"About x servings per container"

Agathokakological

It drives me crazy when I go to look for a food and I use the barcode scanner and it pops up with an entry that is wrong. When entering the nutritional info on an item that says "about x servings" you shouldn't enter the whole thing as that many servings.

For example, I was looking up the entry for a Chef Boyardee Spaghetti & Meatballs. Not something I ever really eat often so I don't have an entry for it that I made myself, so I used the barcode scanner. For the entire can it said about 2 servings. The entry that popped up said 520 calories for the entire can and had no option for serving size by the gram. I got out my food scale and the entire can actually only had 415 calories. A breakdown if anyone is curious how I came up with that number...

One serving = 257 g = 260 cal

I took the 260 cal and divided it by the 257 g to get a rounded 1.01 cal per gram.

The entire can was 411 g which multiplied by 1.01 = 415.11 calories for the entire can.

If you want to track accurately a food scale and a little time to double check entries are your best friend.

Not entirely sure why I felt the need to share this. But in the example, that's an extra 105 calories available for the day when tracked properly. It may not seem like much, but it makes a difference if it happens a lot.

So a simple way to figure it out is to take the calories per serving and divide it by the grams in one serving. Then take that number and multiply it by how many grams you're going to eat.

VUA21

Calories can be off on labels, it's allowable. Also, some of the difference could be calorie differences in the meat balls vs the noodles vs the sauce. Unless you can weigh individual items separately it's freakishly hard to be exact. But, yeah weighing everything helps a lot.

HeyJudii

It's not necessarily that the entries on MFP were done incorrectly. Manufacturers and "official" databases tweek information all the time. Recipes and ingredients are changed or amounts modified. Cane sugar is changed to corn syrup and then to sucralose as an example. Yogurt containers that once held 8 ounces but now hold 7.5 ounces is another. Even the entries I have created myself have to be edited sometimes - protein powder that was 94 calories per serving is now 90 calories per serving for instance.

kpsyche

HeyJudii wrote: »

It's not necessarily that the entries on MFP were done incorrectly. Manufacturers and "official" databases tweek information all the time. Recipes and ingredients are changed or amounts modified. Cane sugar is changed to corn syrup and then to sucralose as an example. Yogurt containers that once held 8 ounces but now hold 7.5 ounces is another. Even the entries I have created myself have to be edited sometimes - protein powder that was 94 calories per serving is now 90 calories per serving for instance.

The MFP entry is not wrong (in the sense that the data on the can is exactly the same as what's in the MFP entry, so they match). There's a reason the can says "about" 2 servings because it really is an approximation.

Edit: I'm not actually sure what the OP is talking about because the entry in MFP is for 1 serve of 257 g... as it should be. If you log 2 serves then it gets logged as 514 g which of course has more calories than 411 g; i.e. if you choose to log 2 serves it doesn't say 411 g which is what the OP is implying. The only "error" is the manufacturer rounding and using the word "about". The servings per container field on MFP isn't used except for informational purposes so it's pretty irrelevant if you're weighing your food anyway (and it becomes even more irrelevant considering how many brand come in containers of multiple sizes/servings per container). MFP does all the pesky mathematics for you, so... what's the issue?

nickssweetheart

I guess it comes down to how accurate you want your logging to be. I personally don't bother weighing things like a can of chili if I'm going to eat the whole can. The manufacturer's label is close enough for me. But I still have a long way to go so I don't have to worry about 100 calories either way messing up my deficit or costing me nutrients.

I guess I don't see why you're so frustrated if you're weighing everything anyway and the nutritional information matches the can.

Francl27

I thought that you had to enter the number of servings per container when you made a food on MFP?

kristingjertsen

I use a food scale when calculating servings of almost everything. For example, I will weigh avocado (something I eat every day) to see how many grams it is before eating it. Keeps me honest and aware of portion size. I don't do this when I am eating out, my rule of thumb there is to eat no more than half the food on my plate and stop eating as soon as I am full. Make certain to have some healthy fat (olive, coconut, sunflower oil, nuts, butter, avocado) at every meal because this helps you feel satisfied. Avoid white carbs and sugar because they raise blood sugar and (for me at least) trigger the urge to overeat and binge on sweets, Don't overthink this, just do the best you can to eat the right portion size and healthy food. Your weekly weigh-in will give you feedback of how successful you are. I have lost 10 pounds using this strategy so far with 15 more to go.

Lounmoun

There are multiple canned spaghetti and meatball entries. Some have the option of entering grams. Check out different entries and choose the one that suits you best.
It is possible that not every can, box or cup entered in the database contains the same amount forever.
I just weighed 3 fruit cups from the same package and they were all a different amount even though the containers were the same size.
It is good to weigh even packaged foods and check how much you are getting but it isn't going to be exact with a mixed food product like that anyway.

Francl27

Also... it's much faster IMO to just do a search and pick the best entry than to scan the food, lol!

Noreenmarie1234

Francl27 wrote: »

Also... it's much faster IMO to just do a search and pick the best entry than to scan the food, lol!

I've been on here for like 8 years and I don't think I've once scanned my food, lol.

Francl27

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

Francl27 wrote: »

Also... it's much faster IMO to just do a search and pick the best entry than to scan the food, lol!

I've been on here for like 8 years and I don't think I've once scanned my food, lol.

I did it a few times, it's just more work than typing in the name, honestly, and you're stuck with inaccurate entries (or that don't come in grams) sometimes. Not worth it, lol.