Weigh Your Prepackaged Foods

Terytha
Terytha Posts: 2,097 Member
I'm so mad at both myself and Superstore.

My SIL sent me there for sourdough bread that she said was very low calorie. I glanced at it and hey, 130 for 2 slices! Whoah. Gotta get some of that.

Get home and look at the faded label and that 2 slices is supposed to be 50 grams. I weighed them. Try 115 grams.

I should've looked closer before buying but that is some shady labeling, and also a really good example of why you can't trust packaging.

vw0gszadxfc5.jpg

Replies

  • tracymayo1
    tracymayo1 Posts: 445 Member
    I learned to weigh everything early on.
    The good news is there are some things that actually let you eat MORE than the serving size if you go by weight though!!
  • ashleycarole86
    ashleycarole86 Posts: 6,305 Member
    I've recently started to notice this - surprises me less I suppose if it's a grocery store barcode, but I've been so confused when it's a can or something and the measurement seems super off... thanks for the advice.
  • maroonmango211
    maroonmango211 Posts: 908 Member
    It is definitely an 'emotional time' going from serving size in suggested portions to serving size by actual weight. I swear I mourned my extra peanut butter for months! But like others have said, sometimes I am pleasantly surprised when the weighed serving size is actually larger than I expected. I generally scan the code and change serving size to 1g and enter based on weight. After around 5 consistent times I may stop using the scale if its easy enough to say measure a cup or specific amount and know within a fair margin of error that it will be the same.... In the end even with food labels and weighing, they are allowed to be anywhere up to 10% off on their nutrient label so even when being as particular as possible there is no surefire way to be 100% accurate.
  • MsCzar
    MsCzar Posts: 1,071 Member
    edited April 2021
    Also remember that canned foods usually count the can's liquid into the weight/serving. Most times, we drain off the liquid before serving and that can throw off the calorie count. Not so important with sliced beets, but it's definitely a factor with something like chickpeas or beans. If you are relying on the label, measure with the liquid and then drain. Best to always trust little and weigh.
  • goal06082021
    goal06082021 Posts: 2,130 Member
    I've recently started to notice this - surprises me less I suppose if it's a grocery store barcode, but I've been so confused when it's a can or something and the measurement seems super off... thanks for the advice.

    Scanning a barcode and finding an entry with a much different serving size than the package in your hand comes down to two things: the Grocery Shrink Ray and changes to nutrition labeling requirements.

    Many, many packaged foods have decreased in size or volume over the past 15 years. The database is largely user-entered, so if someone bought (let's say) a can of corn and entered that into the database in 2011, it's very possible that the can has gotten smaller or there is less corn in it now than there was ten years ago. A food manufacturer might also change its serving size in response to nutrition labeling requirements - when the law started requiring calories and macros to be printed on the front of food packages, for instance, LOTS of manufacturers started reconfiguring their labels to look better, by redefining the serving size, usually to an amount that doesn't make sense for the way it's packaged. It's why canned soup is usually something like 2.5 servings per container - why? So they can say "150 calories per serving!" on the label, not that anyone eats a third of a can of soup at a time.