Frustration with food packages being misleading

MyCatLookedAtMe
MyCatLookedAtMe Posts: 28
in Food and Nutrition
I have noticed there is a lot of food products I eat where they will list a proportion size, say 4 cookies or so, then list how many grams that proportion should be, say 30 grams. So, I actually bought a food scale to ensure my proportions of meat for my lunch sandwich is correct and noticed that many packages are incorrect with matching their proportions to their weight, which means that their is the potential to consume more calories than intended.

This is upsetting me, I measured some cookies today and 3 cookies were the correct weight, which added a whole 40 calories with the 4 cookies they recommended for the 120 calories. And, that can add up. :(

Replies

  • Kanuenue
    Kanuenue Posts: 253 Member
    The government allows for up to a 20% discrepancy in food labels. There have been data reports recording that some products are off by much more than that. Another reason why I am suspicious of prepackaged foods.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    I came across a package of hot dogs that listed the nutritional information by "1/3 of a hot dog".

    Seriously, WTF?

    Trust nothing, verify everything.
  • whierd
    whierd Posts: 14,025 Member
    Yes, this can be an issue. I just either account for it, or rip/break off a piece to make it accurate.
  • magerum
    magerum Posts: 12,589 Member
    The government allows for up to a 20% discrepancy in food labels. There have been data reports recording that some products are off by much more than that. Another reason why I am suspicious of prepackaged foods.

    That regulation applies to all food, not just packaged food. Even their testing results of raw or whole foods are +/- 20%. It's all estimation anyways, track your results and adjust over time.
  • mushroomdestroyer
    mushroomdestroyer Posts: 1
    This is why i weigh everything when counting calories
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    And this is a good example of why so many people push the food scale on people who are trying to be (more) precise.

    Yeah, you still have the acceptable variance in the calorie amounts themselves, but at least you can use weight to eliminate one potential input error.
  • dunlol
    dunlol Posts: 57 Member
    That's why it's better to have a majority of your food from whole-food sources that are un-packaged or widely accepted due to availability in generic forms. For example, oats, fruits, nuts, whole grains (and their corresponding flours), milk (although this one MAY differ in accuracy from brand to brand), eggs, etc. Also, if your deficit is less than 100 cals a day I suggest lowering your calories so that even if the margin of error is that large, it wouldn't be a problem. If the percentage deficit would be too low if you decreased your calories further, then I would suggest only eating whole foods that are simple to measure until you reach your goal and/or using a gram scale to measure EVERYTHING. From experience, though, this is extremely annoying and time consuming; I prefer to measure through estimation or volume, which will have more error but is more precise and accurate with whole foods.
  • TheNewDodge
    TheNewDodge Posts: 607 Member
    I think clearly we should all stop eating.
  • cmcollins001
    cmcollins001 Posts: 3,472 Member
    While measuring food on a food scale is more important for accuracy, I think you might be missing the bigger picture here. Using MFP everyday to track your calories gives you a better understanding of the amount of food you are consuming everyday. That's what's most important here. The extra calories here and there may slow down your weight loss....but only slightly.

    You can't get upset by 40 calories, because in the overall scheme of things, 40 calories is nothing. Calorie counting is an estimate at best. You do your best to track your food, record your calories, you stay with your macros, you exercise, you get healthier....you don't obsess over every single calorie. You do your best, track the best you can, be patient, and enjoy the results.

    Losing weight...or better yet...losing fat doesn't have to be a difficult and evil thing, it can be fun in a way, if you let it.
  • NoAdditives
    NoAdditives Posts: 4,251 Member
    I think clearly we should all stop eating.
    Yes. It's far too complicated.
  • zensugi
    zensugi Posts: 76
    I'd say that counting is mostly to develop awareness about your habits: how much you eat, what, when. There are many sources of inaccuracy; for example, exercise calories are very approximate, calories for a recipe are a rough approximation, etc. You are worrying about the margins (say 2-3% of daily intake) when should probably worry more about changing habits, the type of food, volumes you consume, etc. These habits will have a much bigger effect on your final results.

    In summary, I record as well as I can, but don't worry if at the end of the day there are some over or under estimates. Nevertheless, I can see the results: lower weight, smaller clothes size and a much healthier relationship with food.
  • mmipanda
    mmipanda Posts: 351 Member
    those feels when discovering the calories listed on a twix wrapper were for one stick, not two. :(


    Try to figure it out using the 'per 100g' calculation instead? Serving sizes are bs.
  • mom2sons02
    mom2sons02 Posts: 111 Member
    Try figuring out a bag of microwave popcorn. My sons and I stood in the store for 10 minutes trying to estimate how many calories one bag would have. I went home and threw some regular in the microwave. Sheesh
  • MyCatLookedAtMe
    MyCatLookedAtMe Posts: 28
    Try figuring out a bag of microwave popcorn. My sons and I stood in the store for 10 minutes trying to estimate how many calories one bag would have. I went home and threw some regular in the microwave. Sheesh

    ^ I had a chuckle at this.

    Anyways, I know that counting calories is meant to be an estimate, but it still makes me frustrated when I have seen NO progress in a week and have no idea why. So, as I see nothing moving on my scale, not even a lb, and I calculated that I am burning 7000 more a week than I consume (moderate and light activity factored) I tend to pull in reigns tighter until I see progress and figure "This is what I need to do". I gather I am meant to be making better choices, but there are some bad traits in me that will tend to be obsessive over what I am eating if I am in the mindset to control it. I know 40 calories is nothing, but as I said in my OP, it adds up. And, that was only one example. I am looking into devices to get the most accurate measurements I can, for example, a heart rate monitor for exercise so I am not just relying on a machine.

    Realistically, I am in school and work a lot as well so I don't have a lot of time to make meals. And on top of that, I don't have the money to buy a lot of "fresh" items, because they go bad quick. My husband doesn't eat them so shopping for one is like throwing money down the drain. I do get fruit and salad, but getting things from Whole Foods just won't work well for me.

    I will need to look more into that restaurant thing. I don't eat out at sit down places much, but I would be pretty upset if my "Meal under blah blah" calories is really double or triple what I am expecting. That can be a HUGE increase.

    I feel like I am just whining, and please note I am aware none of this is your fault. I appreciate the advice. :) And support. And comedy.
  • anemoneprose
    anemoneprose Posts: 1,805 Member
    There are many, many levels of possible error or variance in calorie estimates, even if foods were perfectly labelled, as per this:

    http://news.sciencemag.org/evolution/2013/02/have-we-been-miscounting-calories

    And then remember, there are individual variations in metabolic burn.

    But, most people on here just weigh or at least measure portions, using these crappy estimates and imperfect labels for reference. And many have been successful at losing weight & keeping it off. So, it's kind of good enough, really :)

    I love your username :)

    I do think labels should be as accurate as poss, though
  • iamsuperfluff
    iamsuperfluff Posts: 5
    You can get a 3000 to 4000 calorie burger in Las Vegas at the heart attack grill. The staff dress up like medical personell too. They claim to be the home of the triple bypass burger. google it!

Categories