Weighing and Measuring Foods

I was reading a post earlier and one of the comments was this:

"keep in mind the nutrition facts on things like meat are the macros for the meat PRIOR to cooking. So if you're weighing chicken, log the frozen weight.

Same thing applies to pastas and other things that require cooking. The label lists uncooked portions/weights/nutrients"

Ok, so please explain to me why I would do this? Or much more, like how? If I am cooking a meal for my family, how am I supposed to measure dry or frozen foods prior to cooking them and this actually be simpler for me?

When it comes to frozen foods, meat especially, there is water in it, so why would I measure water that will be cooked out? Eating right just took a very frustrating turn for the worse if this is true. I honestly, don't have time to cook separate foods, just for measuring purposes. And then can you imagine the double dirty dishes! :noway:

Replies

  • BigT555
    BigT555 Posts: 2,067 Member
    id like to know how people get around this too, this is one of the reasons i dont bother with a food scale, my largest meal (and only meal id actually have to weigh out since almost everything else i eat is quantifiable) is one prepared for 3 or more people
  • liftingandlipstick
    liftingandlipstick Posts: 1,857 Member
    You're supposed to weigh the uncooked food because that is what the calories/macros are calculated for. You know how much meat shrinks when you cook it, right? Like a hamburger that is half the size it started at? When you weigh an uncooked hamburger patty, and then look it up, it says 4 oz for 219 calories. Now cook that patty and weigh it again- 2.5 oz. So if you weigh out 4 oz of COOKED meat, then you're actually eating almost 40% MORE calories than you're accounting for; in this case about 309.

    ETA I only cook for one, so I don't use this, but the common consensus is to weigh everything uncooked, then use those weights to create a recipe. Divide by number of servings and you have your actual intake numbers. PITA, I know. Or you can estimate and hope that's it's close enough.
  • Heatherybit
    Heatherybit Posts: 91 Member
    You're supposed to weight the uncooked food because that is what the calories/macros are calculated for. You know how much meat shrinks when you cook it, right? Like a hamburger that is half the size it started at? When you weigh an uncooked hamburger patty, and then look it up, it says 4 oz for 219 calories. Now cook that patty and weigh it again- 2.5 oz. So if you weigh out 4 oz of COOKED meat, then you're actually eating almost 40% MORE calories than you're accounting for; in this case about 309.

    ^THIS the USDA uses the weight of uncooked food, therefore unless you have a 20-40% calorie room in your diet for foods that dehydrate when cooked you are not going to lose weight.

    And for foods like pasta, rices, and other starches because they expand so much in cooking you'll actually be eating less than the serving. All in all, you can't be accurate unless you measure the way they measure.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    If you measure and weight the total before, then weight the total after cooking you can work it out. Say you cooked 500 grams worth of chicken.... after you cooked it it weighted 400 grams, you each 100 grams cooked should be be 25% (100/400) so you know the nutrition info on the 500grams so you would log 500*25% = 125 grams of pre-cooked.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    I weigh it cooked and use 'cooked' entries. The only thing I'm going to consider making separately in the future is pasta, but only because I can't find any reliable entry for cooked pasta calories, and it's very easy to be wrong by 100 calories or something... but we rarely have pasta in the evening anyway.
  • Holly_Roman_Empire
    Holly_Roman_Empire Posts: 4,440 Member
    Thaw out your frozen meat the night or morning before you use it. Weigh it before you put it in a pan/pot. For frozen vegetables, I just cook them, weigh them, and log them. The difference can't be that much when you're talking about something that has very little calories to start.
  • _lyndseybrooke_
    _lyndseybrooke_ Posts: 2,561 Member
    I get where you're coming from. Unless you're going to separate your food from the rest and cook it in two pots/pans/dishes, it's hard to measure uncooked foods when preparing meals for more than one person. For some foods, like chicken, you can find entries in the database that say "cooked" or "roasted/baked" that are meant for use after the meal is prepared. I don't really worry too much about it. I weigh my meat cooked almost 100% of the time. With pasta and rice, I use measuring cups or weigh it cooked. If the number is off, I haven't noticed the difference in my results. I'm eating an average of 1810 calories (gross) per day and I'm losing weight - if I were underestimating my calories in any big way, I'd see a stall in my weight loss. Just be sure not to "pack" foods into the measuring cups - loosely spoon them in and level them out. I don't see much harm in logging 1 cup of cooked noodles over 2 oz. uncooked noodles.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    I usually cook separate pieces of meat/fish, so one of them is mine. I weigh that one. For stuff like vegetables or mashed potatoes, I'm sometimes more casual and just know what percentage of the whole I ate or try to weigh out what I plan to eat and put it on a particular part of the pan. For something like a stew or sauce I might create a recipe. For pasta or rice you can used cooked weights, just be aware that they are hugely different than the uncooked ones.

    Sometimes it's not possible. For example, I use a lot of bone-in meat, and there you have to weigh it cooked (or else I haven't figured out a better way to deal with it). Same with a whole roasted bird or breast (which also has bones). So those I weigh cooked, but if you do this--as others have mentioned--it's important to use cooked weights or else you are understating the calories (in essence assuming that a cooked 4 oz is the same as the identified portion size of 4 oz, when it's really bigger).

    The reason you weigh the water you don't eat is that that's what the calories given on the package or for an uncooked entry are based on. In general it's more accurate because people cook meat to different temps and thus some lose more or less water than the cooked entry assumes, but those work fine.
  • AbsolutelyAnnie
    AbsolutelyAnnie Posts: 2,695 Member
    For things like casseroles, chili, and one-pot meals, I take the time to use the recipe builder tool under Food. I use the old method (click on the link on the right side of the page) because I find it easier and it seems to be able to access more food in the database. By logging in recipes, I have the ability to determine how many people it serves and what size a serving is. You can then access your own recipes when log in food.

    For some other things there are both cooked and uncooked listings. Pasta is an example. You will see 2 oz uncooked, and another for 1 cup cooked. Cook the whole pot for your family and then measure out by the cup for yourself, measure your sauce and you are good to go. I will almost always use the cooked listings for meat or fish because of the weight reduction due to fat and water escaping during the cooking process. Also with chicken, there will be listings for boneless and skinless.

    Tricky, but not impossible. Sometimes you just have to give it your best guess and add 100 to give yourself a buffer. Good luck!
  • TheStephil
    TheStephil Posts: 858 Member
    You can used the "cooked" entries in the database and weigh the food cooked but I tend to not trust that as depending on cooking time, cooking method, etc different levels of water can be evaporated.

    What I do though is weigh the meat/pasta/whatever before and after. For example, I make salsa chicken in the crockpot for lunches for the week and my bf and I both eat it. I create a recipe in the recipe builder on MFP, weigh the meat (say 30oz) and log that as an ingredient. Then I add the salsa and other ingredients to the recipe and save the recipe as 1 serving. After its cooked, a weigh the entire recipe. Let's say it equals 24oz then I edit the recipe for 24 servings (1 oz each). Now I can weigh the food when I make my lunch. If I get 3 ozs then its 3 servings, 4ozs - 4 servings, etc.

    I do this with macaroni and cheese, stir fry, chicken cooked in large amounts, beef, etc. I weigh before and use the nutritional information available and then weigh it afterwards and do the math to figure out how much of the cooked amount equals the raw amount.
  • tinkbaby101
    tinkbaby101 Posts: 180 Member
    This hurts my brain.

    What if I want seconds, or if I don't eat my entire serving of something? I'll have to weigh everything before and after, calculate the difference, and account for the percentage I actually ate. :noway: :sad:

  • The reason you weigh the water you don't eat is that that's what the calories given on the package or for an uncooked entry are based on. In general it's more accurate because people cook meat to different temps and thus some lose more or less water than the cooked entry assumes, but those work fine.

    This is the best explanation as to WHY. i am the type of person that needs to know why something is to understand it, and i totally wish I was wired differently.

    With me now actually understanding, it may not be so bothersome, just a minor headache at first.