Sweet potato calories raw vs cooked

Michelle9055

When I look up sweet potato, I got this http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/3254?qlookup=11507&max=25&man=&lfacet=&new=1. It says 1 sweet potato 5" long and 130g is 112 calories. Most sites say a medium sweet potato about same weight is around 112 calories. When I weighed a sweet potato that was 5' long and 2' diameter like this site says http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-sweetpotato-i11508, it was much more than 114g (about double) which says on that site. After I put it in the microwave it was about 114g. So do i use the raw weight or cooked weight? If i used the raw weight, a medium sweet potato would be about 224 calories and everywhere I see on the internet, a medium sweet potato the same size is 100-115 calories but weighs less. How is this possible? Can anyone help me with this? If i look up baked sweet potato, it has the same calories and weight so im really confused. Thanks

NiikouruDesu

So if you go in the microwave you lose weight?

serindipte

I use this entry: Sweet potato - Cooked, baked in skin, without salt
It comes out to 90 cals per 100 grams -- After cooking

laceypatt

Ive also been wondering about this. I buy my potatoes on the smaller side and slice them into really thin fries, spray them with olive oil spray and bake them for about 25 minutes. I'll end up with almost a third of the raw weight. I've been using the entry "Sweet potato - Cooked, baked in skin, without salt " and if i used a raw entry it would be sooo much more calorie/macro wise. So I have no idea which one to use.

Anyone know anything about this?

poohbah4

Any weight lost during cooking would be due strictly to the evaporation of water. The number of calories should be the same before and after cooking.

FredDoyle

If you weigh and log everything raw, it doesn't matter how well done you cook it because it will mostly be water loss.
I even weigh and log raw meats because it's mostly water that cooks off as well. If a bit of fat renders out, well, at least I know I'm not OVER my calorie target. Weights in the database for cooked items are less accurate I feel as people cook things to different temperatures/doneness.

potsnobsc

EVERYTHING about the Nutritional value depends on wether if it raw or cooked and most importantly HOW you cook.
By losing water- you lose food volume. Water is essential to feeling full during weight loss, and if you pay for food according to weight you are losing money.
Heating the veggies over 200f loses vitamins so The hotter your food gets the less nutrition and flavour you get. heat matters.
WATER- cooking food IN water loses flavour and washes out or dissolved water soluble nutrition, and of course flavour (which is how we make soup)
OXIDATION (oven or steam or blending) is highly oxidative and also loses nutritional value and flavour and texture.

By boiling, steaming or baking and pressure cooking you can lose up to 70% of the nutrition and flavour in your food and most importantly your vegetables.
FIBRE: becomes less effective when it is overcooked. Fibre is essential in digestion and sugar regulation and toxin removal (would you ever buy a broom without Bristles on it? 🤔)

If you cook your food in waterless cookware and can catch the temperature below boiling you will have the nutritional value of raw vegetables that are hot tender and simply delicious and absolutely more filling. This will help as not only will you get satisfied with less food ($$) not will NOT feel like you are on a ‘diet’. The food is more delicious and has higher nutrient density and FLAVOR.

Hope this helps.
(I am a cooking coach with Saladmaster and also a Food For Life EAP Instructor with PCRM.)
FB: Saladmaster Niagara

lemurcat2

I would normally weigh before cooking -- and I prefer using the weight to estimating the size or measuring the length (they vary in size even if the same length).

If you choose "sweet potato, raw" and weigh raw, that will give the correct cals. Add any oil or the like that you add, of course.

If you cook and want to weigh after, choose "sweet potato, cooked," plus the cooking method.

lemurcat2

potsnobsc wrote: »

EVERYTHING about the Nutritional value depends on wether if it raw or cooked and most importantly HOW you cook.
By losing water- you lose food volume. Water is essential to feeling full during weight loss, and if you pay for food according to weight you are losing money.
Heating the veggies over 200f loses vitamins so The hotter your food gets the less nutrition and flavour you get. heat matters.
WATER- cooking food IN water loses flavour and washes out or dissolved water soluble nutrition, and of course flavour (which is how we make soup)
OXIDATION (oven or steam or blending) is highly oxidative and also loses nutritional value and flavour and texture.

By boiling, steaming or baking and pressure cooking you can lose up to 70% of the nutrition and flavour in your food and most importantly your vegetables.
FIBRE: becomes less effective when it is overcooked. Fibre is essential in digestion and sugar regulation and toxin removal (would you ever buy a broom without Bristles on it? 🤔)

If you cook your food in waterless cookware and can catch the temperature below boiling you will have the nutritional value of raw vegetables that are hot tender and simply delicious and absolutely more filling. This will help as not only will you get satisfied with less food ($$) not will NOT feel like you are on a ‘diet’. The food is more delicious and has higher nutrient density and FLAVOR.

Hope this helps.
(I am a cooking coach with Saladmaster and also a Food For Life EAP Instructor with PCRM.)
FB: Saladmaster Niagara

This really seems like over-thinking. I like my sweet potatoes (and potatoes and many other veg) roasted, and have never found that that prevents them from being filling.

If one cares about fiber, there are better sources than sweet potatoes. One thing I'd say with both potatoes and sweet potatoes is that if you want to keep more of the nutrients, eat the skin.

nanastaci2020

If you use the raw weight, use a diary entry for raw weight. I trust raw weights over cooked because how long you cook it and/or how you cook it determines the final weight and may not be the same each time.

Are you eating 100% of the sweet potato? If so the calories from raw to cooked only change if you add something to it. USDA site says raw sweet potato is 86 cals per 100 grams. If your raw sweet potato is 225 grams then that would be 2.25 x 86 or 194 calories.

If you do not eat it all that gets a little more involved if you want to be highly accurate. Weigh raw. Weigh cooked. Weigh again after you finish. Lets say those #s are 225g raw, 175g cooked (lower because moisture cooks out/evaporates) and you eat some. The remaining portion is only 55g. In this example you ate 120g cooked (difference between 175 and 55) that was 120/175 or 69% of the original. 225 x .69 = 155g, so you consumed 1.55 x 86 or 133 cals.

Of course, if you're going to eat all of it across 2 sittings, no harm in approximating how much you eat now vs tomorrow as the net result is the same.