The Benefits of Measuring.. at least for me

Winning4EJ

Decided to measure out what a teaspoon of Earth Balance (non dairy butter) would be and to my disappointment found I've been using 1 tablespoon rather than my preferred 1 teaspoon. 1 tablespoon is a whopping 100 calories. Oh my...trying to be more accurate with my calorie counting and overall I think I do pretty well , but glad I caught this.

The calories can add up quick.

claireychn074

I had the same realisation with peanut butter!

AnnPT77

Weighing on a food scale is even better, IMO. Yeah, it's more accurate, but mostly it's quicker/easier. With something like a spread in a tub/jar, I just put the tub on the scale, zero/tare the scale, dip out the amount with my preferred utensil, and read the negative number on the scale. That's the amount I took out.

It's really quick and easy, and doesn't require washing extra measuring thingies. I do a similar process with something like a hunk of cheese. Salads or sandwiches can be built on a plate right on the scale, zeroing with the plate on it, then adding an ingredient, noting the added amount then re-zeroing after each ingredient.

I like to use grams because they're more fine-grained than ounces/tenths, so a little more precise. In the US, most foods' labels include the gram value for the serving size, too.

kshama2001

claireychn074 wrote: »

I had the same realisation with peanut butter!

Me too!



@Winning4EJ - when you say "measure," do you mean by using a food scale? If not, I highly recommend it! See Ann's post above.

Winning4EJ

kshama2001 wrote: »

claireychn074 wrote: »

I had the same realisation with peanut butter!

Me too!



@Winning4EJ - when you say "measure," do you mean by using a food scale? If not, I highly recommend it! See Ann's post above.

No used an actual measuring spoon and leveled it off.

Winning4EJ

I need to look into a new scale

AnnPT77

Winning4EJ wrote: »

I need to look into a new scale

A reasonable digital scale should be able to be had for around $20 or less. Amazon is an option, but even places like Walmart may have them, if you're in the US.

westrich20940

I point this out for mayo all the time to people (irl). It's very easy to make a sandwich and then go to log the ingredients and see 'mayo - 1 tablespoon' is ~100 calories and say that's how much you put on your sandwich. Go and actually measure 1 tablespoon of mayo and spread it on bread and look at what it looks like. LOL, I'm def using significantly more than that if I'm having a sandwich.

That's why it's important to weigh/measure things as accurately as possible so that you get an idea of what your food looks like. Most people use the same cooking equipment and plates/bowls all the time so eventually you can make a decent estimate of how much cereal you put into your bowl - but at first, you need to measure it bc it's much more than a 'serving'.

It doesn't mean you have to change what you are eating necessarily - you just need to know how much you are eating and log it.

claireychn074

Winning4EJ wrote: »

kshama2001 wrote: »

claireychn074 wrote: »

I had the same realisation with peanut butter!

Me too!



@Winning4EJ - when you say "measure," do you mean by using a food scale? If not, I highly recommend it! See Ann's post above.

No used an actual measuring spoon and leveled it off.

Ahh yes defo get a scale. To use the peanut butter example, a tablespoon is listed as 15g. But when I use a tablespoon to scoop my peanut butter (thick stuff with chunks of nuts) it actually comes out as weighing 30-45g. So that’s 2-3 times the weight I thought and a significant calorific difference. That would be enough to wipe out a calorie deficit for some people. I got my scales from Amazon, cheap and cheerful but incredibly useful.

(Edited for my annoying typos)

history_grrrl

I’m finding this same problem with bread (package says one roll = 50 grams, but scale says 70), frozen vegetables, etc. I really struggled the other day to find accurate info for canned kidney beans; the database entries were wildly variable and inaccurate, even for gram weight. I’m mainly relying on my scale now. I scoured these boards for suggestions and got this one, which was pretty cheap and works well: Ozeri Pro Digital Kitchen Food Scale.

kshama2001

history_grrrl wrote: »

I’m finding this same problem with bread (package says one roll = 50 grams, but scale says 70), frozen vegetables, etc. I really struggled the other day to find accurate info for canned kidney beans; the database entries were wildly variable and inaccurate, even for gram weight. I’m mainly relying on my scale now. I scoured these boards for suggestions and got this one, which was pretty cheap and works well: Ozeri Pro Digital Kitchen Food Scale.

Unfortunately, the green check marks in the MFP database are used for both USER-created entries and ADMIN-created entries that MFP pulled from the USDA database. A green check mark for USER-created entries just means enough people have upvoted the entry - it is not necessarily correct.

To find ADMIN entries for whole foods, I get the syntax from the USDA database and paste that into MFP. All ADMIN entries from the USDA will have weights as an option BUT there is a glitch whereby sometimes 1g is the option but the values are actually for 100g. This is pretty easy to spot though, as when added the calories are 100x more than is reasonable.

https://fdc.nal.usda.gov

Use the “SR Legacy” tab - that's what MFP used to pull in entries.

• For drained kidney beans: "Beans, kidney, red, mature seeds, canned, drained solids"
• For frozen veggies not yet cooked entries will look like this: "Peas, green, frozen, unprepared"
• Cooked: "Peas, green, frozen, cooked, boiled, drained, with salt"

Note: any MFP entry that includes "USDA" was USER entered.

For packaged foods, I verify the label against what I find in MFP. (Alas, you cannot just scan with your phone and assume what you get is correct. Note: scanning is mostly only available with Premium these days.)

yirara

Quite often, those USDA entries aren't too bad, and many contain good info, grams, fibre, the lot. Was looking for a simple banana today and could not remember the syntax and only otherwise got stuff with cups, medium sized banana, etc.
However, some are really rubbish.

AnnPT77

yirara wrote: »

Quite often, those USDA entries aren't too bad, and many contain good info, grams, fibre, the lot. Was looking for a simple banana today and could not remember the syntax and only otherwise got stuff with cups, medium sized banana, etc.
However, some are really rubbish.

Just as a point of info, the USDA entries kshama is talking about will usually have cups as the default quantity, even when cups is a really extra-dumb way to measure. (Stuff like watermelon, hard-boiled eggs, etc.) But the drop-down for servings will have volumes, weights, sometimes counts or inch sized: Different types of measurements. That's one of the indicators that you have one of the original-load USDA entries.

Fruit entries are usually fruit-name (plural) plus "raw". The "Bananas, raw" entry (default quantity 4.2 ounces!) looks like the one. It has sizes of bananas, cups of bananas (sliced or mashed), various metric and imperial volume measures and weight measures.

MacLowCarbing

I find there are things I can eyeball and things I need to measure.

I can eyeball fruit, veggie servings, seasonings, even meat portions pretty good. Sometimes I call it then measure it to make sure I'm right.

Things like dairy, or nut butters, spreads, or even some fats when I'm approaching my limits and need to restrict them, I keep track of them more carefully. I'm more likely to underestimate how much is there because I want more lol.