It is what it is PEOPLE!

cramernh

[. I'm not sure why so many people find it necessary to "share" their entries.

BOY OH BOY, you got THAT right! LOL!

it_be_asin

For things like meats, cheeses, produce, etc. your best bet is to go with the MFP-entered listings - these ones *do not* have an asterisk next to the name, and are accurate. All of the foods listed with an asterisk are user-entered.

This is what I always look for and if there isn't an MFP entered item I verify either the package or another site like CalorieKing. I also enter my own but keep them private. I'm not sure why so many people find it necessary to "share" their entries.

Calorie King will provide numbers for Australian versions of foods, so if you take your numbers from there you may still be out because our versions of foods may be different to those available in North America and Europe.

jadedone

My petpeeve is that it is hard to find the raw ingredient. I make a lot of stuff myself. Searching for things like bell peppers is a pain. And forget it if you are using weight not "1 cup chopped" or whatever.

Mindful_Trent

My petpeeve is that it is hard to find the raw ingredient. I make a lot of stuff myself. Searching for things like bell peppers is a pain. And forget it if you are using weight not "1 cup chopped" or whatever.

All of the MFP-entered produce has both volume and weight as a serving option. Look for the entries WITHOUT an asterisk. For example, I search "Red Pepper" and "Peppers - Sweet, red, raw" without an asterisk is the first entry. This is MFP entered (not user entered) and is accurate. The last serving option (100g) is weight.

SaraTN

Like others, I verify foods - chances are if I ate it, I have the label. My little trick is that since I prepare most of my meals for the week, I enter my recipies so they are in my food or favorites. It makes logging a little easier. 90% of the time, I weigh and measure my portions for accuracy.

The tricky part is when I get take out from a local restaraunt (I'm a bit of a food snob when it comes to chains) -- since I have no control over what is going into it.. I feel like that is where most of my errors are... but there is a way to solve that too... I cut down going out to eat from a couple of times a week to a couple of times a month... less room for error = more weight loss.

missfluffyuk

It would be nice if we could search for MPF-entered foods only... Ignore all the user-entered ones.

PippaJo_

My petpeeve is that it is hard to find the raw ingredient. I make a lot of stuff myself. Searching for things like bell peppers is a pain. And forget it if you are using weight not "1 cup chopped" or whatever.

All of the MFP-entered produce has both volume and weight as a serving option. Look for the entries WITHOUT an asterisk. For example, I search "Red Pepper" and "Peppers - Sweet, red, raw" without an asterisk is the first entry. This is MFP entered (not user entered) and is accurate. The last serving option (100g) is weight.

Maybe I've just missed it, but - how do you find *just* the MFP-entered entries? Is there a way, or do you have to scroll through all the junk and hope you catch it?

I don't understand why the MFP entries aren't listed first - for instance, I can look for 'butter', and three or four entries will be first, things like 'butter-flavored cookies' or something, *before* simple 'butter - salted'. How does that happen?

I also get frustrated with entries that have serving measurements that are not particularly easy to figure out (depending on what you're used to). I'm in the US - we use volume, not weight. I have a hard time visualizing what 61g of any given food might be - but I can picture what a cup of it is. I see so many entries with only weights - and it's useless to me, especially if I'm on the go, or it's an unpackaged/prepared food.

Or items that only have measurements in enormous amounts, when you're more likely to use very small amounts. I don't mind cutting something down to .5, or even .25 of the listed serving, but when you're looking at .0025 of something, it starts to get ridiculous.

Mindful_Trent

Maybe I've just missed it, but - how do you find *just* the MFP-entered entries? Is there a way, or do you have to scroll through all the junk and hope you catch it?

I don't understand why the MFP entries aren't listed first - for instance, I can look for 'butter', and three or four entries will be first, things like 'butter-flavored cookies' or something, *before* simple 'butter - salted'. How does that happen?

I also get frustrated with entries that have serving measurements that are not particularly easy to figure out (depending on what you're used to). I'm in the US - we use volume, not weight. I have a hard time visualizing what 61g of any given food might be - but I can picture what a cup of it is. I see so many entries with only weights - and it's useless to me, especially if I'm on the go, or it's an unpackaged/prepared food.

Or items that only have measurements in enormous amounts, when you're more likely to use very small amounts. I don't mind cutting something down to .5, or even .25 of the listed serving, but when you're looking at .0025 of something, it starts to get ridiculous.

Unfortunately they don't have any way to filter by what is MFP-entered only... would definitely be a welcome addition!!

Regarding weight vs. volume... not all things in the US are measured by volume - and if you look at food labels, almost all are both weight and volume. If you get a food scale, weight is actually a lot more accurate for things that are hard to measure consistently/accurately, like chunky veggies/fruits, meats, large/bulky cereal, etc. Really, the only thing I measure by volume these days are liquids and things like flour/sugar - which are VERY consistent/accurate by volume.

Weight is harder to do on the go - I'll usually estimate meals in volume when I eat out... but everything prepared at home is by weight.

jadedone

Today I found some salmon. 4 oz only had 90 calories! And 2 rams of fat!

jadedone

Today I found some salmon. 4 oz only had 90 calories! And 2 rams of fat!

TheBraveryLover

I totally understand your frustration. It would be great if there were MFP moderators whose sole purpose was to verify food entries or at least go in once in a while and delete ones that are way off. There really are a lot of super silly entries (like the 33-calorie slice of pizza mentioned earlier or other entries that are clearly hundreds of calories off).

One can dream Until then, double- and triple-check everything!

There are pizzas that are made with cauliflower crust and low calorie sauce and cheese that may very well add up to 33 cals a slice. I've made a version of this and the entire pie added up to under 200 calories. I'm sure you didn't know this so I thought I'd let you know about those possible "super silly" entries. :-)

jadedone

I totally understand your frustration. It would be great if there were MFP moderators whose sole purpose was to verify food entries or at least go in once in a while and delete ones that are way off. There really are a lot of super silly entries (like the 33-calorie slice of pizza mentioned earlier or other entries that are clearly hundreds of calories off).

One can dream Until then, double- and triple-check everything!

There are pizzas that are made with cauliflower crust and low calorie sauce and cheese that may very well add up to 33 cals a slice. I've made a version of this and the entire pie added up to under 200 calories. I'm sure you didn't know this so I thought I'd let you know about those possible "super silly" entries. :-)

That sounds like the worst pizza ever. :P

TheBraveryLover

I totally understand your frustration. It would be great if there were MFP moderators whose sole purpose was to verify food entries or at least go in once in a while and delete ones that are way off. There really are a lot of super silly entries (like the 33-calorie slice of pizza mentioned earlier or other entries that are clearly hundreds of calories off).

One can dream Until then, double- and triple-check everything!

There are pizzas that are made with cauliflower crust and low calorie sauce and cheese that may very well add up to 33 cals a slice. I've made a version of this and the entire pie added up to under 200 calories. I'm sure you didn't know this so I thought I'd let you know about those possible "super silly" entries. :-)

That sounds like the worst pizza ever. :P

Anything can sound like the worst thing ever, depending on who's judging it. I think shrimp is the worst food ever, but I know many would disagree.

The pizza is amazing. I encourage you to do a search here and try it sometime. You might be surprised.

ruby_red_rose

I make cauliflower pizza as well, and it is quite delicious.

I totally understand your frustration. It would be great if there were MFP moderators whose sole purpose was to verify food entries or at least go in once in a while and delete ones that are way off. There really are a lot of super silly entries (like the 33-calorie slice of pizza mentioned earlier or other entries that are clearly hundreds of calories off).

One can dream Until then, double- and triple-check everything!

There are pizzas that are made with cauliflower crust and low calorie sauce and cheese that may very well add up to 33 cals a slice. I've made a version of this and the entire pie added up to under 200 calories. I'm sure you didn't know this so I thought I'd let you know about those possible "super silly" entries. :-)

That sounds like the worst pizza ever. :P