Nutritional value of chicken (the mind boggles)...

Options
Numptcakes
Numptcakes Posts: 145 Member
in Food and Nutrition
Please, please, PLEASE can somebody settle this before my head explodes!

I have a chicken breast. A simple chicken breast - skinless, boneless and destined for the grill/crockpot.

If I was to weigh the meat raw and log it as 'chicken breast, meat only, raw' then cook it up, would that logged data be incorrect?
Or if I was to weigh the meat raw, cook it up, then log it as 'chicken breast, meat only, roasted/grilled' using the RAW weight?
Or if I was to cook it up first then weigh and log the end product?


Should I feed it to the dog and just save myself the bother?
«1

Replies

  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Options
    Guideline is to weight meat raw and use those calories. Cooking adds too many variables so go with your first option.
  • Numptcakes
    Numptcakes Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    Cool, that's one more for weighing it and logging it raw. Just don't want to be messing up my calorie count.

    Any more for any more?
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    Just be consistent - if you weigh raw, use a raw calorie value. Weigh cooked (why would you do that) then you need a cooked calorie value.
  • peuglow
    peuglow Posts: 684 Member
    Options
    I weigh all my chicken cooked, because I buy them skin on with the ribs (split ribs). The chicken is more tender, flavorful, but you cannot weigh it raw because of the ribs and skin.

    IMO, the difference in calories due to weight loss is rather small to worry. Just be consistent.
  • Numptcakes
    Numptcakes Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    Okay. Consistency is key - got it!

    I suppose what has me confused is how the values change depending on the cooking method. Grilling vs roasting, for example. Grilling has less calories and fat than roasting - am I right? So if I was to log raw then roast it, would I not be cheating myself?
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    Options
    grilling has the potential to let the fat drip off through the grill I guess, whereas roasted whole the skin will hold more fat in.

    You might be overthinking this ;-)
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    Just checked both in the database and the difference is 10 calories lower grilled than raw for a 4 oz chicken breast. Is this even worth worrying about? The daily margin of error for most of us is probably 10X that. Don't trip yourself up worrying about the little stuff.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    Just checked both in the database and the difference is 10 calories lower grilled than raw for a 4 oz chicken breast. Is this even worth worrying about? The daily margin of error for most of us is probably 10X that. Don't trip yourself up worrying about the little stuff.

    THIS
  • magj0y
    magj0y Posts: 1,911 Member
    Options
    Log it raw. You're not frying it, so not a big deal
  • Numptcakes
    Numptcakes Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    Obsession is part and parcel of illness, unfortunately. Okay, lets phrase it another way. Forget what I should do - what do YOU guys do?
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    Obsession is part and parcel of illness, unfortunately. Okay, lets phrase it another way. Forget what I should do - what do YOU guys do?

    I hear you girl and didn't realize that until I took a look at your profile. I just get it close enough and figure it'll all come out in the wash. I usually look up the cooked version because that can have some variables that the raw version doesn't. Like the grilled chicken breast was 10 cals less than the raw as likely what liitle fat is present get's rendered out. Within reason, it's just not that critical.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    Options
    Meat should always be weighed raw. This is done because you lose water and liquids during the cooking that don’t remove any calories from the meat.

    And every time you cook a piece of meat, even if it weighs the same prior to cooking, it may weigh different amounts after cooking due to the amount of time it was cooked and how much moisture it lost.

    Using a 4 ounce boneless, skinless, chicken breast as an example. Weigh it prior to cooking and you have 4 ounces of meat that total 120 calories.

    Outcome 1 - Cook it just to temp, where it’s still moist and juicy inside and it may now weigh around 3.5 ounces after being cooked, but it will still be 120 calories.
    Outcome 2 - Overcook it, to where it’s dry inside because it cooked too long and it may now weigh around 3 ounces after being cooked, but it will still be 120 calories.

    Now, if you weighed it after cooking, using the raw entry, you’d be entering 105 calories for Outcome 1 and 90 calories for Outcome 2. Both fewer calories than you are consuming.

    Or, if you used one of the entries in the MFP database for cooked chicken, you could be entering 113.8 calories for Outcome 1 and 97.5 calories for Outcome 2. Or maybe 175 calories for Outcome 1 and 150 calories for Outcome 2. Or you could even end up with 105 calories for Outcome 1 and 90 calories for Outcome 2. All from just different entries of cooked boneless, skinless, chicken breast entries on MFP.

    The only time you should ever weigh food cooked is A. for portioning purposes (you weighed 20oz of raw chicken, cut it up and cooked it all together, so you can divide the cooked weight by 5 and portion it into 4 equal servings). B. If you have bought pre-packaged food that is already cooked and the weight on the package corresponds directly to that product.

    I worked in a professional kitchen environment for almost five years. There’s a reason there’s fine print on any menu selling a 1/4 pound burger that says that’s it’s pre-cooked weight and that people don’t go to a steakhouse and order a 12 ounce steak and think that means that they are getting 12 ounces on their plate when it’s served.

    Always weigh raw.
  • eabradfo
    eabradfo Posts: 1
    Options
    what I do is weigh it raw. I only grill chicken, but you made a good point about roasting it so if I roasted it, I'd weigh in after it was cooked.
  • NikkiSixGuns
    NikkiSixGuns Posts: 630 Member
    Options
    Raw weight. I typically don't add anything when I cook (like oil or sauces) so this works well for me. If I do add sauce it's after it's cooked and I measure/weigh the sauce separately.

    Good luck!
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Options
    What I do is stand on the scale with the cooked chicken sitting on the back of the toilet in arms reach. Then I eat the chicken, look at the scale, and subtract my bodyweight.



    Joking aside I weigh it raw.
  • Numptcakes
    Numptcakes Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    Thanks SO much for all your input, ladies and gentlemen. I feel a lot more confident about it now :)
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    Thanks SO much for all your input, ladies and gentlemen. I feel a lot more confident about it now :)

    Glad you responses helpful and best wishes as you make progress!! :flowerforyou:
  • Numptcakes
    Numptcakes Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    I'm really sorry to bump this again because the answers I already have are fantastic - I just need further input to settle the demon in my brain. Yes I am over thinking it but as many of you probably know, eating disorder = preoccupation with food. Sucks - but it is what it is.

    Back to this chicken breast. Majority say weigh raw - got it. But do I weigh raw and log 'raw', or weigh raw and log 'cooked'?

    See my dilemma here: http://www.tesco.com/groceries/Product/Details/?id=268401242

    100g raw as sold is 120 calories. A typical grilled breast of 130g is 180 calories. If you were to calculate the raw caloric value, however, it should be 156 calories for 130g. So where did that extra 24 calories come from? Or do you think that grilled breast had been weighed after being cooked?

    Once again, I'm sorry for making a big deal of this. Any further input would be greatly appreciated :)
  • juncture
    juncture Posts: 129 Member
    Options
    I'm really sorry to bump this again because the answers I already have are fantastic - I just need further input to settle the demon in my brain. Yes I am over thinking it but as many of you probably know, eating disorder = preoccupation with food. Sucks - but it is what it is.

    Back to this chicken breast. Majority say weigh raw - got it. But do I weigh raw and log 'raw', or weigh raw and log 'cooked'?

    See my dilemma here: http://www.tesco.com/groceries/Product/Details/?id=268401242

    100g raw as sold is 120 calories. A typical grilled breast of 130g is 180 calories. If you were to calculate the raw caloric value, however, it should be 156 calories for 130g. So where did that extra 24 calories come from? Or do you think that grilled breast had been weighed after being cooked?

    Once again, I'm sorry for making a big deal of this. Any further input would be greatly appreciated :)

    When you grill the chicken breast you are losing some of the weight from the liquid coming out of the chicken, this liquid doesn't have any significant calorific value, if you scroll up in this thread there was a poster who explained it much better than me but say you take your 100g of raw chicken and it's 120 calories when you've finished cooking it it might be say 80g (making numbers up here because I don't know how much liquid is lost) but it will still be 120 calories worth of chicken.

    With the example you've used the grilled breast of 130g being 180 calories if you work back based on the raw calories what they're saying is they expect the raw chicken breast to be about 150g in weight (which would be the 180 calories) but in the grilling process you're losing 20g of weight.

    Hope this makes sense, I always weigh my meat raw and then if I use any oil or other fat in the cooking process I log that separately :)
  • yksdoris
    yksdoris Posts: 327 Member
    Options
    I'm really sorry to bump this again because the answers I already have are fantastic - I just need further input to settle the demon in my brain. Yes I am over thinking it but as many of you probably know, eating disorder = preoccupation with food. Sucks - but it is what it is.

    Back to this chicken breast. Majority say weigh raw - got it. But do I weigh raw and log 'raw', or weigh raw and log 'cooked'?

    See my dilemma here: http://www.tesco.com/groceries/Product/Details/?id=268401242

    100g raw as sold is 120 calories. A typical grilled breast of 130g is 180 calories. If you were to calculate the raw caloric value, however, it should be 156 calories for 130g. So where did that extra 24 calories come from? Or do you think that grilled breast had been weighed after being cooked?

    Once again, I'm sorry for making a big deal of this. Any further input would be greatly appreciated :)

    No worries, we all obsess sometimes.

    There may be 2 causes for the grilled meat to be higher in calories: one has already been mentioned: it loses water but not calories when it's cooked, so a grilled piece of chicken will weigh less than the raw piece but still have the same amount of calories.

    The 2nd reason is that even if it's not much, most people use *some* marinade or oil for the grilling.

Categories