label reading.. my perspective.

chadya07
chadya07 Posts: 627 Member
in Food and Nutrition
i look at the label and a see 140 calories per serving... and then i jump to the servings per container.

and i see 5 servings. and i say to myself. when i inevitably eat this whole bag while sitting in front of the tv tonight that will be..... 700 calories. ok so a serving size is 700 calories.

and if i cant have the whole bag i dont even want it.

because i never eat just a serving. .

i want it all. or nothing at all.

a serving would just be a tease.

oh, hello blueberries... i can eat a whole pint of you!

the end.

Replies

  • MaidensAndMonsters
    MaidensAndMonsters Posts: 89
    It's about what works for you. If you know your lifestyle and your habits, thats great because you'll be able to make the best choices for the way that you eat. I will say though, long term success would probably be more attainable by learning portion control. Makes things fun :)
  • Alluminati
    Alluminati Posts: 6,208 Member
    I don't know, maybe you need to change your perspective.
  • Biggirllittledreams
    Biggirllittledreams Posts: 306 Member
    It's about what works for you. If you know your lifestyle and your habits, thats great because you'll be able to make the best choices for the way that you eat. I will say though, long term success would probably be more attainable by learning portion control. Makes things fun :)

    I totally agree! I think it's a matter of being educated/aware of how companies are deceptive with their advertising, on top of personal preference.

    A great example of this is 'coke zero', and other 0 calorie sodas. They claim to be 0 calories per serving, but many of them list 8oz as the serving size, when the entire bottle (a more realistic serving for the average folk) is 16-33 oz. So the entire bottle may contain a few calories, but due to it being advertised per serving size, it's 0.

    I know the calories in diet soda is obviously rather negligible, but it's a good example nonetheless.
  • rossraskolnikov
    rossraskolnikov Posts: 29 Member
    Nothing wrong with binging, if that's the way you're wired. I'm the same, but chocolate is my nemesis. I tried just buying a (big) bar of whatever at the beginning of week and nibbling a little per day, but it didn't really work. I ended up binging out anyway. So I just accepted that and now counter the calorie overload with a couple of light (~1000 calorie) days. Whatever works to get the weekly totals looking acceptable.
  • chadya07
    chadya07 Posts: 627 Member
    I don't know, maybe you need to change your perspective.

    well... you should have seen my persepctive before. this IS change.
  • SomeNights246
    SomeNights246 Posts: 807 Member
    It's good you're checking.

    When I would finish a bag or pack in one sitting, I never checked to see how much I was eating. This, inevitably, led to confusion about how much I was actually eating.

    "But I only ate an egg, a sandwich, a steak, and a bag of chips today."
    "What kind of chips?"
    "Cheddar."
    "What size was the bag?"
    "One of the big ones."

    Story of my life two years ago. I think if I had started label checking earlier, I would have changed my tune sooner, and maybe avoided an eating disorder. It wouldn't have helped the binge eating, but would have helped the compulsive eating.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    I'm not sure about where you live, but here all the things with multiple servings also have single serving packages. They even sell half servings like 1 tablespoon of nutella or 14 gram packages of potato chips. If you have the compulsion to eat the whole thing, just buy the smaller bags/containers.
  • chadya07
    chadya07 Posts: 627 Member
    I'm not sure about where you live, but here all the things with multiple servings also have single serving packages. They even sell half servings like 1 tablespoon of nutella or 14 gram packages of potato chips. If you have the compulsion to eat the whole thing, just buy the smaller bags/containers.

    thanks. i am ok about a lot of things but i have had a hankering for licorice lately. if i give in to one licorice it will never stop.

    most things i portion at home and write the caloriess on the bag and do ok... but licorice... kettle chips... ya know. there are things...
  • OldHobo
    OldHobo Posts: 647 Member
    I get it. I look at the label and see a serving size of two cookies. All two cookies do is make me mad. Get no satisfaction from them at all. I don't start out thinking I'll only have two, then get carried away. The idea of only two disturbs me. Don't need the whole bag necessarily, but maybe a whole row of those sandwich cookies. So I mostly just skip them all together. Same with beer.
  • glc1990
    glc1990 Posts: 22
    Yes I am exactly like you...! :) haha.

    So last night I bought some big 80g bags of popcorn which I split into 4x 20g servings (using scales) and put into my own clear food bags which I wrote on the front. E.g. "20g Metcalfe's Skinny Topcorn - Sweet & Salt" - and threw the empty big bag straight into the bin and now I have my servings.

    Maybe try that and see how it goes? All you need are scales, food bags and permanent pens! Easy. x
  • glc1990
    glc1990 Posts: 22
    I'm not sure about where you live, but here all the things with multiple servings also have single serving packages. They even sell half servings like 1 tablespoon of nutella or 14 gram packages of potato chips. If you have the compulsion to eat the whole thing, just buy the smaller bags/containers.

    thanks. i am ok about a lot of things but i have had a hankering for licorice lately. if i give in to one licorice it will never stop.

    most things i portion at home and write the caloriess on the bag and do ok... but licorice... kettle chips... ya know. there are things...

    Oops - just seen you already do the portion bagging idea. Ignore my post then :)
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    I get it. I look at the label and see a serving size of two cookies. All two cookies do is make me mad. Get no satisfaction from them at all. I don't start out thinking I'll only have two, then get carried away. The idea of only two disturbs me. Don't need the whole bag necessarily, but maybe a whole row of those sandwich cookies. So I mostly just skip them all together. Same with beer.

    I get what you are saying. For things with ridiculous portions I just double or triple up and squeeze it into my budget. I don't get portions sizes, really. I would rather have things listed in grams or, say, per cookie for countable things to make up my own portions. Half a cup of ice cream is entirely fine for me but 2 cookies or 1 oz of chocolate is not.
  • snowflake930
    snowflake930 Posts: 2,188 Member
    I never buy something without first reading the label. It is a habit now. I look at serving sizes and most of the time put the item back. Sometimes, regretfully. That is just the way it has to be now. Now it is "other people's food", not mine. Works for me.
  • jessilee119
    jessilee119 Posts: 444 Member
    Funny this came up. I just read an article the other day that said they are thinking about changing the serving size labels to fit what people actually eat instead of what they eat. So, in the example above, the coke zero bottles will no longer say a serving is 8 oz it'll say 1 serving is the entire bottle. I think the other example was ice cream. A serving size of ice cream is 1/2 cup; they're going to change it to 1 cup per serving.

    I get that it's more realistic to how people eat, and I know that people will usually eat what they want regardless of the label, but I look to those labels at times to see what I SHOULD eat as a serving. Realistically it's not a huge deal because I don't have to eat an entire serving even if it's suggested. I figured I would be fine as long as I have MFP. I just don't like the fact that on one hand they're saying that more people are obese now than ever and that needs to change, but then on the other hand they're going to increase serving sizes on labels. Doesn't that just encourage people to eat more? I don't know...just my 2 cents.
  • jessilee119
    jessilee119 Posts: 444 Member
    Oh, but more specifically to the OP. I know what you mean so I find myself portioning ahead of time too, or buying it where they have individual packs. If what you're doing works, though, go for it. You're losing weight which is great! :flowerforyou:
  • snowflake930
    snowflake930 Posts: 2,188 Member
    Funny this came up. I just read an article the other day that said they are thinking about changing the serving size labels to fit what people actually eat instead of what they eat. So, in the example above, the coke zero bottles will no longer say a serving is 8 oz it'll say 1 serving is the entire bottle. I think the other example was ice cream. A serving size of ice cream is 1/2 cup; they're going to change it to 1 cup per serving.

    I get that it's more realistic to how people eat, and I know that people will usually eat what they want regardless of the label, but I look to those labels at times to see what I SHOULD eat as a serving. Realistically it's not a huge deal because I don't have to eat an entire serving even if it's suggested. I figured I would be fine as long as I have MFP. I just don't like the fact that on one hand they're saying that more people are obese now than ever and that needs to change, but then on the other hand they're going to increase serving sizes on labels. Doesn't that just encourage people to eat more? I don't know...just my 2 cents.

    I think the problem is, most people DO NOT read labels to see what the serving size actually is. I know pre-MFP I never did. I did not have a clue. I over ate...............everything. Serving sizes are way smaller than many people realize. It is(was) a real eye opener. That is why a kitchen scale and measuring spoons and measuring cups are so necessary for me now.
  • chadya07
    chadya07 Posts: 627 Member
    Funny this came up. I just read an article the other day that said they are thinking about changing the serving size labels to fit what people actually eat instead of what they eat. So, in the example above, the coke zero bottles will no longer say a serving is 8 oz it'll say 1 serving is the entire bottle. I think the other example was ice cream. A serving size of ice cream is 1/2 cup; they're going to change it to 1 cup per serving.

    I get that it's more realistic to how people eat, and I know that people will usually eat what they want regardless of the label, but I look to those labels at times to see what I SHOULD eat as a serving. Realistically it's not a huge deal because I don't have to eat an entire serving even if it's suggested. I figured I would be fine as long as I have MFP. I just don't like the fact that on one hand they're saying that more people are obese now than ever and that needs to change, but then on the other hand they're going to increase serving sizes on labels. Doesn't that just encourage people to eat more? I don't know...just my 2 cents.

    I think the problem is, most people DO NOT read labels to see what the serving size actually is. I know pre-MFP I never did. I did not have a clue. I over ate...............everything. Serving sizes are way smaller than many people realize. It is(was) a real eye opener. That is why a kitchen scale and measuring spoons and measuring cups are so necessary for me now.

    for me it would encourage me to either not buy, or not eat it. like... when shopping for snack foods i usually dont like to go over 140 calories a serving. if the serving size was say, 2 mini muffins (i was looking at those yesterday) and it was 140 i would be like heck yea. but if it was four, which is more likely what i wanted... i would think twice about a 280 calorie snack... and look for something else like that yummy fat free greek yogurt i found yesterday for 110 calories...

    which i guess was one of the points of my post, is that i have been reading labels like i actually eat... and buying blueberries... or snap peas... or something i can eat enough of to be happy with, and not teasing myself with 2 mini muffins and then wanting more all day. so yea... if labels based it on what people eat on average... i would end up making better choices most likely.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    I get that it's more realistic to how people eat, and I know that people will usually eat what they want regardless of the label, but I look to those labels at times to see what I SHOULD eat as a serving. Realistically it's not a huge deal because I don't have to eat an entire serving even if it's suggested. I figured I would be fine as long as I have MFP. I just don't like the fact that on one hand they're saying that more people are obese now than ever and that needs to change, but then on the other hand they're going to increase serving sizes on labels. Doesn't that just encourage people to eat more? I don't know...just my 2 cents.

    I don't know, but I had the exact same thought. For me, especially back in the day, the serving sizes gave me a sense of what a normal serving should be, and I sometimes stuck to that (if I wasn't in the mood to just grab a pint of ice cream and dig in). Had it said 2 servings per pint or some such, I would have had an even more messed up idea of a serving, just like one gets from some restaurants.

    I mean, doesn't matter now, as I count, but it seems possibly counter-productive.

    I never got the argument that people check calories and not servings, because they are right there. You'd have to be willfully ignorant (and of course people are, they are justifying actions they want to take) to miss that the calorie count applies to some portion of the item and not the whole.

    Of course, more often than not when I was gaining I just avoided seeing the calorie information, since I didn't want to feel bad about it.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    I was that way too. But then I had a lightbulb moment... that I'd rather have it in moderation than not at all. The first cookie will taste the same as the third one, I won't tell the difference between 2 and 5 if I really take the time to eat it, instead of shoveling it in my mouth, and if I don't eat it all in one sitting, it means I get to enjoy it longer, and it will be there next time I want it. It's mostly worked so far, well at least for things that I know will keep for a while (baked goods... forget it). Although I haven't dared buying Pepperidge Farm cookies yet, and I really love those.

    I do agree though that some things are just not satisfying if I can only have a couple bites of them (mini croissants, I'm looking at you), so I'd rather not have them at all.
  • chadya07
    chadya07 Posts: 627 Member
    I get that it's more realistic to how people eat, and I know that people will usually eat what they want regardless of the label, but I look to those labels at times to see what I SHOULD eat as a serving. Realistically it's not a huge deal because I don't have to eat an entire serving even if it's suggested. I figured I would be fine as long as I have MFP. I just don't like the fact that on one hand they're saying that more people are obese now than ever and that needs to change, but then on the other hand they're going to increase serving sizes on labels. Doesn't that just encourage people to eat more? I don't know...just my 2 cents.

    I don't know, but I had the exact same thought. For me, especially back in the day, the serving sizes gave me a sense of what a normal serving should be, and I sometimes stuck to that (if I wasn't in the mood to just grab a pint of ice cream and dig in). Had it said 2 servings per pint or some such, I would have had an even more messed up idea of a serving, just like one gets from some restaurants.

    I mean, doesn't matter now, as I count, but it seems possibly counter-productive.

    I never got the argument that people check calories and not servings, because they are right there. You'd have to be willfully ignorant (and of course people are, they are justifying actions they want to take) to miss that the calorie count applies to some portion of the item and not the whole.

    Of course, more often than not when I was gaining I just avoided seeing the calorie information, since I didn't want to feel bad about it.

    you are exactly right though. people ARE willfully ignorant. not only that but i am sure there is the same concept going on where people will buy something that is 9.99 but wont buy the same thing for 10.00. when people want to justify they will just look at the calorie count and say "this isnt that bad for me" and then proceed to eat as much as they want. because they saw the low number.

    but i know i can figure all that stuff myself. its just that people with food problems like myself tend to be great justifiers. so... manufacturers arent responsible for how i eat. they can label how they want but with my justifying mind i would prefer something i cant justify as easily. lol.

    sometimes i am utterly shocked when i tally things up that i used to eat and not care... soooo many calories in one sitting. and i chose to ignore it all.

Categories