This is why weighing is important...
Francl27
Posts: 26,371 Member
There's that brand of frozen waffles I love... 'Waffle Waffle'. I used to eat a whole box of them (yikes). They come in 4, and the nutrition behind says 'serving size - 33g, servings in a box - 8. Ok, so if you're smart, you'll guess that one serving is half a waffle (who comes up with this ****?).
But I weighed one... and it was 83g. One serving is 140 calories. So your 280 calorie waffle is really 352 calories. That's 72 calories I would not have logged if I hadn't weighed my food. Imagine that I love the things (which I do!), and would eat two a day... that's 140 calories right there. With a small deficit, between that and another kind of packaged food, it could nullify my deficit for the day.
But I weighed one... and it was 83g. One serving is 140 calories. So your 280 calorie waffle is really 352 calories. That's 72 calories I would not have logged if I hadn't weighed my food. Imagine that I love the things (which I do!), and would eat two a day... that's 140 calories right there. With a small deficit, between that and another kind of packaged food, it could nullify my deficit for the day.
0
Replies
-
Absolutely! I've done this with bread slices, buns, eggs, pretty well everything. The results are always the same. The servings are usually not accurate and when you have a teeny deficit - they add up. It's super easy to go over by even 50 cals a day and you have blown your 250 deficit (.5lb/wk) for the week.
The only things I have fond come 'close' are pre-packaged foods like baby bell cheeses, individual yogurts, protein bars and other "single serving" items.
Bagels are probably the worst. I serving is HALF a bagel (as if) and most of the time they are WAY bigger then they list them as. The food industry are a bunch of ba*tards - trust NO ONE!0 -
The flipside of this is canned goods ... for instance, a 400g tin of soup or tomatoes, on average weighs about 375 - 385g (and this is into the saucepan, cold not post-cooking when it will likely have a lost a few grams in the cooking process). And so you could be talking about a "saving" - particularly with soup - of about 20 calories or similar. And THAT really adds up, and can make the difference to going over your daily calories or whatever :happy: !!0
-
The food industry are a bunch of ba*tards - trust NO ONE!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
OMG canned goods! I bought a 12oz can of something once because I needed 10oz for a recipe... turned out the can had 9.5oz in it or something. And soups are never 2.5 or 2 servings, but more like 1.7.
Individual yogurts I don't weigh, but the time I did, it was much less than what was on the package (I only buy big ones now anyway). And bread is typically 5-6g more for a slice than what the package says.0 -
According to the FDA, it's fine if the labels are off by 20%. So the now properly weighed waffle still likely has about 336 calories since most food manufacturers err on the side of listing too few, rather than too many, calories in their food.0
-
According to the FDA, it's fine if the labels are off by 20%. So the now properly weighed waffle still likely has about 336 calories since most food manufacturers err on the side of listing too few, rather than too many, calories in their food.
The FDA has also proposed new labeling that would reflect the typical serving size the average person would eat rather than the current serving size on the label. That will make it easier for folks to gauge how many calories they are actually consuming.0 -
Wow! This is something I have never considered! I'll be looking at labels a little more closely from now on and weighing everything!0
-
The FDA has also proposed new labeling that would reflect the typical serving size the average person would eat rather than the current serving size on the label. That will make it easier for folks to gauge how many calories they are actually consuming.
Yeah the way things are setup right now is just insane. Cups, tablespoons, grams, ounces, half a slice, two chunks, the serving sizes are all over the map and impossible to correlate from one product to another. I would much rather we get the nutrition information for a standard unit of measure (per gram for instance) and then optionally list it for the average real serving.
That way, on a measurable basis, we could look at a gram of chips vs. a gram of broccoli and make a nutritional distinction without any fancy conversions.0 -
According to the FDA, it's fine if the labels are off by 20%. So the now properly weighed waffle still likely has about 336 calories since most food manufacturers err on the side of listing too few, rather than too many, calories in their food.
i think we're going a little too far with this calorie calculating now...0 -
These kind of threads make my eating issues SO much worse. I feel like nothing is safe to eat anymore. I always weigh, but what if the calories are off on the packing? This is why I over log calories and never actually finish the entire serving. I need to stay off these message boards before I have no safe foods left lol....
0 -
OH noes! 70 calories off! MY GOD I CAN FEEL LBS. COMING! WATCH OUT PANTS!0
-
According to the FDA, it's fine if the labels are off by 20%. So the now properly weighed waffle still likely has about 336 calories since most food manufacturers err on the side of listing too few, rather than too many, calories in their food.
i think we're going a little too far with this calorie calculating now...
Yeah, I just log what I eat and exercise I do and sort of assume everything is off. I posted the margin of error just to point out that we really don't have enough information to be at all scientific about the individual calories we eat.0 -
Absolutely! I've done this with bread slices, buns, eggs, pretty well everything. The results are always the same. The servings are usually not accurate and when you have a teeny deficit - they add up. It's super easy to go over by even 50 cals a day and you have blown your 250 deficit (.5lb/wk) for the week.
The only things I have fond come 'close' are pre-packaged foods like baby bell cheeses, individual yogurts, protein bars and other "single serving" items.
Bagels are probably the worst. I serving is HALF a bagel (as if) and most of the time they are WAY bigger then they list them as. The food industry are a bunch of ba*tards - trust NO ONE!
Hm when I first got my scale I weighed a lot of things like bread slices, eggs, and other stuff like that and actually found them all to be fairly accurate.0 -
apparently "averaging your calories" is lost on a few people.0
-
Absolutely! I've done this with bread slices, buns, eggs, pretty well everything. The results are always the same. The servings are usually not accurate and when you have a teeny deficit - they add up. It's super easy to go over by even 50 cals a day and you have blown your 250 deficit (.5lb/wk) for the week.
The only things I have fond come 'close' are pre-packaged foods like baby bell cheeses, individual yogurts, protein bars and other "single serving" items.
Bagels are probably the worst. I serving is HALF a bagel (as if) and most of the time they are WAY bigger then they list them as. The food industry are a bunch of ba*tards - trust NO ONE!
Hm when I first got my scale I weighed a lot of things like bread slices, eggs, and other stuff like that and actually found them all to be fairly accurate.
Yeah some brands are. Eggs are all over the place here, from 44g to 60g for a large... but I admit it's not always convenient to weigh them so I don't always do it, and even then it's only 10 calories difference instead of 70 or something. For bread, I typically weigh the topping anyway, so it's just hitting the tare button one more time, so not a big deal.0 -
The FDA has also proposed new labeling that would reflect the typical serving size the average person would eat rather than the current serving size on the label. That will make it easier for folks to gauge how many calories they are actually consuming.
Yeah the way things are setup right now is just insane. Cups, tablespoons, grams, ounces, half a slice, two chunks, the serving sizes are all over the map and impossible to correlate from one product to another. I would much rather we get the nutrition information for a standard unit of measure (per gram for instance) and then optionally list it for the average real serving.
That way, on a measurable basis, we could look at a gram of chips vs. a gram of broccoli and make a nutritional distinction without any fancy conversions.
I do love our system in Australia - all food has nutritional information per 100g - regardless of the actual size of the package.
So much easier.0 -
OH noes! 70 calories off! MY GOD I CAN FEEL LBS. COMING! WATCH OUT PANTS!
Hey c'mon now be nice. To some people this is a lot, especially if it's an every day thing. It's a huge effect for people who don't have a very healthy relationship with food. I understand the sarcasm and trying to be funny, but it really wasn't needed here. And that's a big deal coming form me cause I'm usually the most sarcastic one I come across during any given day.0 -
The FDA has also proposed new labeling that would reflect the typical serving size the average person would eat rather than the current serving size on the label. That will make it easier for folks to gauge how many calories they are actually consuming.
Yeah the way things are setup right now is just insane. Cups, tablespoons, grams, ounces, half a slice, two chunks, the serving sizes are all over the map and impossible to correlate from one product to another. I would much rather we get the nutrition information for a standard unit of measure (per gram for instance) and then optionally list it for the average real serving.
That way, on a measurable basis, we could look at a gram of chips vs. a gram of broccoli and make a nutritional distinction without any fancy conversions.
I do love our system in Australia - all food has nutritional information per 100g - regardless of the actual size of the package.
So much easier.
Didn't we adopt your healthcare reform? Maybe we should adopt this too.0 -
I've seen this on food labels in Europe. They had nutrition info per serving and per 100 g. I loved it. Makes so much sense.0
-
I think it would also be helpful to add calories per package, regardless of how big the package is. If you see in raw numbers exactly how many calories is in that package of Oreos or bag of Lays, it might make you put it down after an actual serving.0
-
You guys are missing the other obvious potential problem here. You're so concerned that their portion size is wrong for the weight. Have you considered that the calorie count could be off by weight thereby compounding the problem. There's nothing a food scale is going to do about that. If it says 40g is 400 calories the FDA is still allowing wiggle room - and it has to. Do people remember from school what a calorie (or rather a kilocalorie) really is? The the energy needed to raise the temperature of 1 kilogram of water through 1 °C measured by burning said food. Calories vary people. You can burn two peanuts and get calorie variation.
We need to stop being so damn anal aboout weighing food by grams and focus more on results. What do I know though? I'm what you'd acall a blasphemer, a heretic...I've never set food on a scale in my whole life. I've lost 37 lbs in <6 months with my OH SO INACCURATE method of counting calories as close as REASONABLY possible and not sweating the variations. Weigh food all you want, I'm not going to change you with my rant - but don't get so hung up on it. I sincerely doubt any food weigher will be doing it for 30 years even if they do maintain their weight loss and health for the rest of their life.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I think it would also be helpful to add calories per package, regardless of how big the package is. If you see in raw numbers exactly how many calories is in that package of Oreos or bag of Lays, it might make you put it down after an actual serving.
I doubt it any more than the warnings and grotesque pictures on packages of cigarettes stops a smoker from smoking.0 -
There's that brand of frozen waffles I love... 'Waffle Waffle'. I used to eat a whole box of them (yikes). They come in 4, and the nutrition behind says 'serving size - 33g, servings in a box - 8. Ok, so if you're smart, you'll guess that one serving is half a waffle (who comes up with this ****?).
But I weighed one... and it was 83g. One serving is 140 calories. So your 280 calorie waffle is really 352 calories. That's 72 calories I would not have logged if I hadn't weighed my food. Imagine that I love the things (which I do!), and would eat two a day... that's 140 calories right there. With a small deficit, between that and another kind of packaged food, it could nullify my deficit for the day.
Good catch. And yes, you have to always weigh and read those darn labels closely. If not, its usually bend over time...... :laugh:0 -
These kind of threads make my eating issues SO much worse. I feel like nothing is safe to eat anymore. I always weigh, but what if the calories are off on the packing? This is why I over log calories and never actually finish the entire serving. I need to stay off these message boards before I have no safe foods left lol....
I agree with you, that is why I never eat all my exercise calories
I don't want to be that OCD and totally consumed about weighting every little morsel that put n my mouth. I didn't do it when was losing, not doing it now that I am on maintenance.
Nothing is that accurate in life, but OP I appreciate your effort and concern.0 -
yep. my thoughts on weighing food as well, and ive also had great resultsYou guys are missing the other obvious potential problem here. You're so concerned that their portion size is wrong for the weight. Have you considered that the calorie count could be off by weight thereby compounding the problem. There's nothing a food scale is going to do about that. If it says 40g is 400 calories the FDA is still allowing wiggle room - and it has to. Do people remember from school what a calorie (or rather a kilocalorie) really is? The the energy needed to raise the temperature of 1 kilogram of water through 1 °C measured by burning said food. Calories vary people. You can burn two peanuts and get calorie variation.
We need to stop being so damn anal aboout weighing food by grams and focus more on results. What do I know though? I'm what you'd acall a blasphemer, a heretic...I've never set food on a scale in my whole life. I've lost 37 lbs in <6 months with my OH SO INACCURATE method of counting calories as close as REASONABLY possible and not sweating the variations. Weigh food all you want, I'm not going to change you with my rant - but don't get so hung up on it. I sincerely doubt any food weigher will be doing it for 30 years even if they do maintain their weight loss and health for the rest of their life.0 -
I can't afford a food scale and to be honest, I would find it depressing to weigh everything I put in my mouth. I'm sticking to calorie counting and portion control, and it seems to be working just fine for me.0
-
OH noes! 70 calories off! MY GOD I CAN FEEL LBS. COMING! WATCH OUT PANTS!
Says the 27 yo man.
But if you were an older woman with only a 300 calorie difference between your TDEE and BMR by most calculators, 70 calories might seem like a bigger deal.0 -
I can't afford a food scale and to be honest, I would find it depressing to weigh everything I put in my mouth. I'm sticking to calorie counting and portion control, and it seems to be working just fine for me.
I can afford a food scale, but have never bought one. Being off a few calories here and there isn't killing me and I've had enough padding in my daily/weekly calorie goals to more than make up for it.0 -
yep. my thoughts on weighing food as well, and ive also had great resultsYou guys are missing the other obvious potential problem here. You're so concerned that their portion size is wrong for the weight. Have you considered that the calorie count could be off by weight thereby compounding the problem. There's nothing a food scale is going to do about that. If it says 40g is 400 calories the FDA is still allowing wiggle room - and it has to. Do people remember from school what a calorie (or rather a kilocalorie) really is? The the energy needed to raise the temperature of 1 kilogram of water through 1 °C measured by burning said food. Calories vary people. You can burn two peanuts and get calorie variation.
We need to stop being so damn anal aboout weighing food by grams and focus more on results. What do I know though? I'm what you'd acall a blasphemer, a heretic...I've never set food on a scale in my whole life. I've lost 37 lbs in <6 months with my OH SO INACCURATE method of counting calories as close as REASONABLY possible and not sweating the variations. Weigh food all you want, I'm not going to change you with my rant - but don't get so hung up on it. I sincerely doubt any food weigher will be doing it for 30 years even if they do maintain their weight loss and health for the rest of their life.
I agree here. I've never weighed anything but my own bad self. Managed to lose 39lbs by averaging out and logging calories as closely as I could. I use a lot of guesstimates as well. Works for me, but to each his own.
I just personally don't want to be putting every slice of cheese or carrot stick on a scale for the rest of my life.
Then there are those that bring their scales to restaurants.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions