans and weigh them alone, there is less than 2 servings (at 125 g per serving). Yet the 280 kcal (3.5 servings X 80 kcal per serving) is mostly still there. (100 g of liquid from cooking pinto beans has 47 kcal, again per the USDA database, and I would expect liquid from cooking other beans to be in the same ballpark.)7 -
The beans I buy in Australia state on the can that the serving size is for the beans drained. So much easier that way as the liquid would have less calories than the beans so just draining and using the nutritional information given on the can which includes liquid and beans would be inaccurate. Because of this, if your serving from the can includes the liquid then using the USDA database would be much more accurate.0
-
I always rinse the beans off before eating them and do not eat the liquid.1
-
I hate logging canned beans because the nutrition on the can includes the liquid weight in most cases, at least for the products I buy. I rinse and drain them then I use the USDA entry for cooked beans by weight.1
-
I've been doing it all wrong (100lbs lost later), but I'm making chili tonight so I'll enter my recipe with the USDA rinse/drained/cooked values and see what a difference there is.
What I'm meaning to say is anecdotally, for over a year I've used the measurement on the can after rinsing/draining beans and still been wildly successful. The +/- is probably not that big of a deal for a person who has a lot to lose. Could make a difference for someone with a much smaller deficit (like me now).
I don't eat a lot of beans except when I make soup or chili, so could be a lot more impactful for a vegetarian who eats canned beans on the regular.1 -
-
missysippy930 wrote: »
In order to be more accurate, it'd have to be dry weight, then math to get dry-equivalent weight per portion. As a vegetarian, I cook and eat pounds and pounds of them, and freeze them cooked.
While I calculate lots of fresh veggies as ((cooked portion ÷ cooked total) x raw weight), that's way too much trouble for huge batches of cooked, divided up, thawed, portioned, reheated beans. I usually still use the USDA entry, even knowing it has to be off due to non-stanardized water content.
There are times when close enough is good enough, even for some of us who usually strive for accuracy.5 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I hate logging canned beans because the nutrition on the can includes the liquid weight in most cases, at least for the products I buy. I rinse and drain them then I use the USDA entry for cooked beans by weight.
Yeah, me too, and I find them annoying too, for the same reason.0 -
sean_hancock wrote: »Well, I think the servings do matter. In the nutrition label it says that there are 3.5 servings per can X 125 grams per serving for approximately 437 grams per can (420 calories). But drained and weighed there are only < 2 servings in the can (approximately 240 calories). Is “bean water” really holding 180 calories?
Maybe I should drain and weigh the beans and divide that number by 3.5?
This is what I do. Sometimes I will make my own food entry based off the grams drained weight, particularly if I use the brand often. I find a lot of variation in different brands of canned beans, so I don't like to use the usda cooked entry. I know the serving amount is not exact (i.e. can may say 3.5 servings and actually have 4), but I figure it is pretty close.0 -
Really, just drain the beans and use the USDA entry for the cooked, drained version of the type of beans it is: No need for mental contortions.
The servings and weights on the can assume beans + liquid, but most of the calories and nutrients are in the beans. If you dump the whole can (liquid + beans) into a soup or something, you can use the can data. If you drain the contents and use just the beans, trying to do math from the label is a fool's errand.
If you have free time and like to learn about food, look up "aquafaba".
https://www.bonappetit.com/test-kitchen/ingredients/article/aquafaba-health-benefits
Enjoy your beans!
Thanks for clarifying. You said it better than I did. When I'm on my phone I try to bottom line things.1 -
ladyhusker39 wrote: »Really, just drain the beans and use the USDA entry for the cooked, drained version of the type of beans it is: No need for mental contortions.
The servings and weights on the can assume beans + liquid, but most of the calories and nutrients are in the beans. If you dump the whole can (liquid + beans) into a soup or something, you can use the can data. If you drain the contents and use just the beans, trying to do math from the label is a fool's errand.
If you have free time and like to learn about food, look up "aquafaba".
https://www.bonappetit.com/test-kitchen/ingredients/article/aquafaba-health-benefits
Enjoy your beans!
Thanks for clarifying. You said it better than I did. When I'm on my phone I try to bottom line things.
I thought you did fine. OP wasn't buying it, even after your and others' sensible, cogent, concise, clear comments. It seemed like time to trot out a wall'o'text (my specialty ). 3 -
sean_hancock wrote: »Well, I think the servings do matter. In the nutrition label it says that there are 3.5 servings per can X 125 grams per serving for approximately 437 grams per can (420 calories). But drained and weighed there are only < 2 servings in the can (approximately 240 calories). Is “bean water” really holding 180 calories?
Maybe I should drain and weigh the beans and divide that number by 3.5?
This is what I do. Sometimes I will make my own food entry based off the grams drained weight, particularly if I use the brand often. I find a lot of variation in different brands of canned beans, so I don't like to use the usda cooked entry. I know the serving amount is not exact (i.e. can may say 3.5 servings and actually have 4), but I figure it is pretty close.
Yeah, I assume the variations are due to the seasonings, etc in each variety (some have some pork, etc in them for flavor)0 -
fitoverfortymom wrote: »I've been doing it all wrong (100lbs lost later), but I'm making chili tonight so I'll enter my recipe with the USDA rinse/drained/cooked values and see what a difference there is.
What I'm meaning to say is anecdotally, for over a year I've used the measurement on the can after rinsing/draining beans and still been wildly successful. The +/- is probably not that big of a deal for a person who has a lot to lose. Could make a difference for someone with a much smaller deficit (like me now).
I don't eat a lot of beans except when I make soup or chili, so could be a lot more impactful for a vegetarian who eats canned beans on the regular.
The bolded is an important point. It's less likely to make a difference if you make a mistake or choose to estimate or use a random "homemade" database entry if it's for something you don't eat often.0 -
sean_hancock wrote: »Well, I think the servings do matter. In the nutrition label it says that there are 3.5 servings per can X 125 grams per serving for approximately 437 grams per can (420 calories). But drained and weighed there are only < 2 servings in the can (approximately 240 calories). Is “bean water” really holding 180 calories?
Maybe I should drain and weigh the beans and divide that number by 3.5?
This is what I do. Sometimes I will make my own food entry based off the grams drained weight, particularly if I use the brand often. I find a lot of variation in different brands of canned beans, so I don't like to use the usda cooked entry. I know the serving amount is not exact (i.e. can may say 3.5 servings and actually have 4), but I figure it is pretty close.
Yeah, I assume the variations are due to the seasonings, etc in each variety (some have some pork, etc in them for flavor)
I don't know about other posters, but when I talk about draining and using the USDA entry for cooked beans of whatever variety you're eating, I'm talking about plain canned beans that are packed in plain cooking water, with nothing other than salt and perhaps preservatives added.
If there are spices and pork in the can, that's a sauce, and it's not meant to be drained and rinsed (and if you drain and rinse it, you're just wasting money, because those sorts of beans cost more than plain canned beans). Of course I would use the information on the nutritional label for that sort of bean.
More importantly, the OP made clear that s/he is asking about beans packed in a liquid that gets drained, so any spices in the liquid are irrelvant.0 -
I did not mean a sauce or spiced. I also generally try to use plain beans, but did not always check the ingredients. Some are made with a decent amount of added sugar or corn syrup, which I assume accounts for the variation (something I never realized until I checked). It's not a sauce, they're not labeled any differently, just the way particular brands make them. Red kidney beans are a common culprit.
Although now that you point that out, it would make sense to use the usda entry as long as the beans were, indeed, only beans and water. I've never been one to use cooked entries I guess.lynn_glenmont wrote: »sean_hancock wrote: »Well, I think the servings do matter. In the nutrition label it says that there are 3.5 servings per can X 125 grams per serving for approximately 437 grams per can (420 calories). But drained and weighed there are only < 2 servings in the can (approximately 240 calories). Is “bean water” really holding 180 calories?
Maybe I should drain and weigh the beans and divide that number by 3.5?
This is what I do. Sometimes I will make my own food entry based off the grams drained weight, particularly if I use the brand often. I find a lot of variation in different brands of canned beans, so I don't like to use the usda cooked entry. I know the serving amount is not exact (i.e. can may say 3.5 servings and actually have 4), but I figure it is pretty close.
Yeah, I assume the variations are due to the seasonings, etc in each variety (some have some pork, etc in them for flavor)
I don't know about other posters, but when I talk about draining and using the USDA entry for cooked beans of whatever variety you're eating, I'm talking about plain canned beans that are packed in plain cooking water, with nothing other than salt and perhaps preservatives added.
If there are spices and pork in the can, that's a sauce, and it's not meant to be drained and rinsed (and if you drain and rinse it, you're just wasting money, because those sorts of beans cost more than plain canned beans). Of course I would use the information on the nutritional label for that sort of bean.
More importantly, the OP made clear that s/he is asking about beans packed in a liquid that gets drained, so any spices in the liquid are irrelvant.
0 -
I like the juice. It is called pot liquor. With a name like that it has to make you feel good,1
-
This thread is giving me a complex. I've never thought about canned beans so much in my life.
Good info, though! Lol.4 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »sean_hancock wrote: »Well, I think the servings do matter. In the nutrition label it says that there are 3.5 servings per can X 125 grams per serving for approximately 437 grams per can (420 calories). But drained and weighed there are only < 2 servings in the can (approximately 240 calories). Is “bean water” really holding 180 calories?
Maybe I should drain and weigh the beans and divide that number by 3.5?
This is what I do. Sometimes I will make my own food entry based off the grams drained weight, particularly if I use the brand often. I find a lot of variation in different brands of canned beans, so I don't like to use the usda cooked entry. I know the serving amount is not exact (i.e. can may say 3.5 servings and actually have 4), but I figure it is pretty close.
Yeah, I assume the variations are due to the seasonings, etc in each variety (some have some pork, etc in them for flavor)
I don't know about other posters, but when I talk about draining and using the USDA entry for cooked beans of whatever variety you're eating, I'm talking about plain canned beans that are packed in plain cooking water, with nothing other than salt and perhaps preservatives added.
If there are spices and pork in the can, that's a sauce, and it's not meant to be drained and rinsed (and if you drain and rinse it, you're just wasting money, because those sorts of beans cost more than plain canned beans). Of course I would use the information on the nutritional label for that sort of bean.
More importantly, the OP made clear that s/he is asking about beans packed in a liquid that gets drained, so any spices in the liquid are irrelvant.
I get what you are saying, but sometimes this isn’t obvious.... the “recipe” for some varieties of black beans (for instance) are different due to the different preparations.
I was specifically responding to the person I quoted (not the OP), who was noting different information for different brands, and thus relevant to the conversation taking place.0 -
-
lynn_glenmont wrote: »
I only like it in soups and stews because it thickens them. I still rinse the beans so they don't glob together, though,0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »fitoverfortymom wrote: »I've been doing it all wrong (100lbs lost later), but I'm making chili tonight so I'll enter my recipe with the USDA rinse/drained/cooked values and see what a difference there is.
What I'm meaning to say is anecdotally, for over a year I've used the measurement on the can after rinsing/draining beans and still been wildly successful. The +/- is probably not that big of a deal for a person who has a lot to lose. Could make a difference for someone with a much smaller deficit (like me now).
I don't eat a lot of beans except when I make soup or chili, so could be a lot more impactful for a vegetarian who eats canned beans on the regular.
The bolded is an important point. It's less likely to make a difference if you make a mistake or choose to estimate or use a random "homemade" database entry if it's for something you don't eat often.
Yes, I eat canned beans 5-6 times a week usually. It's a measurement I feel is personally important for me to be very accurate with.
(For what it is worth, I drain and use the USDA entry).0
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
- 96.4K 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