Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Does spaghetti really have 300 calories/100g?

2

Replies

  • WomonaWomona Posts: 410Member Member Posts: 410Member Member
    One serving of pasta is pitifully small. I plan my day around eating two servings when I’m making a meal, so at least my plate is *almost* full.

    Question: I’ve been measuring the cooked weight. Am I supposed to measure out the uncooked weight, and boil it separately from what I’m serving my family? I hope not. What a pain if that’s true.
  • BarbaraHelen2013BarbaraHelen2013 Posts: 609Member Member Posts: 609Member Member
    Doesn’t matter in which state you weigh it, as long as you’re using the appropriate entry to log it.
    On the occasions I eat pasta I generally weigh it dry only because I’m often cooking for myself separately from the rest of the family anyway because I’m vegetarian and they are not, and I like my food HOT when it reaches the table and weighing it cooked takes a few seconds and a few degrees 😂
  • sardelsasardelsa Posts: 8,321Member Member Posts: 8,321Member Member
    Sounds about right for dry weight. Mine has 300 cal for 85g.
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Posts: 3,354Member Member Posts: 3,354Member Member
    I find pasta to be a reasonable for the calories kind of food and ate it around once a week when I was losing, but I'm happy with a standard serving of the actual pasta and just bulk it up with a tasty sauce or toppings, which can be made reasonably low cal. The pasta itself is important to me for the overall meal, but I mainly like it as a vehicle for the sauces or other toppings, and so don't mind eating more of those, less of the pasta.

    But for OP, as others have said, I'm guessing that you are measuring cooked rather than dry.
    edited July 12
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Posts: 3,354Member Member Posts: 3,354Member Member
    Womona wrote: »
    One serving of pasta is pitifully small. I plan my day around eating two servings when I’m making a meal, so at least my plate is *almost* full.

    Question: I’ve been measuring the cooked weight. Am I supposed to measure out the uncooked weight, and boil it separately from what I’m serving my family? I hope not. What a pain if that’s true.

    You measure the dry weight, so a serving is actually quite a bit bigger than you've been thinking. It's good news!

    The trick for multiple servings is cook 4 servings (or whatever) and then when finished weigh the whole and take 1/4 of it.
  • noobootsnooboots Posts: 479Member Member Posts: 479Member Member
    MikePTY wrote: »
    It’s a sad reality that pasta is so calorie laden.

    It's not really though. There are a lot of foods that are more calorie dense. It can easily be made part of reasonable calorie dinners. You just can't eat giant plates smothered with fatty sauces

    I love giant plates smothered with fatty sauces though!
  • MikePTYMikePTY Posts: 3,104Member, Premium Member Posts: 3,104Member, Premium Member
    Womona wrote: »
    One serving of pasta is pitifully small. I plan my day around eating two servings when I’m making a meal, so at least my plate is *almost* full.

    Question: I’ve been measuring the cooked weight. Am I supposed to measure out the uncooked weight, and boil it separately from what I’m serving my family? I hope not. What a pain if that’s true.

    The nutritional info on the back of the package is for dry weight. So to get the most accurate results, measuring a dry portion is the best option. If doing that is not feasible, you should weigh your cooked pasta and then convert it back into dry. The issue is that cooked weight can vary pretty widely based on cooking time, so there's not one easy way to do it. General recommendations seem to say that cooked pasta weight is about double that of dry, but for some people, it ends up being more. It is probably better to do a few tests of dry weight to cooked weight based on how you cook it, to get an approximate answer to that equation. Then you can just convert back to dry from your cooked weights going forward.
  • katiesmom_99katiesmom_99 Posts: 87Member Member Posts: 87Member Member
    MikePTY wrote: »
    I got a bit inspired. While wheat pasta with a cna of tuna, some ligtt mayonnaise, and a touch of hot sauce. May not be fancy but it's tasty and filling. It clocked in at around 500-550 calories, which is a below average dinner for me, and could even be worked into a 1200 calorie diet pretty easily.

    99p2fvkp2nka.jpg

    Dang that looks good. Toss in some spinach or greens of choice and a few chunks of tomato. Pretty sure this is going on my menu next week.
  • thanos5thanos5 Posts: 502Member Member Posts: 502Member Member
    sigh. today is the italian fest right outside of my work. giant garlic bread bowls of pasta.
  • kshama2001kshama2001 Posts: 19,762Member Member Posts: 19,762Member Member
    I have seen this argument before. Everyone thinks they need to plate a huge amount of pasta because when they go out to eat, since the pasta is the cheapest ingredient on the menu, they get a ton of it.

    Just weigh out 3 oz and cook it up al dente and plate it with an appropriate amount of tomato sauce and see for yourself.
    MikePTY wrote: »
    Yes this is it. Restaurants give us enough pasta for 3 people at least.

    I did a high carb diet preparing for an event a few months ago, and that involved a lot of whole wheat pasta with some chicken and mild seasoning. It was a actually hard for me to get as many calories as I wanted, because the pasta filled me up so much more than my normal diet.

    Yes, I add extra veggies to takeout Pad Thai and get three servings out of it.
Sign In or Register to comment.