How do y’all track macros for steak?
jbmackey5
Posts: 42 Member
Trying to buy steak is so frustrating because the macros are all over the place. I went around looking for lean grass fed filets and saw some at the store that said anywhere from 150-275 calories per 4 oz. i even saw a grass fed ribeye that said 150 calories for 4 oz. no way it’s that low
How the heck do I know what the real number is ?
How the heck do I know what the real number is ?
2
Replies
-
Check the USDA database to view the calories/macros for a particular cut of beef. Find a matching entry in MFP's database. Log the weight, ensuring you're choosing raw/cooked based on when it's weighed.8
-
Theirs seem really high too. Plus grass fed has much less fat and calories10
-
Different cuts of beef can be more or less caloric because of the intramuscular fat 'marbling'. An 8 ounce ribeye steak has more fat (and hence more calories) than an 8 ounce sirloin steak, for example.7 -
When measuring calories the USDA specifies whether the meat is trimmed to 0" or to 1/8" fat, and what grade of meat (prime, choice, select in decending order of marbling) they are evaluating.
If you believe that your grass fed beef is leaner than "regular" beef (I don't have any reason to believe you are correct, but then again I've never looked into the issue), you can always pick a lower grade level (i.e. select) and use that for your caloric value.
I note that there exist two USDA "grass-fed beef" entries (strip steaks, and ground, raw). There also exist several Beef, Australian, imported, grass fed entries.
https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/search/list
(pick standard reference in the first drop down box)4 -
Different cuts of beef can be more or less caloric because of the intramuscular fat 'marbling'. An 8 ounce ribeye steak has more fat (and hence more calories) than an 8 ounce sirloin steak, for example.
Also has more flavour. Man I love rib-eye.
Not convinced grass fed is inherently leaner though. I'd need to see some proof of that.6 -
It’s been pretty widely known that grass fed has much less fat and is leaner. Google it. Whole Foods has grass fed ribeyes and sirloins next to regular ribeyes and there is hardly any white in them. They have a deep red color, too.6
-
5 years of MFP and I still don't know how to log beef. USDA is nice and all, but it's VERY specific about how much fat is on your beef cut and frankly... I have no idea what is considered lean or 1/8" fat or what... Probably a good thing I don't eat much beef.4
-
Tacklewasher wrote: »
Different cuts of beef can be more or less caloric because of the intramuscular fat 'marbling'. An 8 ounce ribeye steak has more fat (and hence more calories) than an 8 ounce sirloin steak, for example.
Also has more flavour. Man I love rib-eye.
Not convinced grass fed is inherently leaner though. I'd need to see some proof of that.
My taste buds say it is, that's for dang sure.2 -
You're the dude that OCD about numbers, right? Beef, especially cuts of beef (as opposed to ground beef) can be tough. IMO, find a couple of cuts you like, then find a store near you that sells them and has nutritional info posted somewhere (either available in store, or on their website, etc). Then use that cut from that store exclusively. Don't go shopping at random stores and buying different cuts every time or you'll go through this every time you eat steak. For your own sanity.
And for as much as you don't want to hear it.. you NEVER know what the REAL number is. They are all approximations. Even USDA (or whoever regulates this stuff) allows for some rounding and some margin of error on food labels.3 -
Grass-fed has a different ratio of Omega-3 to Omega-6 fatty acids. The Omega-3 number is higher. It's still just as many calories as grain fed beef.
8 -
It’s been pretty widely known that grass fed has much less fat and is leaner. Google it. Whole Foods has grass fed ribeyes and sirloins next to regular ribeyes and there is hardly any white in them. They have a deep red color, too.
Do you have a source for this? A quick google search isn't turning up any real science behind whether grass fed is actually leaner, closest I found to something reputable was this link:https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heart-disease/expert-answers/grass-fed-beef/faq-20058059
And even they don't explicitly say how much less fat grass fed beef has compared to it's conventional counterpart.2 -
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »Grass-fed has a different ratio of Omega-3 to Omega-6 fatty acids. The Omega-3 number is higher. It's still just as many calories as grain fed beef.
My local super market offers grass fed and, uh... whatever non-grass fed is. For teh same cut of steak, grass fed has about half the fat and just over half the calories. Could be how the steak is cut/trimmed, but comparing strip steak to strip steak, that's how the numbers compare.
Ribeye - 3oz serving size
180cals and 11g fat vs 260cals and 20g
Strip Steak - 3oz serving size
130cals and 4.5g fat vs 220cals and 9g of fat.2 -
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »Grass-fed has a different ratio of Omega-3 to Omega-6 fatty acids. The Omega-3 number is higher. It's still just as many calories as grain fed beef.
My local super market offers grass fed and, uh... whatever non-grass fed is.
Grain finished.
Anyway, OP, if the beef comes in a package with calories, go with those and find an entry that matches.
USDA does have some grass fed entries, but you really have to be honest about how much fat there is if no supermarket package info (I get all mine from a farm, so I am WELL AWARE of how annoying trying to guess at the right USDA entry can be). Here's one grass fed strip steak entry (ribeye would be more fat): https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/3743?manu=&fgcd=&ds=
I tend to estimate on the higher side for fat/calories just to be safe.1 -
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »Grass-fed has a different ratio of Omega-3 to Omega-6 fatty acids. The Omega-3 number is higher. It's still just as many calories as grain fed beef.
My local super market offers grass fed and, uh... whatever non-grass fed is. For teh same cut of steak, grass fed has about half the fat and just over half the calories. Could be how the steak is cut/trimmed, but comparing strip steak to strip steak, that's how the numbers compare.
Ribeye - 3oz serving size
180cals and 11g fat vs 260cals and 20g
Strip Steak - 3oz serving size
130cals and 4.5g fat vs 220cals and 9g of fat.
In the Biz, we call it conventional. As lemurcat said, it's grain finished.2 -
Good info. For those who never knew the macros were different, go to a good meat market or store and look at an identical cut of grain vs grass. How can you say they have the same calories and fat? The grass fed has almost zero marbling. One gram of fat has 9 calories so it makes sense that for a large cut with 15-20 less grams of fat has much fewer calories.2
-
Good info. For those who never knew the macros were different, go to a good meat market or store and look at an identical cut of grain vs grass. How can you say they have the same calories and fat? The grass fed has almost zero marbling. One gram of fat has 9 calories so it makes sense that for a large cut with 15-20 less grams of fat has much fewer calories.
Actually marbling isn't the best test of how much fat is in the meat (and generally people don't eat the fat that makes up the most visible streaks):
http://www.grass-fed-solutions.com/marbling.html4 -
I was actually thinking about this thread in Whole Foods today while grabbing lunch. I think the USDA database is your best bet. I'd probably log that myself, just because meat is so finicky and I wouldn't really trust others' accuracy.
I have the same issue when I trim the tiny bit of remaining fat from my boneless/skinless chicken filets. There will always be some margin of error but often that's negligible when you're otherwise fastidious.
1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Good info. For those who never knew the macros were different, go to a good meat market or store and look at an identical cut of grain vs grass. How can you say they have the same calories and fat? The grass fed has almost zero marbling. One gram of fat has 9 calories so it makes sense that for a large cut with 15-20 less grams of fat has much fewer calories.
Actually marbling isn't the best test of how much fat is in the meat (and generally people don't eat the fat that makes up the most visible streaks):
http://www.grass-fed-solutions.com/marbling.html
From there, I went to this link http://www.grass-fed-solutions.com/grassfed-beef.html
It explains that cattle, for most of their lives, eat grasses. It's only in the finishing stages at the feedlot that they get grain fed. So the marbling is pretty late in the process (they stand around eating grains and get fatter) and that would typically be the fat that is not eaten.
I see there is a difference in the Omega 3 to 6 ratio, but I'm not seeing a lot of macro differences. Certainly not enough for me to choose one over the other, given the typical price difference.
It just seems to be another trend based more on hype than reality to me. Bare in mind I tend to avoid organic for the same reason.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions