I question the nutritional count accuracy

Caralynl
Caralynl Posts: 43
edited December 2024 in Food and Nutrition
I understand there is no way to "clean up" the accuracy of the nutritional count of foods in the data base, with the exception of editing a food if we know it is incorrect when we pull it up to add to our daily food intake. I find it a little disconcerting to find very different nutritional contents for identical foods (same serving size, etc.). Is there a website that we can trust 100% for foods that don't have a nutritional label, such as fresh foods?

Replies

  • rebeccalray5
    rebeccalray5 Posts: 36
    Check your local grocery store site. I shop at Hannaford who is owned by the same company that owns food lion and another grocery store in Florida. They have the nutritional information for most of their foods. I only have come across one item that was blank but I went to the store site of the one in Florida and found what I was looking for.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    You can't trust anything 100% as there will always be variances, no matter what.

    Our food labels in the US have a legal variable of +/- 20% of what the label says.
    Restaurants that publish nutrition info can't account for a cook that adds a bit more oil one day, or a larger scoop of rice another.
    The soil and conditions that fresh fruits and veggies are grown in, along with their cultivation will affect their overall calorie, vitamin and mineral amounts.

    That said, I use nutritiondata.self for fruits and veggies as I like being able to enter everything into My Foods as 100g servings, with potassium estimates (since so many of the MFP entries are missing that) and then it's easy to enter my food servings that I weight based off of number of grams.
  • JossFit
    JossFit Posts: 588 Member
    For fresh foods, I look up the data on www.nutritiondata.com. Hope that helps!
  • Caralynl
    Caralynl Posts: 43
    Thanks, I'll try that. However, is there a good website that you might use for this?
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/

    These are findings from USDA tested foods. They will be averages though because nutritional content will always vary based on soil content, area grown, climate changes, etc.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Info on labels change too, that's why some of the entries are different.

    Additionally, different products sent to different markets.

    I've had an old box of something and gotten a new box, and they have reduced the size, and the serving size.

    Or they tweaked the ingredients for less sodium or such, and added more carbs or removed fat.

    That's one reason why same entries different info.

    Though some you can tell were entered by idiots because they also mis-spelled, added an extra 0, left carbs out totally. Just laziness.
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    I do wish MFP would apply some basic reasonableness checks to the numbers. For example:

    Beef, Chuck, Arm Pot Roast, Lean & Fat, 0" Fat, Braised
    1 oz
    70 cal
    fat 14g
    carb 0 g
    protein 25g

    (14 x 9) + (25 x 4) = 226 vs. 70

    This entry simply cannot be correct.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I do wish MFP would apply some basic reasonableness checks to the numbers. For example:

    Beef, Chuck, Arm Pot Roast, Lean & Fat, 0" Fat, Braised
    1 oz
    70 cal
    fat 14g
    carb 0 g
    protein 25g

    (14 x 9) + (25 x 4) = 226 vs. 70

    This entry simply cannot be correct.
    [/quote

    Dead on!

    That would be the easy check to do to, do the macros at least end up with 5%, which even with the allowed rounding, I think would still be within 5%.

    Or start displaying not only how many confirmations of being correct, but how many rejects of the info being wrong. A label may have changed and been correct 1 yr ago, but no longer.

    Actually, allow a simple search with wildcard, and a written recommendation to search with out too much detail first. Or you get people thinking something wasn't entered, so they enter "Chex Gluten Free - Apple Cinnamon Chex Gluten Free Low Fat cereal" (1 guess what the ad on the right was).
  • VanillaBeanSeed
    VanillaBeanSeed Posts: 562 Member
    I too am trying to find TRUE, ACCURATE, nutritional data for meats! Chicken thighs, pork sirloin chops, sirloin tip steaks.. ALLL kinds of meats/poultry!
  • Pebble321
    Pebble321 Posts: 6,423 Member
    Look for entries with no * in front. These have been entered by MFP, I think they are based on USDA data.

    And you're right, it has to be "user-beware" for any other entries - that's the blessing and the curse of datbase that is largely user-entered, you get a great range of products but it is inevitable that some of them will be wrong.
  • girllovedcupcakes
    girllovedcupcakes Posts: 109 Member
    I usually scan all the foods I eat so it is not much of a problem. I also do the measurements by weight.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    I usually scan all the foods I eat so it is not much of a problem. I also do the measurements by weight.

    Be careful when scanning too. Just because it was scanned doesn't mean it's right. I'd say that about 50% of the time the nutrition info that comes up from being scanned is correct. 40% of the time at least one item on the nutrition info is wrong. And the final 10% it's not even the item I scanned.
  • ritasice21
    ritasice21 Posts: 200 Member
    http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/

    These are findings from USDA tested foods. They will be averages though because nutritional content will always vary based on soil content, area grown, climate changes, etc.

    This is what I use. Also, when you search MFP database if there is no *before the fresh food this is where it seems to come from.
  • alpine1994
    alpine1994 Posts: 1,915 Member
    If I'm unsure of something (like it didn't have nutrition facts on it) I usually google "how many calories in...." and take an average of what 4 or 5 different websites say. I feel that calorie counting (and expending via exercise) in general is really just estimating. You could probably make an exact science out of it but like, we have other things going on in our lives too, you know? :)
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    I usually scan all the foods I eat so it is not much of a problem. I also do the measurements by weight.

    Not that I necessarily want to start one of *those* arguments, and not that it is even relevant to the topic, but my *personal opinion* is that it is generally healthier to eat foods that don't have a barcode (or that are routinely handed to you in your car through a window).

    Okay, now back to complaining about the accuracy of the MFP food database...
  • taylor5877
    taylor5877 Posts: 1,792 Member
    ticks me off that there's a lot of food that have a lot of potassium, but it doesn't show up on any listing.

    JC-rant.gif
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    ticks me off that there's a lot of food that have a lot of potassium, but it doesn't show up on any listing.

    JC-rant.gif

    Agreed. But given how often people screw up macronutrients, it isn't at all surprising that they would screw up micronutrients too.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    ticks me off that there's a lot of food that have a lot of potassium, but it doesn't show up on any listing.

    JC-rant.gif

    This is kind of a result of the packaging laws in the US though. Potassium isn't one of the nutrients that companies are required to list, so it's skipped on more food labels than it's on.

    For fresh veggies and fruits, I created all of my own entries using the 100g option from nutritiondata.self since you can get the potassium info. But even there it's not in the main label that is created at the top of the screen when you've selected your food and amount, you have to scroll down to the minerals sections specifically to get it. But at least it's there. :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories