Shockers when you started paying attention to calories?

Options
1…457910…13

Replies

  • Rubie81
    Rubie81 Posts: 720 Member
    Options
    Cereal. Because a real bowl of cereal is not the same thing as a serving of cereal, at least not in my world. I would eat a giant bowl with lots of milk and it turns out a bowl of cereal was like 500 calories.
    YES! :grumble:
  • Rubie81
    Rubie81 Posts: 720 Member
    Options
    I have a Pret right next to my office so I usually get either breakfast or lunch from there. Well their tuna sandwich is 510 calories. That might not seem like THAT many calories, but it is not even a HUGE sandwich. So within the hour I am hungry. But I'm really into tuna lately so I'll have it regardless.
  • seltzermint555
    seltzermint555 Posts: 10,741 Member
    Options
    My shocker was how many calories I squander on lattes, frapuccinos and all those delicious coffee drinks!!! Not to mention the money I've squandered on them too;)

    I keep it in moderation now. My bank book and belly are much happier this way:wink:

    Totally agree! I used to work at a stressful office job one block from Starbucks, and I wasn't counting calories at the time...I got a white chocolate mocha or cinnamon dolce latte 3-4 times per week, so that's at least $12/wk on Starbucks.

    That's over $600 per year. On Starbucks.

    I am really frugal so it kills me now to even think about that. I could pay for my husband and my car insurance for an entire year, or 2-3 MONTHS of groceries for that amount of money.
  • donnarogers6211
    donnarogers6211 Posts: 19 Member
    Options
    Have you tried the powdered peanut butter. I mix with light cool whip and it taste great. There is also a chocolate peanut butter version. It makes a great peanut butter banana sandwich. only 45 calories per 2 tablespoons.
  • vastiris
    vastiris Posts: 56 Member
    Options
    Pasta - Not that I didn't know there were a lot of calories, just that I didn't realize how small serving sizes really were. And I used to eat it ALL THE TIME, thinking it was better than a lot of other options.

    Olive Oil - again, not that I didn't know it was pure fat, but how much you have to factor in while cooking recipes.

    Wine - oh, you 6oz serving size. you mock me.
  • MissLeelooDallas
    MissLeelooDallas Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    Haha, oh OP, I had a very similar shock to the system at Noodles and Co. I don't even eat there anymore since I wasn't 'that' into it in the first place. I'd certainly rather spend those calories on foods that meet my macros and that I enjoy more. I was really shocked also by pizza and most restaurant desserts. I know those should have been no-brainers, but seeing dishes that hit 2,000+ cals really stopped me in my tracks.
  • 0somuchbetter0
    0somuchbetter0 Posts: 1,335 Member
    Options
    Everything from the Cheesecake Factory. I mean everything. Appalling.
  • hmanley66
    hmanley66 Posts: 57
    Options
    I started doing vanilla protein with frozen mango, and it is thick like a milkshake for a 3rd of the calories... just a tip ;)
  • fnbhealthy
    fnbhealthy Posts: 1
    Options
    You are right! Everyone should do this regardless if you have to lose weight or not. I was in shock when I logged my food in just breakfast and lunch and I was way over my calorie intake! And I know I won't be running on the treadmill all night to bring it down. This really makes you think.
  • srv524
    srv524 Posts: 1,363 Member
    Options
    I knew about pop but not pizza, burgers and fries. My burgers and fries are about 1,000 calories so that alone is not good...
  • seltzermint555
    seltzermint555 Posts: 10,741 Member
    Options
    Pasta - Not that I didn't know there were a lot of calories, just that I didn't realize how small serving sizes really were. And I used to eat it ALL THE TIME, thinking it was better than a lot of other options.

    For me pasta was a surprise in the other direction. Coming of age in the 90s everyone was either a raving fan of pasta or they shunned it (possibly because of creamy alfredo sauces and such). I thought of it as a "bad food" to eat only in tiny portions and now have realized it's not as evil as I was led to believe.

    BUT...I feel that way about cereal. I see a lot of people have mentioned it already, but I used to think a SMALL bowl filled less than full with cereal and then milk just enough to cover it, was probably 1 serving. More like 2-3 even with that truly small bowl.

    I cringe when I remember myself, at my heaviest, switching from my go-to single brown sugar Pop Tart and 8 oz of milk (not the best choice around) to what I thought was a better option...a bowl of frosted shredded wheat with milk and about 8 oz of orange juice or grapefruit juice. Not IMO a better option! And I didn't even like it very much!

    Now I sit down to a 230 calorie breakfast of egg taco with chipotle sauce and half a plate of cantaloupe along with my coffee. It is eye-opening!!
  • kdotie
    kdotie Posts: 4
    Options
    i rarely go out to eat anymore just because of the calorie shock.. it pisses me off because i love going out to eat, it's one of my favorite things to do.. the most annoying thing about going out to eat is when they advertise this low calorie meal option and it's like under 700 calories.. isn't a meal supposed to be under 700 calories in the first place? i have no idea what they are cooking with, but most of the foods aren't any better than what i make at home for half the calories.. it's like they have a calorie machine in their kitchen and just amp up the cals or something. just sucks that there are few places that you can go sit down, have a meal with your friends, not sweat every time you look up how many calories are in everything. by the time i'm finished looking up the whole menu to see what i can eat it's usually less than 4, very unappetizing options.. how hard would it be to add a turkey burger to a menu!? hopefully, eventually people will start coming up with actual healthy options at restaurants.
  • jennk5309
    jennk5309 Posts: 206 Member
    Options
    Oh, I'm sure that sometimes having chocolate mousse cheesecake is worth that caloric price tag!! lol
  • LianaG1115
    LianaG1115 Posts: 453 Member
    Options
    Texas Roadhouse for dinner the first day we decided to log our food, OMG!! I was eating enough to feed 3 people in ONE meal!!!
  • danbleedblue
    danbleedblue Posts: 1
    Options
    My favorite beverage, Sierra Nevada Bigfoot Barley Ale is almost 30 calories per ounce. Yikes
  • paintlisapurple
    paintlisapurple Posts: 982 Member
    Options
    Two things that I noticed after starting logging on mfp were that there aren't quite as many calories in most foods as I thought (probably because I had no idea that I was able to eat as many as I'm allotted here) and the other thing that absolutely amazed me was the crazy amount of sodium that many things seem to have.
  • ThinLizzie0802
    ThinLizzie0802 Posts: 863 Member
    Options
    Cheese
    I guess it wasn't really a shocker, I knew it was going to be a lot of calories, but I was amazed at how many calories I could lob off of a salad, sandwich, bowl, etc by not including cheese. And I love cheese.
  • birdsetfree
    birdsetfree Posts: 9 Member
    Options
    portions -- until you start to measure your servings you really don't know and you always eat more than you think. When I started measuring, itemizing and accounting for everything in my entree, salad or sandwich -- it was a real eye-opener when I stopped eyeballing it.

    And I quit eating a few things almost entirely -- pasta, rice, peanut butter and table appetizers like bread and butter or chips and salsa.
  • hannamarie88
    hannamarie88 Posts: 231 Member
    Options
    "A standard meal at a fast food joint consumed 90% of the calories I should eat every day"

    I think it has more to do with the evolving definition of what a "standard" meal is. A standard meal at McDonalds used to mean a hamburger, regular fries and a regular coke. That's 620 calories, 480 if you go with a diet coke. That's really not all that bad. But that's not what people want now. Today it's double quarter pounders and bacon double cheeseburgers with the large fries and large coke. When the Big Mac came out, it was considered a very large sandwich, only suitable for really big people, not your average Joe. It's even in the name of thing. Now, this one time king sized sandwich is dwarfed by half the items on the menu.

    My husband was stunned when I told him his sandwich, which I think was a double quarter pounder with cheese or something -- had more calories than a Big Mac (which I used to enjoy and still do on very rare occasions...). -- 550 cals in it is not that bad since I don't drink Cokes or eat fries... literally just the sandwich if I get a terrible craving, which is not often.

    Edit: For more details
  • ch3vyington
    ch3vyington Posts: 6 Member
    Options
    "A standard meal at a fast food joint consumed 90% of the calories I should eat every day"

    I think it has more to do with the evolving definition of what a "standard" meal is. A standard meal at McDonalds used to mean a hamburger, regular fries and a regular coke. That's 620 calories, 480 if you go with a diet coke. That's really not all that bad. But that's not what people want now. Today it's double quarter pounders and bacon double cheeseburgers with the large fries and large coke. When the Big Mac came out, it was considered a very large sandwich, only suitable for really big people, not your average Joe. It's even in the name of thing. Now, this one time king sized sandwich is dwarfed by half the items on the menu.


    That is true, things have changed

Categories