Tracking rice?

ca_price_

Hi, I'm getting a bit confused with how to track my basmati rice e.g weigh cooked or uncooked? The packet says '100g (hob cooked) kcal 127' and it states 1 portion is 70g.

I weighed 70g dry for myself and tracked it as 89kcal like it said above, but should I have weighed out a 70g portion after it was cooked

durden

The difference between cooked and uncooked is negligible, so whatever is easiest for you is the way to go.

Lietchi

durden wrote: »

The difference between cooked and uncooked is negligible, so whatever is easiest for you is the way to go.

Sorry, but no.
The difference between using a cooked rice entry (weighing the cooked rice) and an uncooked rice entry (weighing the uncooked rice) will be negligible.

But weighing raw and logging that weight using a cooked rice entry, that is certainly not a minimal difference.

70gr cooked is 89 calories. 70gr uncooked is 245 calories.

durden

Lietchi wrote: »

durden wrote: »

The difference between cooked and uncooked is negligible, so whatever is easiest for you is the way to go.

Sorry, but no.
The difference between using a cooked rice entry (weighing the cooked rice) and an uncooked rice entry (weighing the uncooked rice) will be negligeable.

But weighing raw and logging that weight using a cooked rice entry, that is certainly not a minimal difference.

70gr cooked is 89 calories. 70gr uncooked is 245 calories.

That's... Not what i'm suggesting. Nutritional information on packages for raw materials (like rice) almost always reference the uncooked weight, and state as much. If you want to be as accurate as possible, then logging from the box is always your best bet.

Since we're talking about rice specifically, let's be real; Unless you're adding additional ingredients (which if we're being this nitpicky should be tracked separately anyways) all you're doing is boiling it in water and expanding its mass through that water weight. The actual volume of rice you are consuming is still the same.

Now if you're logging an item that stipulates it is "cooked rice", then yes, you will obviously want to log the item as described. But that's assuming you are just logging from MFP and not double-checking the package itself.

As a follow up suggestion- It's more important to be consistent with how you log (whether it be pre or post cooking) than anything.

Lietchi

We seem to be talking about different things.

When I read that someone logged 70gr of raw rice for 89 calories (70gr portion of cooked rice as stated on the package), I really don't understand how anyone can say it is negligible unless there is some misunderstanding.

kami3006

Lietchi wrote: »

We seem to be talking about different things.

When I read that someone logged 70gr of raw rice for 89 calories (70gr portion of cooked rice as stated on the package), I really don't understand how anyone can say it is negligible unless there is some misunderstanding.

I think what they meant was the difference in weighing raw and using a raw weight vs weighing cooked and using a cooked weight is negligible.

OP, just make sure your weights correspond to your entry. raw wt = raw entry; cooked weight= cooked entry. Use packaging when you can as the user entered database may reflect ingredients that aren't noted in the description; like added oils. Most labels are raw, frozen foods are the frozen weight, and some will say as prepared which is the cooked weight.

In the provided example, your 70g dry is significantly more than 70g cooked as the absorbed water would add weight.

When I cook pasta, I use 1.25 servings for myself which is 70g @ 250 calories. When it's cooked the weight is about 170g @ 250 calories. If I were to weigh out 70g cooked, it would be significantly less than 250 calories. If I weighed out 170g raw, it would be significantly more cals.