How do you know how many calories are ACTUALLY in fruit and veg?
Options
Replies
-
I find the chart at the bottom of this page helpful for a quick reference:
https://www.lasting-weight-loss.com/calories-in-vegetables.html0 -
I haven't read all the comments, but what I have read I tend to agree with those who are less rigid. If you are eating the recommended servings of fruit & veg (is it still 5-10 daily? in the revised food guide) and not choosing HUGE portions then it shouldn't be that big of a deal if you're not exactly exact. And even though MFP contains varying estimates, I think most things can be averaged out without going extreme either way.
If you think about it Weight Watcher members lose weight WITHOUT calculating most of their fruits & veg intake, but it is also based on being reasonable, it isn't a free-for-all just because they are considered "free" foods. For instance bananas are a free food, but only if you eat ONE banana not FIVE bananas. I'm assuming Weight Watchers still calculate that way...they tend to change their format regularly so perhaps it isn't...ANYHOO the principle still applies.....9 -
lorrainequiche59 wrote: »I haven't read all the comments, but what I have read I tend to agree with those who are less rigid. If you are eating the recommended servings of fruit & veg (is it still 5-10 daily? in the revised food guide) and not choosing HUGE portions then it shouldn't be that big of a deal if you're not exactly exact. And even though MFP contains varying estimates, I think most things can be averaged out without going extreme either way.
If you think about it Weight Watcher members lose weight WITHOUT calculating most of their fruits & veg intake, but it is also based on being reasonable, it isn't a free-for-all just because they are considered "free" foods. For instance bananas are a free food, but only if you eat ONE banana not FIVE bananas. I'm assuming Weight Watchers still calculate that way...they tend to change their format regularly so perhaps it isn't...ANYHOO the principle still applies.....
except 5 servings of fruit can be up to 500 calories and that can and often does wipe out a deficit.
Same with veggies...
I am not saying that it has to be so strict that you are stressing over a carrot stick or even 4 or 5 but they do have calories and they need counted especially if you are stalled...or finding it difficult to lose weight or gaining...time to take stock of the CI CO equation.4 -
lorrainequiche59 wrote: »I haven't read all the comments, but what I have read I tend to agree with those who are less rigid. If you are eating the recommended servings of fruit & veg (is it still 5-10 daily? in the revised food guide) and not choosing HUGE portions then it shouldn't be that big of a deal if you're not exactly exact. And even though MFP contains varying estimates, I think most things can be averaged out without going extreme either way.
If you think about it Weight Watcher members lose weight WITHOUT calculating most of their fruits & veg intake, but it is also based on being reasonable, it isn't a free-for-all just because they are considered "free" foods. For instance bananas are a free food, but only if you eat ONE banana not FIVE bananas. I'm assuming Weight Watchers still calculate that way...they tend to change their format regularly so perhaps it isn't...ANYHOO the principle still applies.....
I would argue that WW members tend to be less successful in their loss/maintenance efforts than those who track calories. This is purely based on observations that I've made throughout the years of reading threads on MFP (I had another account before this one). 1-5 servings of fruits and veggies can easily wipe out a deficit. When I lose I stick to a 250 calorie deficit which is like... a banana and a side of peas and carrots. Not a lot of food at all.2 -
lorrainequiche59 wrote: »I haven't read all the comments, but what I have read I tend to agree with those who are less rigid. If you are eating the recommended servings of fruit & veg (is it still 5-10 daily? in the revised food guide) and not choosing HUGE portions then it shouldn't be that big of a deal if you're not exactly exact. And even though MFP contains varying estimates, I think most things can be averaged out without going extreme either way.
If you think about it Weight Watcher members lose weight WITHOUT calculating most of their fruits & veg intake, but it is also based on being reasonable, it isn't a free-for-all just because they are considered "free" foods. For instance bananas are a free food, but only if you eat ONE banana not FIVE bananas. I'm assuming Weight Watchers still calculate that way...they tend to change their format regularly so perhaps it isn't...ANYHOO the principle still applies.....
It might help if you actually read through the thread, this was already addressed by some of us.2 -
The differences of opinions on this subject are why I always suggest that everyone start by logging anything that has calories and reviewing everything that you put in your mouth that is not water. Examine the way you eat and then decide where, if anywhere, you can be relaxed. Also, be prepared to change as your deficit decreases and the things you could get by with at higher deficits might work against you more when you get down to the lower deficits.
9 -
lorrainequiche59 wrote: »I haven't read all the comments, but what I have read I tend to agree with those who are less rigid. If you are eating the recommended servings of fruit & veg (is it still 5-10 daily? in the revised food guide) and not choosing HUGE portions then it shouldn't be that big of a deal if you're not exactly exact. And even though MFP contains varying estimates, I think most things can be averaged out without going extreme either way.
If you think about it Weight Watcher members lose weight WITHOUT calculating most of their fruits & veg intake, but it is also based on being reasonable, it isn't a free-for-all just because they are considered "free" foods. For instance bananas are a free food, but only if you eat ONE banana not FIVE bananas. I'm assuming Weight Watchers still calculate that way...they tend to change their format regularly so perhaps it isn't...ANYHOO the principle still applies.....
You don't have to be exact, but why not learn how to choose the correct entries given how many in MFP are incorrect, and not do silly things like exaggerate amounts rather than choose the correct entries.
Also, advice like "don't eat too many, be reasonable" is not IMO good advice re fruits and veg (especially veg) given how many people don't eat many at all.
It's not like veg and fruit are harder to measure than anything else, and the question about "which entry" applies across the board to non packaged food items (including starches and meat).5 -
The differences of opinions on this subject are why I always suggest that everyone start by logging anything that has calories and reviewing everything that you put in your mouth that is not water. Examine the way you eat and then decide where, if anywhere, you can be relaxed. Also, be prepared to change as your deficit decreases and the things you could get by with at higher deficits might work against you more when you get down to the lower deficits.
+1
People tend to think we all eat the same way, have the same patience for numbers or organization, and the same desires and goals. We don't. But following this advice will get you closer to a system that will work for each individual.5 -
lorrainequiche59 wrote: »I haven't read all the comments, but what I have read I tend to agree with those who are less rigid. If you are eating the recommended servings of fruit & veg (is it still 5-10 daily? in the revised food guide) and not choosing HUGE portions then it shouldn't be that big of a deal if you're not exactly exact. And even though MFP contains varying estimates, I think most things can be averaged out without going extreme either way.
If you think about it Weight Watcher members lose weight WITHOUT calculating most of their fruits & veg intake, but it is also based on being reasonable, it isn't a free-for-all just because they are considered "free" foods. For instance bananas are a free food, but only if you eat ONE banana not FIVE bananas. I'm assuming Weight Watchers still calculate that way...they tend to change their format regularly so perhaps it isn't...ANYHOO the principle still applies.....
This is why Weight Watchers begins with a calorie goal that is lower than some other plans -- because they're counting on you eating some "free" foods. They give you a lower calorie goal because they know there is really no such thing as a "free" food. Calories count.5 -
I don't really worry about it. If there are a few calorie options, I tend to pick one that makes sense. Really, I didn't gain weight by overeating on fruits and veggies! At the end of the day, a lot of this is a guesstimate and now I know that I maintain my weight right where I want it so the calories in vs. calories out must be working.1
-
Guava 100g 68Calories
Small apple 50Cal
Medium apple 65 Cal
Large Apple 75Cal
Banana 80Calories
Grapefruit 45Calories
Orange 60 Calories2 -
I reduced 26 KG in 5 Months, strictly following Calories in/Gym4 -
For reducing Belly FAT, I strongly believe on Weight Training 90 minutes and Protein Diet. No Carbs. I am no very smart, Waist size reduced from 46 inches to 39 and i am planning to reach 32 waist size11
-
There is always the UK govt official listing of food values: "McCance and Widowson" https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/composition-of-foods-integrated-dataset-cofid but you have to do some work to find out what the documents contain0
-
I've always understood calorie to be as much art as it is science. What I mean by this, is that there are uncertainties and variables that we have no way to account for (ie, a sweeter or less sweet apple of the same size might not have the exact same calories, so we have to estimate based on given information). The important thing to remember is that, despite some inevitable inaccuracies, CICO works.5
-
For reducing Belly FAT, I strongly believe on Weight Training 90 minutes and Protein Diet. No Carbs. I am no very smart, Waist size reduced from 46 inches to 39 and i am planning to reach 32 waist size
For weight loss the only thing that matters is calories, not cabs or other macros/macros ratios.
I eat 200+ grams of carbs a day and I'm nailing my weight management goals.
2 -
Might want to wrap your head around the fact that none of this is exact. There is no way to know exactly how many calories in the food you are eating can be used to raise 1gram of water one degree in temperature.
It's a complicated science. Not to mention every person's metabolism is different depending on the amount of muscle they have, how efficent their body is with using calories, how much sleep they are or aren't getting.
So go with the estimates and then compare to how much weight your losing.
Even then it wont be exact. So control only what you can control and don't get obsessive. Quit bad habits and adopt good ones for life and You'll be great.4 -
Fatty_Nuff wrote: »I can live with entering my apple as a medium or large. But a lot of people prefer to be more accurate, and the best way to be accurate is to weigh, after peeling and/or coring your fruit. You can also create custom entries to use in your diary, if the ones already in the database seem inaccurate. And quite a few are inaccurate and repetitious.
Yes that's exactly what I mean. I don't know which entries to trust on MFP. Especially if one says Apple 100g - 85 cal and another says Apple 100g - 105 calories. I know the green tick means it's not user generated but if there isn't one that has a green tick then you have to pick another one. And as I don't have a huge amount of weight to lose, even a couple of hundred calories can make a difference
If I see multiple entries, until I determine otherwise I pick the middle value from the cluster that is closest to consistent. I ignore the outliers. Not perfect, but a quick way to approximate if you have trouble finding exactly what you are looking for.
But yet, the USDA website would be a good source.0 -
Not sure if it's already been said but something my nutritionist told me that I didn't know was that the information on the package is for the product AS IS on the inside of the package. So if it says 1/2 cup, and it's something like rice, it literally means 1/2 cup DRY like in the package, unless it specifically says "prepared".1
-
Not sure if it's already been said but something my nutritionist told me that I didn't know was that the information on the package is for the product AS IS on the inside of the package. So if it says 1/2 cup, and it's something like rice, it literally means 1/2 cup DRY like in the package, unless it specifically says "prepared".
Might read through the topic - because that has been mentioned, as well as the much more important point that it's by weight, not volume.
Many other tips and tricks mentioned you might find enlightening.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 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
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 944 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions