Weighing pasta

nataliehallworth

I'm totally confused re the weighing of pasta. I scanned the packet and it said 134 calories for 100g. I've been weighing out 100g dry and cooking it separately but this seems like a lot for so few calories. Should it be 100g once cooked for those calories?? Please help

Jruzer

100 g of uncooked pasta is more like 350 kcal. I think the entry you're using is for cooked pasta.

goal06082021

The nutrition label should specify on the serving size line as to whether it's cooked or dry. It might even have both, depending on the manufacturer. When it comes to packaged food, always always always double-check the entry in MFP against the nutrition label in your hand, and assume the label in your hand is the correct one if they differ. The vast majority of the packaged food entries were added by your fellow users at some point in the past 15 years - even if that user faithfully copied over all of the nutrition information with perfect accuracy in 2011, it's very possible that the recipe or serving size has changed in the interim.

About pasta specifically, I always weigh it dry and make sure I'm using an entry for dry/uncooked pasta.

Edit to add: You say you're using the barcode scanner - be aware that doing so is not downloading any data from the package in your hand, or anything like that. The scanner is basically just searching the database faster, since you don't have to manually type in the name of the food you're searching for.

Jthanmyfitnesspal

Almost all unsweetened flour-based products are about 100kcals/oz (dry). That includes basic bread and dry pasta. There's more uncertainty in cooked pasta because it can soak up water over a range of proportions.

I'm an approximate kind of guy, so I jam as much pasta as will fit in a cup measure and use one of the entries that puts that at about 280kcals. It's fast and easy.

nataliehallworth

The scanner and the label are the same it just doesn't say if cooked or dry so I'm still confused

wilson10102018

nataliehallworth wrote: »

The scanner and the label are the same it just doesn't say if cooked or dry so I'm still confused

Let's say this again. Pasta has 100 calories per ounce dry. End of discussion.

springlering62

wilson10102018 wrote: »

nataliehallworth wrote: »

The scanner and the label are the same it just doesn't say if cooked or dry so I'm still confused

Let's say this again. Pasta has 100 calories per ounce dry. End of discussion.

An ounce being 28 grams.

lemurcat2

And to complete the loop, 100/28=3.57. 3.57x100=357. So as the first responding poster said, 100 g of dry pasta = about 350 cals (or 357 cals).

That corresponds reasonably to 100 g cooked being 134 cal, although in the US the label would specify whether it's "cooked" or "as prepared."

Unless it is some special low-cal "pasta" (do you have a brand or label?), it wouldn't be 100 cal dry for 134 cal.

zheother

I recently had this dilemma, and after some "research" for barilla i take it as 100 grams of uncooked at 360, and 100 grams of cooked is 180 since pasta gains in volume as you cook.

Me and the wifey cook roughly 300 grams of pasta and then the division goes to roughly 2/3 to me and 1/3 to her plate. So to avoid weighing the cooked stuff I just enter the dry weight and call it a day.

yirara

How much calories are in cooked pasta depends a lot on how it's cooked. Al dente has absorbed less water, and hence the overall weight is lower compared to pasta cooked to death. It's always best to chose a dry entry. When this has an entry in grams of around 350-360 calories per 100 grams you got a good entry. The same is also true for other dry products such as rice, couscous, etc.
Btw, i always chose the amount of pasta based on the rest in the dish. It's usually around 70-90gr dry for a portion for me.

wilson10102018

Cooked pasta also varies based on the type of pasta,. So weighing dry is the only way. If it must be divided after cooking one would weigh dry to get the calorie count of the whole thing and then weigh each cooked portion to see what % of the calories end up on your plate.

lemurcat2

Sounds like her label doesn't give a dry weight. If it's just standard pasta I'd use the USDA entry for dry pasta, personally. But if it's something atypical the label is probably the best option. I would expect a label to reflect al dente/the type of pasta it is, so cooking longer would just mean you really had slightly fewer cals than you thought.

MaggieGirl135

@goal06082021 ”You say you're using the barcode scanner - be aware that doing so is not downloading any data from the package in your hand, or anything like that. The scanner is basically just searching the database faster, since you don't have to manually type in the name of the food you're searching for.”

I did not know that! Thank you.

Jthanmyfitnesspal

Hah! I love that people are disagreeing with my approach of measuring pasta in a cup. My dudes: it works for me!

Jruzer

Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »

Hah! I love that people are disagreeing with my approach of measuring pasta in a cup. My dudes: it works for me!

Works for me too - I don't even usually measure it any more. I just eyeball; I know about how much pasta to eat. Same with rice.

NB: I didn't always know. Its taken 10 years of losing and maintaining to get here.

yirara

Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »

Hah! I love that people are disagreeing with my approach of measuring pasta in a cup. My dudes: it works for me!

Yes, for you. Not for everyone. I don't know what kind of pasta you eat, but a lot of pasta is irregularly shaped, and orientation can change things a lot. and why would you eat exactly the measure of a cup of pasta? I said above I usually have 70-90gr of pasta, depending on how much calories I have left after the other ingredients. Btw, I didn't downvote you.

Jthanmyfitnesspal

@yirara : and I have no problem with people who choose to weigh portions!

westrich20940

I weight my pasta dry and the nutrition info on the box is for dry....if 2oz is 200 calories, then 100 grams is ~3.5oz --- which is ~350 cals. So your measurement must be for cooked pasta....so then weight the pasta after it's cooked.

alexmose2

here's something funny, i accidently got my angel hair pasta wet and had to cook it all. i just half the cooked amount to dry and call it a day

penguinmama87

This might be too much trouble depending on how you usually eat pasta, but since I typically am incorporating it into a recipe and not cooking and serving separately, I weigh dry and enter that into the recipe builder, then weigh the entire dish after it's cooked to get my number of servings.

If you really wanted to be precise, you could even build a recipe just for the pasta, where you enter the dry weight, weigh it once it's cooked, and set that as your number of servings.

For me it just isn't practical to cook portions for myself separately from the rest of my family. I think the ideas above are fine too, but just wanted to give you another option so you can pick what works best for you.

wilson10102018

Calorie count info is relevant from dry pasta weight. Portion size from cooked. If I made 600 calories of pasta I just have to weigh the cooked and my portion of the cooked to get my calories.

snowflake954

Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »

Almost all unsweetened flour-based products are about 100kcals/oz (dry). That includes basic bread and dry pasta. There's more uncertainty in cooked pasta because it can soak up water over a range of proportions.

I'm an approximate kind of guy, so I jam as much pasta as will fit in a cup measure and use one of the entries that puts that at about 280kcals. It's fast and easy.

I live in Italy and make pasta almost everyday. The vision of "jamming" it in a cup, just makes me want to cry.

wilson10102018

Set the strainer down on a plate on the scale. Weight will register. Take out your portion. weight will go down. That proportion of the total times the dry weight is how much you had.