Under or Over Estimating Food Portions?

quarterhorseygirl

While taking care to measure my food portions and track, and reading discussions here about it as well, a question struck me that I thought might make for some interesting conversation.

Which is worse...Under or Over estimating food portions for tracking, and why? Is neither bad, both, why? Just a discussion I thought might be interesting to see different perspectives or thoughts.

heybales

Food labels are allowed to be upwards of 20% incorrect.

Logging is likely to go both ways.

Estimating really isn't needed that rough though.

Because you shouldn't be "measuring" food portions - because calories is per gram, weight, not volume, or cup or spoon measures.

quarterhorseygirl

I did mean weighing, not necessarily measuring, just mistyped for that. I'm talking for those moments that you didn't get to weigh the food. You're out at a gathering, no scale available, have to eyeball it is the sort of scenario I'm thinking of.

puffbrat

I generally prefer to overestimate since that is the option that is more likely to keep me within goal rather than seeing I still have calories for the day and eating more because I underestimated. The caveate though is that I still attempt to go for a reasonable estimate because I don't want to severely undereat.

MikePTY

A lot depends on the individual and their struggles. If a person is having a hard time losing weight, and sticking to their calorie goals, then underestimating their portions would be bad for them, and they'll want to be a bit looser with their estimates and overestimate them a bit. But if a person is losing weight quickly and having trouble reaching their goal, then overestimating would be the bigger concern. They should be conservative in their estimates and underestimate.

In an ideal world, people will do a combination of both, overestimating some things and underestimating others, and it kind of just evens itself out in the long run.

sardelsa

It depends. If I'm trying to gain I hope I underestimated. If I'm trying to lose, overestimate. Of course keeping an eye on my weight over time will be key for me ask don't want to gain or lose too fast.

Gisel2015

quarterhorseygirl wrote: »

I did mean weighing, not necessarily measuring, just mistyped for that. I'm talking for those moments that you didn't get to weigh the food. You're out at a gathering, no scale available, have to eyeball it is the sort of scenario I'm thinking of.

I don't log while eating out, on vacation, etc. Not worthy to me, because over or under estimating will not make a difference. I use my wits to eat healthy and keep an eye on my portions. It works for me, but we are all different.

quarterhorseygirl

Gisel2015 wrote: »

quarterhorseygirl wrote: »

I did mean weighing, not necessarily measuring, just mistyped for that. I'm talking for those moments that you didn't get to weigh the food. You're out at a gathering, no scale available, have to eyeball it is the sort of scenario I'm thinking of.

I don't log while eating out, on vacation, etc. Not worthy to me, because over or under estimating will not make a difference. I use my wits to eat healthy and keep an eye on my portions. It works for me, but we are all different.

I've heard of not worrying about doing it at these times too so you can also focus more on enjoying yourself and your company, so at least if you are out of bounds a little, at least it was worth it. I think when starting out it's scarier to think of not doing it (weighing/logging) than when you've maybe been at it a little while and have developed some knowledge, better habits and consistent accountability.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

lemurcat2

Basically just be as consistent as possible and adjust based on results.

I never tried to over or underestimate, and it worked fine for me. If I'd not lost I probably would have changed my calorie goals or tried to figure out if I was measuring things wrong rather than overestimating, since I think trying to be accurate is best (or best for me) even though I acknowledge I'd be under or over at times (and some things are less accurate than others, like meals you don't make/have no cal count for).

I now don't bother with restaurant meals (I don't log or roughly estimate total cals), but I tried to estimate when I was logging more regularly and actively losing, and there I'd overestimate knowing I would otherwise miss calories that were likely there (for example, add in extra butter, even if it wasn't noticeable in the finished dish).

wmd1979

just_Tomek wrote: »

Better to under estimate in all cases IMHO. Weather you are trying to gain or maintain and for sure when trying to lose.

Why would it be better to underestimate if you are trying to lose? That's a sure fire way to go over your calorie goal and doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.

JaydedMiss

I mean i weigh everything so i know what im getting but when im away or more relaxed i will underestimate on things like veggies and overestimate on high calorie things like dressings.

edit: I totally meant the reverse lol

wmd1979

just_Tomek wrote: »

wmd1979 wrote: »

just_Tomek wrote: »

Better to under estimate in all cases IMHO. Weather you are trying to gain or maintain and for sure when trying to lose.

Why would it be better to underestimate if you are trying to lose? That's a sure fire way to go over your calorie goal and doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.

Sorry, meant to say OVERestimating.

Ahhh, I thought that may have been the case, but I wasn't sure. I appreciate the clarification, I wasn't sure if I was missing something or not.

sardelsa

just_Tomek wrote: »

wmd1979 wrote: »

just_Tomek wrote: »

Better to under estimate in all cases IMHO. Weather you are trying to gain or maintain and for sure when trying to lose.

Why would it be better to underestimate if you are trying to lose? That's a sure fire way to go over your calorie goal and doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.

Sorry, meant to say OVERestimating.

But why would overestimating be beneficial when trying to hit a surplus? That is how many people who struggle to gain think they are eating tons are really not eating very much at all.

sardelsa

just_Tomek wrote: »

sardelsa wrote: »

just_Tomek wrote: »

wmd1979 wrote: »

just_Tomek wrote: »

Better to under estimate in all cases IMHO. Weather you are trying to gain or maintain and for sure when trying to lose.

Why would it be better to underestimate if you are trying to lose? That's a sure fire way to go over your calorie goal and doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.

Sorry, meant to say OVERestimating.

But why would overestimating be beneficial when trying to hit a surplus? That is how many people who struggle to gain think they are eating tons are really not eating very much at all.

Because manufacturers under estimate calories on the boxed food, and because people generally do not measure what they consume properly, again under estimating, and most of all, way over estimating their calories burned during exercise.

Well I am an overestimator so that wouldn't work for me! I am pretty awful, so I just keep eating to make up for it until my weight is moving in the right direction.

sardelsa

If you go to the gaining section you will find many people who don't track accurately who think they are eating 3000 calories and wonder why they aren't gaining when really they are eating more like 2000-2500 and are really maintaining.They also underestimate how much they move, fidget, exercise.

cmriverside

In your scenario of eating away from home and not knowing, well. I don't know.

So I truly try to guess as accurately as I can and log it, then...

I let it go.

It isn't important enough for me to spend any more time than that. I don't care if it's over or under.

magnusthenerd

heybales wrote: »

Food labels are allowed to be upwards of 20% incorrect.

Logging is likely to go both ways.

Estimating really isn't needed that rough though.

Because you shouldn't be "measuring" food portions - because calories is per gram, weight, not volume, or cup or spoon measures.

Weighing is measuring.
If we wanted to get technical, one doesn't "weigh" anything in grams, one masses something in grams because grams are a unit of mass, not weight.


For the question, I'd favor trying to side with what will work best with your goal, so side on overestimates for losing, and underestimates for gaining. When looking at maintenance, side against what seems to be your natural tendency.

garystrickland357

As much as I am on the accurate logging bandwagon - the truth is I don't log accurately. Here's what I do - and it has worked for me to lose 80 pounds and maintain for over 7 months...

I weigh and log MOST of my food. I'll weigh my breakfast because I'm home and it's easy. I can usually log lunch accurately because I can eat at home for lunch. I usually cook supper and I am mostly accurate. I log the calorie dense ingredients. I generally skip the tomatoes, lettuce, pickles, etc that are very low calorie. I'll also skip logging a few licks and nibbles here and there...

This works I believe because I probably overestimate the caloric value of the things I DO log. I also use the lowest numbers available for my exercise calories. In spite of that I often show a calorie deficit for the day - I know that's wrong because I'm maintaining my weight.

The act of logging keeps me mindful of what I'm eating. Overestimating the caloric value of foods makes me consider my food choices. Monitoring the scale keeps me honest about the trends. This works for me.

For clarity: I use the values in the database. I just usually choose the higher caloric value if there is a choice.

heybales

magnusthenerd wrote: »

heybales wrote: »

Food labels are allowed to be upwards of 20% incorrect.

Logging is likely to go both ways.

Estimating really isn't needed that rough though.

Because you shouldn't be "measuring" food portions - because calories is per gram, weight, not volume, or cup or spoon measures.

Weighing is measuring.
If we wanted to get technical, one doesn't "weigh" anything in grams, one masses something in grams because grams are a unit of mass, not weight.

True and sorry, rather than what would be a constant battle of correcting vast majority on MFP and life, I was merely going by the commonly used terminologies that seem to be accepted.