I need help with my MEAT

lisaidem

Ok. Got your attention.

I am really frustrated with you MPFers out there who enter foods into the database and are not putting in the cooking method, or lack of cooking (raw). This is especially frustrating with meats! There is a huge difference in weight between a cooked piece of meat and raw meat. This goes for other foods too--some other foods pick up weight and others lose it during the cooking process. I think we have established that 2oz of uncooked spaghetti is not the same as 2oz of cooked spaghetti--so why can't we be as considerate with MEAT.

I'm really just looking for accurate nutrition information for boneless beef ribs. Just the meat. No sauces or special cooking, just raw, untamed meat. The entry that MPF shows for the "Generic boneless beef ribs" does not say cooked or uncooked for the 3oz portion size, and is not consistent with numbers I have seen on other sites, such as calorieking.com. For instance, it says that 3oz has 26g of protein (great!) but calorieking.com and other sites say around 15g of protein (booo). I just want an accurate number!! :sad:

melsinct

I agree. It takes me FOREVER to sift through all of the options to find what I am looking for. Not to mention the 3,000 duplications. Meat is the worst thing to try and look up on MFP!

noneya2010

Yeah - it gets confusing. If I am not sure about something, I go google it and find some other sources to confim the accuracy of some items.

chocolateandvodka

i know a surgeon....

Sidesteal

Dear OP: Thank you for providing me with the LOLs in your thread title. I hope to someday return the favor.

Sincerely,
Random internet person.

DeeJayTJ

and SOME of you MFPers are so hardcore about calorie counting that you worry about how many calories are in a pinch of sugar! !

stefchica

does that help? http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/bearwiki/Claiming_cooked_meat_is_more_nutritional_and_raw_meat_wastes_calories

IMYarnCraz33

Have you read labels on meat?
They don't always give a weight for it after it's cooked.
And people can only enter the information that is given on the label.

I do understand your frustration. It's the same with some pasta too.
They only give you the amount before cooking.
(Luigi Vitelli pasta is a good example of that).

p0pr0cksnc0ke

I assume if its going to be cooked in some form, your serving is to be measured before cooking.

kcwonder

I usually broil, bake, grill red meat or chicken. I actually didn't know the calorie count would change that drastically. The only time I use pan frying with no calorie cooking spray is for eggs and fish.

How much do the calories in red meat or chicken change from uncooked to broiling, baking, or grilling?

lisaidem

does that help? http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/bearwiki/Claiming_cooked_meat_is_more_nutritional_and_raw_meat_wastes_calories

Um...I don't know...TLDR?

I'm not really worried about the calories for those that are calling me a stickler, but my macros call for 135g of protein a day, so I try to make sure everything that goes in my face hole has protein in it. So even a 10g difference in a serving means I'm that much farther from reaching my goal.
I want to eat as much meat as possible, so if I know that a MPF entry is cooked, then I will shoot for that serving size, cooked. Does anyone get what I'm saying here?

This is part of a larger problem with the MPF database--everyone puts in every specific food they can, and make it public. Which is why for your Chipotle-lovers there are 10,000 entries of every possible Chipotle combination. Instead of using each of the ingredients in a diary entry, they make one conglomerated entry. Same with everything else--I'm finding "sauteed asparagus." Oh yeah? What did you sautee that in? How much? I have no damn clue. So I enter "raw asparagus" and "2 tbsp olive oil."

stefchica

does that help? http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/bearwiki/Claiming_cooked_meat_is_more_nutritional_and_raw_meat_wastes_calories

Um...I don't know...TLDR?

I'm not really worried about the calories for those that are calling me a stickler, but my macros call for 135g of protein a day, so I try to make sure everything that goes in my face hole has protein in it. So even a 10g difference in a serving means I'm that much farther from reaching my goal.
I want to eat as much meat as possible, so if I know that a MPF entry is cooked, then I will shoot for that serving size, cooked. Does anyone get what I'm saying here?

This is part of a larger problem with the MPF database--everyone puts in every specific food they can, and make it public. Which is why for your Chipotle-lovers there are 10,000 entries of every possible Chipotle combination. Instead of using each of the ingredients in a diary entry, they make one conglomerated entry. Same with everything else--I'm finding "sauteed asparagus." Oh yeah? What did you sautee that in? How much? I have no damn clue. So I enter "raw asparagus" and "2 tbsp olive oil."

i get what yours aying, i just cant find any articles on it right now. BUT i sense your frustration with the database. for me, when i enter in a recipe i enter in EVERYTHING i put into is.

do you HAVE to eat meat?? what about protein rich grains?

lisaidem

i get what yours aying, i just cant find any articles on it right now. BUT i sense your frustration with the database. for me, when i enter in a recipe i enter in EVERYTHING i put into is.

do you HAVE to eat meat?? what about protein rich grains?

I have this bag of sprouted quinoa in my cabinet. I kind of just look at it warily, and then close the cabinet. I'll get around to giving it a go sometime....

cramernh

does that help? http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/bearwiki/Claiming_cooked_meat_is_more_nutritional_and_raw_meat_wastes_calories

Um...I don't know...TLDR?

I'm not really worried about the calories for those that are calling me a stickler, but my macros call for 135g of protein a day, so I try to make sure everything that goes in my face hole has protein in it. So even a 10g difference in a serving means I'm that much farther from reaching my goal.
I want to eat as much meat as possible, so if I know that a MPF entry is cooked, then I will shoot for that serving size, cooked. Does anyone get what I'm saying here?

This is part of a larger problem with the MPF database--everyone puts in every specific food they can, and make it public. Which is why for your Chipotle-lovers there are 10,000 entries of every possible Chipotle combination. Instead of using each of the ingredients in a diary entry, they make one conglomerated entry. Same with everything else--I'm finding "sauteed asparagus." Oh yeah? What did you sautee that in? How much? I have no damn clue. So I enter "raw asparagus" and "2 tbsp olive oil."

You are DEFINITELY not alone! I dont use the data base here. I use Calorieking.com and enter the foods I am looking for in my personal food-use section. I just entered in my homemade Chicken Tikka Masala recipe and Calorie King saved me alot of aggravation (easy to adjust the portions/weighing AND get the right NI) and the recipe has some beautiful numbers for sure!

I dont want someone else's entry-mistakes to be MY mistake on the scale....

dleithaus

I agree, and to recognize the problem is critical.

If you think about the following: Fat: 1 gram = 9 calories, Protein: 1 gram = 4 calories, Carbohydrates: 1 gram = 4 calories
Alcohol: 1 gram = 7 calories.... in relation to what we eat things can fall into place more easily.

For instance on meat... 1 oz of "pure" protein would be 28.4 grams per oz multiplied by 4 cal/gram....so 113.6 calories per oz. Raw meat contains significant moisture as water... so depending on the meat it might be 50-60% fewer calories per oz... say 50-60 cal per oz raw. Cooking throws all of these numbers off due to variations in moisture retention, and is of the reasons I prefer raw numbers over cooked numbers. Toss fat in there and things definitely get more complex, but lean meat is lean meat.

Pasta and bread provide another example. 1 oz of bread or pasta are essentially (although not fully for bread) moisture free examples of pure carbs... so one oz should be about 28.4 grams per oz multiplied by 4 cal/gram = 113 cal/oz. In fact pasta is about 100 calories per oz (moisture and/or protein account for the differences). Flour exactly the same.... 1 oz is about 100 calories. Potatoes? About 0.8 cal per gram RAW.... check it out for yourself... it is pretty close...

Fat? 1 tablespoon of liquid or solid fat like shortening or lard (not butter or margarines, they contain moisture!) should be about 120 calories. Derivation: 1 tablespoon = 13.7 grams, so 9 cal/gram multiplied by 13.7 grams = 123 cal.

I was thinking about nuts recently. 1 oz of nuts (no matter what the nut) is about 170 calories. A listing in MFP said 1/2 cup was 170 calories. That was obviously incorrect, because an oz of just about any nut is 1/4 cup. So there was an obvious and significant error in the portion measurement.

I do not like having to sift through a bunch of entries in MFP trying to find the correct ones... and think there needs to be some additional moderation over the entries (the description) along with the actual portion and calories.